Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/11/03
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I decided to keep my Digilux 2 - rather than sell it - for the exact reason it *is* a capable camera. I will certainly use it when I want to shoot digital. It sure is a fine example of the speed at which a really good camera design can be left in the dust, though. Ted's point about the pain of keeping one's gear up to date is taken. All of the posts on this topic have reminded me that it's way past time to put in a print order for some 4x6's so I can update my own "shoebox." Regards, Dick Boston MA >Dick, > >The Digilux 2 was not meant to compete with the SLRs. It is a point >& shoot, admittedly a very expensive one, but still a P&S. As such, >its performance should be compared to the current top-of-the-line >P&S cameras, and in that comparison the Digilux 2 does not do so >badly as long as you forget about the price. > >In the world of DSLRs, you can easily buy something today with which >you will still be happy in 5 years. I do not expect to replace my >newly purchased 1D Mark II (released in 2004) unless it breaks and >the cost of repair is too high. > >And BTW, the images I have shot with my 20D did not suddenly get >worse when the 5D was released... > >Nathan (snip) >-- >Nathan Wajsman >Almere, The Netherlands > >General photography: http://www.nathanfoto.com >Seville photography: http://www.fotosevilla.com >Stock photography: http://www.alamy.com/search-results.asp?qt=wajsman >http://myloupe.com/home/found_photographer.php?photographer=507 >Prints for sale: http://www.photodeluge.com > Ted Grant wrote: >>John, Ted - Well, if you don't like "obsolete," how about >>"outclassed" or "outperformed" then? :-)<<< > >Hi Richard, >I'm not sure what some of the problems folks have with "obsolete or >"outclassed" or "outperformed?" > >(snip) > >Yes I've heard the stories of... "well you can write it off because >it's a business!" But what people never think about is... "we still >have to earn money before we can buy the camera!" Business or not! > >>For $1,800+ dollars and as a Leica, yet, one should be able to >>expect a longer period of superior performance.<<< > >Well I suppose so, but knowing it's of high cost and not your cup of >tea for survival, why purchase in the first place? And certainly if >you find you're not getting the results with it you expected, why >would you hang on to it and complain? Hell I'd have sold it the >moment I found it didn't produce what I expected. > >And that would be the same if it were an M7, R8 or any other type of >gear. If I'm not satisfied? Get rid of it and don't waste thought on >the poor quality of the purchased gear. > >>However, as I said in my original post: >> >>>None of the above applies to pros, of course. Digital has to be >>>the hands down winner when you have to produce results NOW! and it >>>doesn't matter if you have to replace your cameras every couple of >>>years.<<<<<<<< > >Actually it sure as hell does matter!!! What do you think some of >the pros make in a year and quite frankly due to digital today, many >pros are having a much harder time making any kind of real solid >income! Simply because every idiot with a digital camera thinks >they're great photographers but have no idea what really solid >professional work is. > >(snip) > >ted