Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/08/07

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] squabbling over digitial vs. film
From: Afterswift@aol.com
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2003 12:45:34 EDT

In a message dated 8/7/03 9:22:31 AM Pacific Daylight Time, 
bdcolen@earthlink.net writes:

> Ah - the truth finally outs here....You are comparing film output from
>  an excellent camera, decent enlarger, and darkroom to digital output
>  from a "middling HP printer?" That's like comparing output from an M7
>  with a Summilux 75 mounted, shooting 64 asa chrome, custom printed, to
>  output from  Wal-Mart disposable ASA camera printed by a blind teenager
>  in a bad 60 minute lab.
- --------------------------------------
BD,

I was merely exaggerating to prove a point. The point is that no matter how 
good other combos are, a Leica M or R negative printed on a first rate enlarger 
with consumate enlarger lens will outclass all those combos; and that the 
size of the print doesn't obscure that obvious quality difference.

One of our colleagues alluded to LUG encompassing digital because Leica is 
producing digital cameras and backs. I agree because I think Leica can bring a 
higher standard of performance to the digital side, as well a to the inevitable 
interface between film and digital.  

I also wish Leica would restore the Leica system approach to its film product 
line: enlarger, enlarger lenses, close-up units, Rondinax dayload developing 
tank and lens shades for the great lenses of the past we all still buy and 
use.  

br
- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html