Archived posting to the
Leica Users Group, 2013/01/01
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index]
[Home]
[Search]
Subject: [Leica] a "pro-hobbyist" evaluates an M9 . . . ICK
From: red735i at verizon.net (Frank Filippone)
Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2013 16:49:29 -0800
References: <CD0884E6.2CBB%mark@rabinergroup.com> <B87C31DB15084DD6B2D4BD1CE004A041@billHP> <80F9701439F20347874CE5E4E03C22E99EF7B7A5@WHIZZMAIL02.whizz.org> <00aa01cde880$3da6c550$b8f44ff0$@verizon.net> <80F9701439F20347874CE5E4E03C22E99EF7F051@WHIZZMAIL02.whizz.org>
Explain more about your comment of the 3200dpi scans.......... What is
different? Was the scan done in native mode (not the total of some 4x800DPI
or other math assisted scans?)
I understand that you had the body checked out.... I agree that this should
have ensured the body was OK.....
Note: SWC lenses ( 38mm Biogon) is certainly one of the best volume made
lenses ever created.....and wed permanently to a body is a killer combo!
Frank Filippone
Red735i at verizon.net
3200dpi scans are a different matter IME. The 500C/M had been back to
Hasselblad UK for servicing.
john
Replies:
Reply from john at mcmaster.co.nz (John McMaster) ([Leica] a "pro-hobbyist" evaluates an M9 . . . ICK)
In reply to:
Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] a "pro-hobbyist" evaluates an M9 . . . ICK)
Message from billcpearce at cox.net (Bill Pearce) ([Leica] a "pro-hobbyist" evaluates an M9 . . . ICK)
Message from john at mcmaster.co.nz (John McMaster) ([Leica] a "pro-hobbyist" evaluates an M9 . . . ICK)
Message from red735i at verizon.net (Frank Filippone) ([Leica] a "pro-hobbyist" evaluates an M9 . . . ICK)
Message from john at mcmaster.co.nz (John McMaster) ([Leica] a "pro-hobbyist" evaluates an M9 . . . ICK)