RE: [Leica] Was Digilux 2 Review, Now Frank Van Riper Speaks

["B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>]

Greg, for a smart guy you can be so __________________ - I NEVER
suggested that he had not had the equipment in his hands - what I said,
and continue to say, is that he did not post a real review of the camera
as a tool - all he did was gush over the handling, and buttons, dials
and features - WITHOUT TALKING ABOUT HOW ANY OF THAT TRANSLATES TO
PRODUCING IMAGES. The "review" read precisely like the ads Leica puts
out in brochures and press releases. Period. If that's what you consider
a real review, well...I'm hardly surprised given that the product was a
Leica. However, had I written something similar about the Olympus E-1,
or about a Nikon product, I know full well you, of all people, would be
trashing me demanding to know what the PICTURES were like, how the
controls effected the use of the camera, how the camera compared to
other similar cameras, whether the price difference was worth it. Etc.
Etc. Etc.

Cheers to you...



- -----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, February 21, 2004 12:07 AM
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: Re: [Leica] Was Digilux 2 Review, Now Frank Van Riper Speaks


Now your actually disappointed to discover that Mr. Van Riper does 
ACTUALLY USE equipment BEFORE writing his reviews, unlike say, yourself?

Well B.D., in response to this I can only quote someone far wiser than 
me.... "Better to say nothing and have others think you a fool then to 
open your mouth and remove all doubt".

Regards and Goodnight,

Greg

B. D. Colen wrote:

>Good, Greg - Of course that doesn't respond to my pointing out that his

>"review" is nothing but a recitation of FEATURES and FEEL. I didn't see

>anything about noise at various isos; I don't see anything about the 
>appearance of the images; I don't see anything about the kinds of 
>digital distortion that do or don't appear, and under what 
>circumstances they appear; I don't see anything about color accuracy; I

>don't see anything about the fact that the camera only has a top iso of

>400, which is definitely limiting in terms of low light use, and which 
>suggests that it may be noisier at 400 iso than less expensive DSLRS 
>with interchangeable lenses; I don't see anything about write times for

>images, and  on and on and on. I'm glad you and Frank Van Ripper are 
>such chums - but that really doesn't respond to my questions/criticisms

>at all. And, again, you well know that it doesn't.
>
>Hey, why not just wait and point us to the Dpreview review when it 
>runs; it will be a REVIEW of the camera, and not just a recitation of 
>features. ;-)
>
>Your pal,
>
>B. D.
>
>  
>
>  
>


- --
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