Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/08/13

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
Subject: [Leica] M9 - not much more expensive than M8?
From: photo at frozenlight.eu (Nathan Wajsman)
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 09:18:29 +0200
References: <C6A926DF.52C9A%mark@rabinergroup.com> <p06230904c6a961a6bb8e@10.0.1.199> <7ac27f4f0908122357i7d12480bmf8ee579e77294dad@mail.gmail.com>
 
It is not a subjective perception, Richard, but an objective  
assessment. I have an E3 too, with two of the best lenses in the E  
system, the 12-60 and the 50-200. So I am not knocking the E3 by any  
means, but it is simply not in the M8+Leica lenses league. And indeed  
it would not be reasonable to expect it to be, given the price  
difference in lenses.

Nathan

Nathan Wajsman
Alicante, Spain
http://www.frozenlight.eu
http://www.greatpix.eu
http://www.nathanfoto.com

Books: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/search?search=wajsman&x=0&y=0
PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws
Blog: http://www.fotocycle.dk/blog



On Aug 13, 2009, at 8:57 AM, Richard Man wrote:

>
> BTW, I know Nathan says his M8 pics are much sharper than his E-3
> pics, but I beg to differ. To each of their own, of course.
Replies: Reply from richard.lists at gmail.com (Richard Man) ([Leica] M9 - not much more expensive than M8?)
Reply from images at comporium.net (Tina Manley) ([Leica] M9 - not much more expensive than M8?)
 In reply to: Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] M9 - not much more expensive than M8?)
Message from richard.lists at gmail.com (Richard Man) ([Leica] M9 - not much more expensive than M8?)