*- DORIS FANG -* wrote:
>
> On Wed, 4 Aug 1999, W. J. Liles wrote:
>
> > Leica vs Olympus
>
> Hold it right there, W.J. I certainly hope that no one thought THAT
> of my posts regarding Leica. That's exactly what it has not been about.
I apologize. That is indeed a misrepresentation of your comments.
>
>
> OM-3ti....$1,500 Leica M6....$1,599
> 50mm/2.0..$ 500 50/2.0 Summi$ 710
> --------- ----------
> $2,000 $ 2,309
>
> Wow...a +$310 difference. Probably less than what detailing the ole
> Porsche costs. ;-) My point is that if you're buying new, the difference
> is less than one might think. In SLRs, an R6-2 with a 28-70, runs
> $2250. The OM-3ti plus 35-80, a mere $2650. My, you could SAVE $400
> by buying Leica. Yes, I know that if you fill a camera bag with glass, the
> difference widens considerably, but the point is: We're already breathing
> rare air cost-wise in OM-country, beyond diminishing returns, or reason.
Actually I drive a Jeep and detail it with the garden hose, have a son
in the local, state university and bought my cameras used after my OM-1
I had for 22years was stolen. I still can't afford a new OM or Leica,
especially considering what a lousy photographer I am. I'm recently out
of the Army and I'm not in the rarified income level you suspect. On
the other hand to you the Leica is worth every penny and I am glad you
could find a way to get one. No one ever said reason has anything to do
with photography as a hobby. Someday I hope to have an attack of
insanity and find a good M-3 or M-6.
By the way I love your style even when it is aimed at me, keep it up.
W. J. Liles
Maj MC
USAR
>
>
>
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|