Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/12/16

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

Subject: RE: [Leica] Miserable Failure
From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 18:03:45 -0500

My "savaging" on Leica digitals has nothing to do with my receiving
equipment from Olympus, Adam, it has to do with the fact that thus far
Leica's digital efforts have been more than a little half-assed, and
have been limited to rebadging cameras manufactured by others - or, as
you note, making a back for a film camera at a price that will buy you a
Canon D1s which is clearly THE 35 digital at this point. 

As to the new Digilux II - based on its description - and obviously we
have nothing more at this point, it is nothing more than a 5 mgp p&s
posing as an M. It is really, really cool looking - as I've said several
times, but cool looking isn't what I look for in a camera. And at the
price at which is it being offered, you can buy a Canon Digital Rebel
with a good Canon lens, or you can buy a Nikon D100 body, an Oly E1
body, or a Canon D60 body. And that strikes me as Leica's once again
missing the digital boat. BUT - and if you'd check the archives before
pouncing for once - I have also said on several occassions that I think
the digiII looks like a VERY smart marketing move on Leica's part,
because they know full well that many, many of their buyers are buying
marque, their buying Red Dots, and if they can buy a digital that looks
like an M, they will.

And I have NEVER savaged Tina for liking her digilux - I did point out,
as you are quick to do re me and Olympus, that Tina has a relationship
with Leica, which I found as relevant as you find my relationship with
Olympus. I don't consider that 'savaging.' And I am quite sure Tina
doesn't feel I ever 'savaged' her.

Tina, have you felt savaged? ;-)




- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
[mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Adam
Bridge
Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 5:41 PM
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: RE: [Leica] Miserable Failure


On 2003-12-16 <bdcolen@earthlink.net (B. D. Colen)> thoughtfully wrote: 

>Oh, and btw - Yes, my posted images have been shot with the E-1. You'll

>notice I haven't made a bunch of BS claims - I've simply posted what 
>I've been shooting; just as I've posted my Leica images. Either the 
>images speak for themselves, or they don't. Same thing goes for the 
>digilux you're drooling all over - except that the only images are 
>those OF the digilux, not those taken in the field, under real-world 
>conditions. ;-)

Excuse me, B.D. but I'm not drooling over the Digilux. My sole digital
is a D30 and it works just fine for family purposes right now so no
Digilux need apply. I'd love to have a digital back for my R8 but at the
price point Leica has set I can darn near buy the full-frame Canon
that's superior to any "35mm" digital out there.

But...

Every single time a Leica digital is mentioned on this list you find a
way to savage it. Now you're on the Olympus payroll. There's a seemingly
obvious connection. I pointed that out. Remember, you savaged Tina for
actually liking her Digilux I, couldn't wait to point out that as a
result of her liking the product she'd be asked by Leica to make a
presentation about it.

You don't get it both ways.

Adam


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

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

Replies: Reply from Eric Welch <eric@jphotog.com> (Re: [Leica] Miserable Failure)