Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/01/04
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I am an amateur photographer whose enjoyment includes the appreciation of the ergonomics of and quality of manufacture of my tools. I will also probably not buy a Digilux 2 at the price it is being offered but I do appreciate the design (I don't mean styling). I have become used to focusing with a ring round the lens, I much prefer dials to buttons, etc.. It may well be that the photographic results can be duplicated for less - this has been said for years about all Leicas, most on this list do not agree. I used an M6 for years as my main camera - it went everywhere with me. I now use a digital SLR more but I do not enjoy the use of the tool as much. I find the controls counter intuitive though I can get used to them if I use it often enough. It is a shame the viewfinder has to be electronic but it is pretty obvious that a quality optical viewfinder of the same magnification range would be huge and much more expensive. I do not think the camera is laughable - it looks to have got rid of most of the details I hate about the microchip generation cameras. It does look too expensive for me, and particularly irritating that it is so much cheaper in the US than the UK! cheers Frank On Sunday, January 4, 2004, at 11:19 pm, Gary Williams wrote: > As someone who does not make a habit of bashing Leica, it pains me to > say this but the new Digilux is nothing short of absurd. What is the > marketing and product strategy behind a brick size $1800 P&S? With > this > kind of thinking Leica will only contribute to its demise, a la Nero > fiddling while Rome burns. As sales of film cameras continue to drop > vs. digital, with a digital product like this, one wonders if the > future > for Leica will ever be more than an esoteric boutique line catering to > the rich and jaded (and fiddling). At $1800 MAP, the Digilux is more a > piece of jewelry than a camera. If this weren't so unfortunate it > would be laughable. > > Yea, yea, I know, what was Nero supposed to do, put out a flaming city > with a violin? > > Gary > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of B. D. > Colen > Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2004 5:12 PM > To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > Subject: RE: [Leica] Digilux 2 vs Panasonic LC > > > Don't forget too that you are paying $1850 for a point-and-shoot with a > top ISO of only 400 - compared to 1600 and 3200 with the > DSLRs...granted > that there's allot of noise at those higher isos, but there is with > high speed film as well...and at 800 noise isn't an issue with the > Canon > DSLRs..... > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Steve > Unsworth > Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2004 3:45 PM > To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > Subject: RE: [Leica] Digilux 2 vs Panasonic LC > > > I've always preferred the larger size of my M6 over the smaller IIIC > that I used to have, so perhaps the size is a subjective thing. > Certainly the Digilux price is high but apart from the electronic > viewfinder I like the design. However for someone shooting in Raw mode > I > can't see any reason to go for the Leica offering over the cheaper > Panasonic. The major claimed difference between the Panasonic LS5 and > the Digilux I was the difference in firmware, I would have thought this > would be irrelevant if shooting Raw. > > Steve > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of B. D. > Colen > Sent: 04 January 2004 20:23 > To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > Subject: RE: [Leica] Digilux 2 vs Panasonic LC > > > BTW - My point isn't to say that this proves something great about the > E-1...It's to point out what a monstrosity the DigiII is given that > it's > a fixed lens point-and-shoot.....;-) > > > -- > 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 > > -- > 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