Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/10/21
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Emanuel challenged - "Sure sounds like a heck of a problem-plagued gizmo for three thousand cool ones. If this was a Solms-made product, Brother B.D. would be slaying us here with his most mellifluous ridicule. B.D. -- speak up, man! What say you about this Epson shite? The blood of your late Wetzlar Leicas is calling to you from the Great Beyond!" First - Damn right you'd be hearing from me if the Great and Wonderous Gnomes of Solms, who in the eyes of many in Luggland can do no wrong, who are said to be the Supreme Gods of the Photo Pantheon, produced a camera as described by Henning! And of course we know it would cost somewhere way north of $4500, not somewhere between $2500 and $3000! Second - As much as I respect Henning and his review, the camera he's describing doesn't sound much like the camera that's been described quite positively in multiple postings. I don't doubt the accuracy of any of his comments, btw, but the one that is the most troublesome - having to do with the rangefinder - could well be an issue with that one individual camera, given that what he encountered sounds far worse than problems described by others. Beyond that, what I say is that it's an interesting camera that can be had for less than 50% of what a Leica digi M will be - if there is ever a Leica digi M. It is the first camera of it's kind, over priced, but not grossly so - hell, it's less than some red leather covered M6 ;-). Despite the problems Henning points out, it still produces some pretty nice images - note the multiple pots of praise for Hennings images. What it is is a demonstration that Leica was wrong in hestitating to produce a digital M. And what say you to the far more Leica-relevant news that Solms will only sell M7s and Mps with .72 finders, unless one wants to pay a $1000 premium? I would think you'd be far more concerned about the Hermesification of Leica, the end of Leica as a company that produces real cameras for real photographers, than you would be about how good the Epson RD-1 is or isn't. And, just for the record - I said way back when that while I want a digital rangefinder, I'd be waiting for one that was reasonably priced and that produced results at least equal to - if not better than - the results produced by pro DSLRS. So what's your point? ;-) As to why I haven't jumped into this discussion previously - I have posted very little recently as one, I am busy with work; two, I have a ruptured disc, am drugged to the gills, and need to try to focus on what I need to focus on. And three, as happens from time to time, I've found most of the recent threads to be of little interest to me. :-) -----Original Message----- From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org [mailto:lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of Emanuel Lowi Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2004 8:13 AM To: lug@leica-users.org Subject: [Leica] Re: Henning's RD 1 report Sure sounds like a heck of a problem-plagued gizmo for three thousand cool ones. If this was a Solms-made product, Brother B.D. would be slaying us here with his most mellifluous ridicule. B.D. -- speak up, man! What say you about this Epson shite? The blood of your late Wetzlar Leicas is calling to you from the Great Beyond! Emanuel Lowi Montreal ______________________________________________________________________ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information