Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/03/01
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I suspect the Digi II will be much better in terms of lag time - if it's not, it's not worth more than 1/3 of the asking price. But, again, I stress that I assume the lag time will not be a real problem with it. - -----Original Message----- From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of animal Sent: Monday, March 01, 2004 10:50 AM To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: Re: [Leica] OT Digital question The lag time is the major frustration for my friends who have digital cameras. A lot buy the latest models cheaply somewhere in the middle or far east wherever prices are lowest and sell them here in Europe when the models arrive.So they can buy a new one again with even a little profit. Especially the young parents often comment how they miss opportunities for kid,s shots because of the shutter lag. Will the digilux 2 do a lot better in that respect? simon > I have gotten free equipment from Olympus: > > That said - Having used all three cameras, I will say the lag time on > the Olympus C5050 or C5060 is shorter than that on the Canon G5 - > obviously not only is it nowhere near the lag time on an M, it's > nowhere near the lag time on a good DSLR, but that's the nature of the > digital p&ses.... The C5050 has an f 1.8 lens, and can be found on > sale. > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of > rclompus@cox.net > Sent: Sunday, February 29, 2004 11:04 PM > To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > Subject: [Leica] OT Digital question > > > The Canon G5 although not pocketable has an f 2 lens at some focal > lengths. Try www.dpreview.com - this site has a number of reviews that > may shorten > your search. Nothing has the short shutter lag time of an M6 or even R6 > for > that matter. > > Richard Clompus > > > > From: JCB <jcb@visualimpressions.com> > > Date: 2004/02/29 Sun PM 10:45:44 EST > > To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > > Subject: [Leica] RE: OT Digital question > > > > Contax makes some very pocketable digital cameras that are Zeiss > > sharp! I hear nothing but accolades from my colleagues. > > > > JB > > > > > > At 10:25 PM 2/29/2004 -0500, Bill wrote: > > >I'll probably regret this but here goes. If you have no digital > > >desires, quickly hit the DELETE key. > > > > > >She Who Must Be Obeyed just returned from 9 days in Italy. Because > > >of > the > > >nature of the trip, she only brought one camera, an Olympus E10. > > >She > > > >is very happy with the results of this camera but got to wondering > > >if > > > >there > was > > >not something a bit smaller and perhaps more importantly, lighter. > > >Yes I know, the M7 with a lens would be smaller and lighter but not > > >as flexible, and for these trips, she prefers digital anyhow. An R > > >would also be going in the wrong direction, as would our Fuji S2, > > >so the question is, has > anyone > > >used a smaller camera that would produce as good an image as the > > >E10? > I > > >know there are plenty out there with a higher pixel rating but that > > >does > not > > >always translate into better image as we all know. Just by chance > > >I happened to be playing with the new Leica Digilux 2 on Friday. > > >Aside > from > > >hurdle of the 1,850 tag, the Nintendo viewfinder annoys me and > > >there is > the > > >nagging question about others that may perform as well. The new > > >Canon > G5 > > >has received some good 'press' from folks that should know good > > >from > ok. > > >I guess what I'm attempting to do is narrow down the search using > > >the > > > >collective wisdom of those that have actually used a digital that > > >they are happy with the large prints from. Preferably with an > > >optical 4x or larger zoom, a relatively fast lens, and hopefully an > > >optical viewfinder. > > > > > >Thanks in advance for any help. > > >Bill > > > > > >-- > > >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