Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/06/16
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]George, I don't put down people using large format and looking at screens - it just wouldn't work for me. And yes, I find myslelf more and more captivated by screen viewing - I literally never use the 'regular' viewfinder on the E-330. As to the comparison of rangefinder, etc., keep in mind that when I bought them, my M6s cost less than Nikon F5s or Canon D1s. Further, using rangefinder regularly for a number of years retrained my eye to the point where I now see and think similarly shooting a DWLR. ...... Original Message ....... On Fri, 16 Jun 2006 10:31:16 -0500 Lottermoser George <imagist3@mac.com> wrote: >On Jun 16, 2006, at 8:55 AM, B. D. Colen wrote: >> Of course the far more important question is whether it will >> outperform the full-frame Canon 5D > >B.D. - Taking the comparison of the RD1 and DigiM to a comparison >with a DSLR really moves away from the point - which remains - a >serious digital RF comparison. When you were shooting film, I believe >that you preferred the M for all that it offered to etch your vision >on to that film, even while many, much less expensive, SLR and other >RF, systems would have done just as well. You chose Leica for all >sorts of reasons which we all appreciate. > >I'm using a 20D and 5D with R glass and occasionally, when >appropriate, with C glass. However, I continue to feel the desire to >work with RF's and salivate for day when I can add one to my digital >work flow. At this moment the only viable choices for a serious >digital RF rest with the RD1 and supposedly, soon, a digital M. >Period (unless I've missed an announcement). > >The "far more important question" is whether it will perform "as well >as" not "outperform" the current crop of serious equipment. >The DMR would suggest that the digiM will do that. Will it do that >for the same price point as Olympus or Canon? Never did before. >Olympus has always provided a remarkable value; always fine quality >at a price below the competition. But when you shot film you used >Leica, not Olympus. The price point will be what ever it will be. >Those who can afford it will. Those who can't won't. It was true when >you chose Leica to make your images. It's true when folks choose >'blad, Linhof, BMW, Viking, Lotus, Alpa, whatever. Do I wish that I >could afford a truly fine car? Sure. Does my '93 Saturn do all I need >it to do? Yes. Is my 5D a serious RF? No. Do I want a serious digital >RF? Yes. > >Having played with an R9DMR for 15 minutes - I can assure you that, >if and when the digiM, appears. it will feel wonderful in your hands, >possess a simplicity which the majority of digicams don't, and >produce extremely fine images. I say this because that's what Leica >has always done (with the exception of the R-3 - don't get me started >on that error). Even the Digilux1 did what it did with elegance (I >miss the little thing). And when I expressed my delight in working >with it's (at the time) huge screen, similar to working with medium >or large format ground glass; you put me, and others looking at their >screens, down. Now that you have found the benefits of doing the same >thing with the 330 - it's the greatest thing since the bayonet lens >mount. > >Relax. Enjoy the range of options and price points ;-) > >Regards, >George Lottermoser >george@imagist.com > > > > >_______________________________________________ >Leica Users Group. >See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information ___ Sent from handheld device. Please forgive any typos or spelling errors.