Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/07/05

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

Subject: [Leica] New York Times anonymous fine art photography Now Mark's screw up
From: abridge at gmail.com (Adam Bridge)
Date: Mon Jul 5 12:57:36 2004
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20040704125447.015a58e0@mail.infoave.net> <5.2.0.9.2.20040705151108.01635a88@mail.infoave.net>

I read that they aren't QUITE the savings you'd think...on the order
of 30% as I recall. But just having BOTH blacks and not having to
change so often would be really nice. It's also faster. But it's big
and heavy (80 pounds or so) which means getting it upstairs to my
studio will be a pain. Not that I'm not wanting to invest in the
effort you understand!

On Mon, 05 Jul 2004 15:12:25 -0400, Tina Manley <images@infoave.net> wrote:

> 
> Say what, Mark?  I don't have the 4000 yet, but I'd love to get it.  The
> huge ink cartridges would be a great saving over the tiny ones that run out
> constantly on the 2200.
> 
> 
> 
> Tina

Replies: Reply from feli at creocollective.com (Feli di Giorgio) ([Leica] New York Times anonymous fine art photography Now Mark's screw up)
Reply from timatherton at theedge.ca (Tim Atherton) ([Leica] New York Times anonymous fine art photography NowMark's screw up)
Reply from images at InfoAve.Net (Tina Manley) ([Leica] New York Times anonymous fine art photography Now Mark's screw up)
In reply to: Message from images at InfoAve.Net (Tina Manley) ([Leica] New York Times anonymous fine art photography Now Mark's screw up)
Message from images at InfoAve.Net (Tina Manley) ([Leica] New York Times anonymous fine art photography Now Mark's screw up)