Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/05/27
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I'm with you, Nathan. It's like those people who shoot with Elmars from the 40s and sing the praises of the "finger print" of the lens, which the users of any other sort of equipment might disparagingly call flare, lack of contrast, or poor definition. :-) On 5/27/05 2:27 PM, "Nathan Wajsman" <nathan.wajsman@planet.nl> wrote: > I am with Luis on this one. I have never understood the attraction of > the likes of Lomo, Lensbaby, Holga etc. If someone needs to use inferior > equipment for economic reasons, that's one thing (and many great > images have been produced by people in this category). But deliberately > using what amounts to a Coke bottle bottom to make pictures and then > claiming it to be ART or whatever, well... > > Suffice it to say that the Lomo will not be missed here. > > Nathan > > Luis Miguel Casta?eda wrote: >> >> On 27 de may de 2005, at 15:22, Douglas Sharp wrote: >> >>> In the latest issue of "Fotomagazin" (Germany) there is an article >>> announcing the demise of the LOMO. >> >> >> crap camera keeped afloat by the lomography trend made it to raise its >> price off limits of the reasonable price tag. Cheapness was the main >> reason to be. DEP. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >>