Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/02/14

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
Subject: [Leica] NOW R-D1 vs Fuji 400/800
From: richard-lists at imagecraft.com (Richard)
Date: Mon Feb 14 01:21:15 2005
References: <121fa7c843a0cb13cefe959eb68b2dd9@mac.com> <BE34D653.FB46%simonpj@mac.com> <6.1.0.6.2.20050213221222.05d0dfb8@192.168.100.42> <1108372046.42106a4e43287@arrowana.singnet.com.sg>
 
At 01:07 AM 2/14/2005, joelct wrote:

>Your reasoning entirely logical, understandable and acceptable. But for 
>a >US$2000 piece to malfunction and requiring returns to manufacturer 
>smacks of poor QC and
>inferior finish.

Unfortunately, I would have to agree that something is lacking....

However, there is just no other choice right now for a digital M body. I 
think this says less about Epson's bad QC etc. and more about (OK, I am 
going to sound like B.D. :-) ) Leica's mis-opportunity.

// richard (This email is for mailing lists. To reach me directly, please 
use richard at imagecraft.com)
In reply to: Message from driggett at mac.com (Christopher Driggett) ([Leica] OT: OS X 10.3.8 problems with Epson drivers??)
Message from simonpj at mac.com (Simon P-J) ([Leica] SOLVED OT: OS X 10.3.8 problems NOW R-D1 vs Fuji 400/800)
Message from richard-lists at imagecraft.com (Richard) ([Leica] NOW R-D1 vs Fuji 400/800)
Message from joelct at singnet.com.sg (joelct) ([Leica] NOW R-D1 vs Fuji 400/800)