Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/05/23
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]You can by and M6 for $1699 new. For less used. What's the problem? - -- On Mon, 22 May 2000 19:53:28 AWSteg wrote: >I will buy all the Leica M6's you have to offer with a 3 year warrantee at >$1,000. ( the price of the G2.) I will also buy all the 21mm Leica lens's >with 3 year warrantee for $1,000 and so on. . with the exception of the 35mm >glass and the offerings of glass where Leica does have the edge. The bang >for the buck is simply not the same but at a factor of about 2X. For my >money I can't see 2X the difference in the same offerings of glass. If your >buying M6's for the price of G2's please tell us where? > >To put it another way, I'll trade you a new G2 for a new M6. . .want me to >go on or is cost now a factor? The fact is the G2 is not cheaper but less >expensive. > >Al Stegmeyer >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Takeshi Hashimoto" <hashimoto.takeshi@mailcity.com> >To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> >Sent: Monday, May 22, 2000 6:17 PM >Subject: Re: [Leica] Thanks!! OT Contax G2: Cost > > >> To put an end to this discussion (ahem!). If one chooses to buy a G2 and >what you really want is an M6, but you believe that "cost" is a big factor, >I say you're mistaken. The costs are close enough to be negigible. If you >buy a G2 because you prefer a G2, or prefer an M but cannot use an M, then >that's different. I'm not impugning the G2, only the idea that it's a >"cheaper" M6. It's neither cheaper nor the same sort of camera. >> -- >> >> On Mon, 22 May 2000 17:29:57 john wrote: >> >Mark Rabiner wrote: >> >> >> >> Takeshi Hashimoto wrote: >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > -- >> >> > >> >> > On Mon, 22 May 2000 08:49:27 John Collier wrote: >> >> > >You will be delighted to learn that the word "cost" does not have to >be >> >> > >confined to a strictly monetary definition. The space allotted and >the >> >> > >patience of the average leica-user forbears a detailed discussion. >Perhaps >> >> > >we could take this off list and amaze one another with a new nuance >of >> >> > >meaning and usage of this oh so useful word every day. We probably >could >> >> > >occupy ourselves thus for several weeks. >> >> > > >> >> > >Cheers >> >> > > >> >> > >John Collier ;-) >> >> > >> >> > What I meant was that all things being equal (which they're not) if >cost were to be the deciding factor, the difference was negligible. If, as >you point out, the M6 could not be used efficiently because of poor >eyesight, then that's something else again. It's not cost. >> >> > >> >> > >> From: "Takeshi Hashimoto" <hashimoto.takeshi@mailcity.com> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> What does this have to do with "cost". >> >> > > >> >> ><Snip> >> >> >> >> Yes and to make a small point: >> >> Every time you shot with your G2 a small part of your soul rots away. >> >> Until you left with a steaming hunk of steaming....DNA confusion. >> >> Leica M photography however is an uplifting experience in every way! >> >> Leica photographers are known to all of a sudden blink off into a >gleaming all >> >> knowing state of bliss!* >> >> But i don't wish to put too fine of a point on it! >> >> Mark :-) Rabiner >> >> *not the same as f8 and be there. >> >Oh My God!!!!!!!!!!! So now using your Leica can lead to an O----m. Holy >Crow. >> > This is a family e-mail group. Puleeeeze. I am still sound of mind from >> >using a G2 and pure of heart from using an M Leica. >> >John >> > >> >> >> Get your FREE Email at http://mailcity.lycos.com >> Get your PERSONALIZED START PAGE at http://my.lycos.com > > Get your FREE Email at http://mailcity.lycos.com Get your PERSONALIZED START PAGE at http://my.lycos.com