Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2015/06/13

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
Subject: [Leica] Q vs M for size
From: dstella1 at ameritech.net (Dante Stella)
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2015 20:29:11 -0700
References: <019a01d0a64f$b4bd5ac0$1e381040$@mcmaster.co.nz> <557CF290.2030109@jayburleson.com> <01a801d0a651$deba0880$9c2e1980$@mcmaster.co.nz>
 
I got to play with one yesterday. It is indeed M-sized, as in M6 with a fat 
50. It may beck game changer.

Dante

> On Jun 13, 2015, at 8:26 PM, John McMaster <john at mcmaster.co.nz> wrote:
> 
> I think my M with 28mm Summicron might be smaller......
> 
> http://www.wired.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Leica-Q_top1-1024x768.jpg
> 
> john
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jay Burleson
> 
> It can be, by a little bit, but then you get into the small body / huge 
> lens
> mismatch.
> 
> http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/71E4shHGbjL._SL1500_.jpg
> 
> Jay
> 
>> On 6/13/2015 8:10 PM, John McMaster wrote:
>> First image I have seen with both...
>> 
>> http://leicarumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/DSC0377.jpg
>> 
>> I thought EVF was meant to be more compact than a rangefinder ;-)
>> 
>> john
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
Replies: Reply from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] Q vs. M for size)
Reply from nwajsman at gmail.com (Nathan Wajsman) ([Leica] Q vs M for size)
 In reply to: Message from john at mcmaster.co.nz (John McMaster) ([Leica] Q vs M for size)
Message from leica at jayburleson.com (Jay Burleson) ([Leica] Q vs M for size)
Message from john at mcmaster.co.nz (John McMaster) ([Leica] Q vs M for size)