Archived posting to the
Leica Users Group, 2009/08/13
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index]
[Home]
[Search]
Subject: [Leica] Hasselblad digi-backs, lenses - was M9"M8
From: henningw at archiphoto.com (Henning Wulff)
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 17:26:22 -0700
References: <C6A9E9C7.52D0A%mark@rabinergroup.com> <p06230908c6aa3189a222@[10.0.1.199]> <0D984AC4-A065-4311-A904-AA8B335CDDB1@mac.com> <00c901ca1c64$0a373ce0$1ea5b6a0$@net> <p0623090dc6aa427198ab@[10.0.1.199]> <00cd01ca1c6b$4b1d72e0$e15858a0$@net> <65AEFCF4-34B8-43BC-AA05-9EC76D50231F@mac.com>
At 6:25 PM -0500 8/13/09, George Lottermoser wrote:
>The real question in my mind (and I believe Henning's as well)
>Does that $6 to $11K 'blad C back buy me into a system that will
>truly, in the real world,
>perform significantly better, for what I need or want to do, than
>that same $6 to $11K purchasing a similar part for another existing
>(on my shelf) system?
>i.e. M9, Nikon 3 whatever, etc.
Yes, that's _EXACTLY_ it!
--
* Henning J. Wulff
/|\ Wulff Photography & Design
/###\ mailto:henningw at archiphoto.com
|[ ]| http://www.archiphoto.com
In reply to:
Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] M9 - not much more expensive than M8?)
Message from henningw at archiphoto.com (Henning Wulff) ([Leica] Hasselblad digi-backs, lenses - was M9?M8)
Message from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] Hasselblad digi-backs, lenses - was M9?M8)
Message from red735i at earthlink.net (Frank Filippone) ([Leica] Hasselblad digi-backs, lenses - was M9"M8)
Message from henningw at archiphoto.com (Henning Wulff) ([Leica] Hasselblad digi-backs, lenses - was M9"M8)
Message from red735i at earthlink.net (Frank Filippone) ([Leica] Hasselblad digi-backs, lenses - was M9"M8)
Message from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] Hasselblad digi-backs, lenses - was M9"M8)