Archived posting to the
Leica Users Group, 2005/11/02
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index]
[Home]
[Search]
Subject: Film vs. Digital [was Re: [Leica] Re:Leica D200]
From: jbcollier at shaw.ca (John Collier)
Date: Wed Nov 2 15:08:32 2005
References: <25229337.1130876375153.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hound.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <20051101222836.85761.qmail@web34013.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <9b678e0511011817t5259faafh22546ead6ce19f6f@mail.gmail.com> <22c93b290511011820w4d858415y5e29adb71240c186@mail.gmail.com> <4dccee3d0511011821l57442bdel966db4cbdcc3af9f@mail.gmail.com> <22c93b290511011955y25e7248dh558a7623e3450d29@mail.gmail.com> <003301c5df71$fca3aa10$1ae76c18@ted> <p0623090dbf8e81075c1a@[131.142.12.152]>
It is only obsolete when it stops working and you can't get it fixed
anymore. It met your requirements when you bought it and it still
does. Tools are always improving but the old tools still work fine.
John Collier
On 2-Nov-05, at 8:06 AM, Richard S. Taylor wrote:
> My Digilux 2 was obsolete within months of purchase. Any of the
> newer DSLRs outshine it in speed of response and low noise
> performance.
Replies:
Reply from tedgrant at shaw.ca (Ted Grant) (Film vs. Digital [was Re: [Leica] Re:Leica D200])
In reply to:
Message from feli2 at earthlink.net (feli) ([Leica] OT: Nikon D200)
Message from zoeica1 at yahoo.com (Chris Williams) ([Leica] Re:Leica D200)
Message from don.dory at gmail.com (Don Dory) ([Leica] Re:Leica D200)
Message from wooderson at gmail.com (Matt Powell) ([Leica] Re:Leica D200)
Message from dcm at pobox.com (David C. Mason) ([Leica] Re:Leica D200)
Message from wooderson at gmail.com (Matt Powell) ([Leica] Re:Leica D200)
Message from tedgrant at shaw.ca (Ted Grant) ([Leica] Re:Leica D200)
Message from r.s.taylor at comcast.net (Richard S. Taylor) (Film vs. Digital [was Re: [Leica] Re:Leica D200])