Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/06/04
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Those cameras have been disasters from day one...The miracle is that they kept that effort going as long as they did. Point and shoots SHOULD have longer shelf-lives. :-) On 6/4/05 1:22 PM, "Slobodan Dimitrov" <s.dimitrov@charter.net> wrote: > Speaking o f which, have you read that..."Kodak has today confirmed > that the DCS Pro SLR/n and DCS Pro SLR/c digital SLRs have been > discontinued and will no longer be manufactured." Support stops in > 2008. Thanks for the memories Kodak. Point and shoots have longer > shelf lives! > > http://tinyurl.com/a987m > > Slobodan Dimitrov > Studio G-8, AGCC > http://sdimitrovphoto.com > > > > On Jun 4, 2005, at 9:26 AM, B. D. Colen wrote: > >> The 20D may not have the build quality of the EOS1DMKII and other >> "pro" >> cameras, but in terms of image quality, it is among the best of the >> best. >> I'll be the first to admit I'm impressed if the DMR can match the >> 20D image >> quality - then we'll at least know that for only $4K more, Leica >> can produce >> half a camera that matches a 20D in image quality. ;-) >> >> >> On 6/4/05 12:00 PM, "Slobodan Dimitrov" <s.dimitrov@charter.net> >> wrote: >> >> >>> Couldn't agree with you more on this. But I would of liked to see the >>> DMR stacked up against a professional camera. Comparing it to the 20D >>> just doesn't inspire much confidence with me. >>> >>> Slobodan Dimitrov >>> Studio G-8, AGCC >>> http://sdimitrovphoto.com >>> >>> >>> >>> On Jun 3, 2005, at 7:15 PM, Ted Grant wrote: >>> >>> >>>> David Mason offered: >>>> Subject: Re: [Leica] Leica DMR vs. Canon 20D comparison shots >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Well, it gives what data it can - but it certainly isn't telling us >>>>> the lens type, and aperture - just as I thought. So it would be >>>>> incomplete at best from the canon.<<<<<<<,, >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> Guys and gals I know I'm about to ask a completely inane stupid >>>> question and undoubtedly there will be a million answers back why >>>> one needs it. This recorded information. >>>> >>>> But here goes: >>>> >>>> I can't for the life of me understand what the heck you'd ever need >>>> to know what lens, aperture and other miscellaneous information not >>>> being read camera to camera? >>>> >>>> Isn't the whole action of taking pictures about the final >>>> photograph and how well you shot it? Surely these other details >>>> can't have much meaning for anything of logic in how good the end >>>> product is going to be? Or was. >>>> >>>> I know people want to know what lens, aperture etc were used right >>>> here on the list, but the question is some times asked when it's a >>>> mere happy snap of no meaning. >>>> >>>> Now if there's a specific effect, say blurred action of runners in >>>> a race and there's a beautiful effect of speed, then yes knowing >>>> what the shutter speed was can be helpful, if the asking person is >>>> going to try this effect. I have no problem with this because >>>> that's how we learn. >>>> >>>> But having it recorded with the shot is like.... "Who cares? I'd be >>>> far more interested in knowing it was a damn fine photograph than >>>> "what lens was recorded." >>>> >>>> OK now all together, thrash me! ;-) >>>> >>>> ted >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Leica Users Group. >>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information