Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/11/02

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] the 90% rule-long, rambling BS from Walt
From: Guy Bennett <gbennett@lainet.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 10:27:38 -0800

>I would say that all these things make the Leica the "better" camera. If you
>cannot say that a camera is better because is has say sharper lenses (which
>Leica arguably has) and you can't say it's because you get better results
>with it (for whatever reason), then what IS the proper criterion for
>determining which camera is better? Of course this means better for you...
>Doesn't necessarily mean better for me.
>BUT, if enough people get "better" results with one brand than with
>another...And we could of course do some statistics and see for instance
>what say some high class photo group such as Magnums photographers use, but
>that's not allowed either, so ... ;-)
>Dragi Anevski


Now you're getting it, Dragi! It always takes time to break in the
new-comers, but it seems you finally understand the LUG motto, applicable
to everything from lens testing to UV filter use: "THOU MUST NOT... (fill
in with appropriate propaganda)."

And while we're on the subject of commandments, it is interesting to note
that the LUG is cleanly divided into two camps: those who religiously
worship the camera and those who religiously refuse to worship the camera,
with, in both cases, zealots attempting to convert the misguided.

Proselytizers of the World Unite! Go out and use your camera, and leave
your unrepentant brethren to worship or not as they choose.

Perhaps then we can give this tired debate a rest.

Guy




>>From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>
>>Reply-To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
>>To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
>>Subject: Re: [Leica] the 90% rule-long, rambling BS from Walt
>>Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 11:13:55 -0500
>>
>>
>>
>>George Weir wrote:
>> >
>> > Ok Walt I'll bite, and no flame intended;
>> >
>> > If there is no difference in results as you say then why would it be
>> > that clients, photographers and non-photographers can correctly identify
>> > the "better photos" when shown a set taken under same circumstances,
>> > using same film, developer, paper etc.?
>>
>>Perhaps they see a difference because you take better photos with your
>>Leica equipment than you do with Nikon equipment. You may be more
>>comfortable with the Leica equipment. You may 'see' better with the
>>Leica equipment. You may tend to use the Leica equipment to take the
>>more impressive shots. You feel more confident as a photographer using
>>the Leica equipment. You may use the Leica equipment to take shots which
>>- because of the noise - you wouldn't take with the Nikon equipment, and
>>folks really like those shots.
>>
>>There are any number of reasons why your Leica shots might be "better"
>>than the Nikon shots, and not one of those reasons has anything to do
>>with the equipment being inherently better.
>>
>>B. D.
>>
>>Who loves both his Leica and Nikon equipment, each for different
>>reasons.
>>--
>>To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html