On 5/6/2013 3:37 PM, Tina Manley wrote:
> Most people find if they add up all of the different camera systems and
> lenses that they have bought over they years, they could easily have paid
> for a Leica
Which assumes that using a Leica would not have led them to leave photography
for other, more enjoyable, or at least
less annoying, careers or pastimes.
Perhaps if all cameras were rangefinders in the Leica style, I would be a
painter, or writer, philosopher or king, and
possibly enjoying a better life.
Contrary to what might easily be read into AG's comments on ergonomics, it is a
HIGHLY personal subject. You may well be
able to take better photographs with a Leica than I can with any camera I have.
I happily concede the point with people;
perhaps not with dragonflies and a few other subjects. :-)
BUT, I cannot make better images with Leicas than with other cameras, as I will
not even try. Their viewing model and
the focal length and close-up limitations drive me crazy.
> and a Leica lens that never goes out of date. ;-)
In TOP today, Mike says: "A friend just completed some tests on his own
equipment and told me that a $7,000 Leica 24mm
ƒ/1.4 Summilux-M produces visibly inferior results to a $1,100 Sony/Zeiss 24mm
ƒ/1.8 E-Mount on a NEX."
Part of his theme is that some of the rules may have changed - such that old
verities no longer apply.
N.R.F. Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|