Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/08/23

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

Subject: RE: [Leica] digitalrebel
From: "bdcolen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 16:52:31 -0400

Of course you don't believe you're receiving those posts, Greg. But let
me suggest that you improve your life by simply using the instructions
that were provided earlier in the week for deleting unwanted Email -
just send my posts straight to your trash folder. Not only won't I be
insulted; I'll feel honored. ;-)

- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
[mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Greg J.
Lorenzo
Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2003 1:03 PM
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: Re: [Leica] digitalrebel




bdcolen wrote:

>Well, I may be missing something here, Gregie, but I don't see any 
>contradiction in what I've written.
>
Your right. In most of your posts to the LUG (and some "totally" not on 
the LUG posts) lately your missing common decency and common sense.

> And I do not denigrate all things
>Leica - only Leicadolatory.
>
I suggest you reread what you write and the original posts that 
precipitated your post.

> If I wanted to denigrate all things Leica I
>wouldn't own and use the equipment.
>
Just what is your excuse then?

> I do find utterly ludicrous the myth
>that if something is manufactured by Leica it automatically: 1. Is the 
>best; 2. Is the perfect solution for every photographic situation, or 
>every photographer;
>3. Makes one a competent photographer.
>
Just who is it that is posting this utterly ludicrous myth on the Lug? I

don't seem to be receiving these posts.

>
>If my believing that, and stating it in various ways, suggests to you 
>that I denigrate all things Leica, you must assign far different 
>meanings to words than I. Which is of course your right. :-)
>  
>
Yes, your the Lug's original Rebel Without a Cause, but in this role 
your also frequently the major reason (cause) many people new to this 
list flock elsewhere.

Regards,

Greg

>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
>[mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Greg J. 
>Lorenzo
>Sent: Friday, August 22, 2003 7:12 PM
>To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
>Subject: Re: [Leica] digitalrebel
>
>
>bdcolen in his ongoing desire to continually enlighten the rest of us
>dimwits without B.D's "digital vision" wrote in part:
>
>  
>
>>Steve - You miss the point, and manage to be patronizing while missing
>>it - as usual.;-)
>>
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
>>I have NOTHING against anyone being happy with what ever form of
>>photographic equipment - from a Box Brownie to a gold-plated, ostrich 
>>skin-covered Leica MP meets their photographic needs. None what so 
>>ever.
>>
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
>>And I have never written anything suggesting that I do.
>>
>>    
>>
>
>Now this explains it. Apparently you don't actually read what you write
>before you post it to the list!
>
>  
>
>>I have also
>>repeatedly stated that I am still primarily using film in my own work,
>>and understand that some people are not only loath to give up film,
but
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
>>may never - more power to you, Steve.
>>
>>    
>>
>Yes, repeatedly. Always in a post to the list where your major theme is
>to denigrate all things Leica.
>
>  
>
>>And I was not comparing the results obtainable with the latest
>>generation of M lenses - results which are, when all is said and done,

>>beyond the power of 99.9 percent of hand-held shooter to obtain ;-) - 
>>to digital results. What I am saying here is that it is utterly 
>>ludicrous for those who are using 40-50-60 year-old flare-prone,
poorly
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
>>coated lenses that when they were new were not considered the best
>>available and now don't even compare in image quality to the lenses
SLR
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
>>manufactures sell as part of cheap packages, to be knocking digital
>>quality.
>>
>>    
>>
>Huh? Nothing patronizing about this statement.
>
>  
>
>>Again, just say "I love film." If someone loves using an III C,, or 
>>III
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
>>F with a Summabeenobsoletefor50years or an
>>Elmarcouldntproduceasharpimageswhenitcameoutoftheboxfivedecadesago, 
>>more power to them. But it sounds pretty silly for them to be knocking

>>digital and digital cameras that in terms of pure lens and image 
>>quality are generations ahead of the equipment they're using.
>> 
>>
>>    
>>
>Ditto!
>
>  
>
>>B. D.
>>
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
>>[mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Steve
>>LeHuray
>>Sent: Friday, August 22, 2003 2:56 PM
>>To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
>>Subject: Re: [Leica] digitalrebel
>>
>>
>>B.D.Colen sings the same old song:
>> 
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Again, if you're happy with film and your Rs, great - just as I am 
>>>happy with my Ms and film for most of my serious work. But our 
>>>preferring film for some or all our work doesn't negate the truth 
>>>about where digital is now, or about the fact that many of those 
>>>blindly bashing the idea of going digital are using truly obsolete 
>>>equipment that produces subpar results - in fact that produces image 
>>>quality that can be bested by virtually any modern SLR using consumer

>>>lenses, or, for that matter, can be bested by a Bessa R using Cosina 
>>>lenses costing less than $500. ;-)
>>>
>>>B. D.
>>>
>>>   
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>B.D. -- you have been banging the same old drum for several years now.
>>Please explain what you have against those people who are happy with 
>>their Leicas. OK, a new M7 costs about $2700. Is it worth it? Probably

>>not. But apparently it is to many who are buying them. A new Porsche 
>>911 Carrera costs about $80,000. Is it worth it? Apparently so, they 
>>cannot keep up with the orders. Are digicams great and the wave of the

>>future? Yes I think they are. But so what? There are 10s of thousands 
>>of people who love their Leicas and really do not need you making them

>>feel about about liking something. So now on your 57th (Happy Birthday

>>BTW), how about you moving on to some other crusade that is more 
>>meaningful to you and something more important than your constant and 
>>meaningless Leica bashing.
>>
>>Best regards,
>>
>>sl
>>
>>--
>>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
>>
>> 
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>--
>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
>
>  
>


- --
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

Replies: Reply from "Greg J. Lorenzo" <gregj.lorenzo@shaw.ca> (Re: [Leica] digitalrebel)