Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/03/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Walt, Actually more then that. Add the lens. $1620 vs. $6390. Len On Mar 8, 2007, at 8:33 PM, Walt Johnson wrote: > George > > 1300 for the D200 Nikon, 4800 for an M8. The Nikon seems to do > quite well for itself. Why not compare the M8 with something in the > same price range? > > Walt > > Lottermoser George wrote: >> Could be the lens. However, both are obviously stopped down. I do >> believe that in reality it's a combination of lens, sensor, in >> camera software - the whole deal - and if I had a point - that >> would be it. The M8 system competes superbly with the best of the >> pro systems at producing clean, sharp, finely detailed digital >> files. And for M lovers, in a digital world, that's a very good >> thing. >> >> Regards, >> George Lottermoser >> george@imagist.com >> >> >> >> On Mar 8, 2007, at 6:38 PM, Leonard Taupier wrote: >> >>> Pretty interesting, George. No comparison. But I think the >>> comparison is more the 50 1.4 Nikkor vs the Summicron. We know >>> the M8 is sharper, but shouldn't be that much. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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