Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/08/07
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]In a message dated 8/7/03 10:39:55 AM Pacific Daylight Time, bdcolen@earthlink.net writes: > Try making a statement sometime that is not a ridiculous exaggeration - > such as your latest statement - and then perhaps there will be some > point in this discussion. It is obvious, however, that you are so > besotted with the name "Leica," that you simply can't grasp the fact > that there are numerous pieces of photo equipment of equal quality, or > quality so close to Leica that the images they produce are indiscernible > from those produced by Leica equipment. Were this not the case, all the > world's outstanding - non-newspaper - photographers would be shooting > with Leica equipment. And they are not. ;-) - ---------------- BD, I'm referring to a standard of excellence. Sure a Nikon is a very good instrument. I use Nikons and Nikkors all the time. A Nikon isn't a Leica M when it comes to ultimate quality at 3' to infinity. Just one man's opinion. There are many cameras that produce 'acceptable' images. They're commercially viable and I see those pictures in newspapers and magazines all the time. But I'm shooting for my journals. And there the rubber meets the road. br - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html