Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/02/08

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

Subject: RE: [Leica] Re: Digital M - was Leica to Restructure, Cut Staff
From: "Jeffery Smith" <jls@runbox.com>
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2004 16:44:55 -0600

You're right. I keep going back to it, from HP5+ and Neopan.

Jeffery Smith
New Orleans, LA


- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
[mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of B. D.
Colen
Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2004 4:00 PM
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: RE: [Leica] Re: Digital M - was Leica to Restructure, Cut Staff

Ah...But there's never been an X like Tri-X... The PJ/Documentary film
of films... ;-)

- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
[mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Jeffery
Smith
Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2004 4:54 PM
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: RE: [Leica] Re: Digital M - was Leica to Restructure, Cut Staff


Back when they were making the Retina? Hmmm. The lenses were good, but
they were Schneider lenses. I thought as early as 1968 that Ilford was
better B&W film, and Chinese-made Seagull paper and Ilford paper were
better than Kodak. And then they really decided to get frugal and put
less and less silver in their paper, and I couldn't get a true black
from it. Sorry, but if you put Agfa, Ilford, Fuji, Kodak, and Konica
head to head, I have Kodak beating Konica. Konica's 50 ISO C-41 film is
absolutely dreadful.

Sorry Yellow Father, but I've never considered you to be best of the
best in my lifetime.

Jeffery Smith
New Orleans, LA


BD said:

>So Kodak is the "best of the best?" Maybe 40 years ago.


- --
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