Archived posting to the
Leica Users Group, 2006/10/31
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index]
[Home]
[Search]
Subject: [Leica] M8 and the Future
From: walt at waltjohnson.com (Walt Johnson)
Date: Tue Oct 31 05:34:04 2006
References: <001d01c6fa88$015aec30$6601a8c0@dcpdc.dcts.org> <20061031010312.83527.qmail@web50106.mail.yahoo.com> <22c93b290610301706ycede2f3w654b7bb5c1651445@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.0.20061030193137.01a233f8@northcoastphotos.com> <115e7bd00610301949m1b41f3bbs5e3628e1c37e053c@mail.gmail.com>
Sounds like the old Gold Meanie is about to rear its head. Something
like 5/8?
brad daly wrote:
> i realize the use of 35mm film is largely arbitrary for the reasons
> previously stated. but isn't there something about the 2:3 aspect
> ration that's considered desirable from a geometrical POV?
>
> --brad
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
In reply to:
Message from rclark01 at comcast.net (Robert Clark) ([Leica] M8 and the Future)
Message from rhaightjr at yahoo.com (Bob Haight) ([Leica] M8 and the Future)
Message from wooderson at gmail.com (Matt Powell) ([Leica] M8 and the Future)
Message from datamaster at northcoastphotos.com (Gary Todoroff) ([Leica] M8 and the Future)
Message from bwdaly at gmail.com (brad daly) ([Leica] M8 and the Future)