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: richard.lists at gmail.com (Richard Man)
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 15:38:10 -0700
References: <380-22009841321365230@M2W021.mail2web.com> <FC26A6A1-DC15-40B0-A44D-0C6813D2F929@mac.com> <7ac27f4f0908131516t1889edf7we0b0b44e50111890@mail.gmail.com> <D056A649-705C-4331-A6A1-FC3FE9F0E12A@mac.com>
 
YES! You said it in a much less antagonistic way than I do :-)

Thank you.

On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 3:35 PM, George Lottermoser<imagist3 at mac.com> 
wrote:
> Richard, I believe that your point is that each system,
> whether Oly, Nikon, Canon, Hasselblad, PhaseOne, Leica, et al
> and either digital and/or film
> can produce rich, stunning photography;
> when both gear and photographer are pleased with one another.
>
> Couldn't agree more.
> In the end - show me the print - I don't give a hoot about the gear.
> Even a 72 ppi .jpg can show a whole lot of aesthetic quality
> (though not compared to a fine print).
> So much for the subjective and aesthetic side of the craft.
>

-- 
// richard m: richard @imagecraft.com
// w: http://www.imagecraft.com/pub/Portfolio09/ blog:
http://rfman.wordpress.com
// book: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/detail/745963
In reply to: Message from wildlightphoto at earthlink.net (wildlightphoto at earthlink.net) ([Leica] M9 - not much more expensive than M8?)
Message from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([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?)
Message from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] M9 - not much more expensive than M8?)