RE: [Leica] D100 photos

["Austin Franklin" <darkroom@ix.netcom.com>]

Patrick,

> There are similarities to the pure Leica question.
> Traditional materials and craftsmanship vs. new high
> tech materials and manufacturing techniques.

I don't associate "vintage steel bikes" with "traditional materials and
craftsmanship".  Material and craftsmanship are two entirely different
things.  A Leica is hardly "vintage steel".  I don't know how anyone can say
that new bikes aren't made with the same craftsmanship old ones are...I'd
even say new bikes are made with MORE craftsmanship than old bikes are, and
you certainly can not say that about new cameras vs old cameras.

Leicas ARE made with higher craftsmanship, in my opinion, than most other
cameras, and so are NEW bikes.  Old "vintage steel bikes" aren't really made
with much "craftsmanship", at least the ones I've seen...they are made
heavier duty, but that isn't craftsmanship.

As far as materials go, it's the proper material for the job.  For bikes,
LIGHT weight is an issue.  For a Leica, heavier IS better, as it dampens the
camera for use with the very fast lenses that Leica offers.  Is there
anything wrong with the material used in the Leicas?  Not that I am aware
of.  Is there anything wrong with the material in a "vintage steel bike"?
Yes.  Steel isn't conducive to light weight.

Again, I still don't understand the comparison.

Regards,

Austin


> >
> > > To give another example of Leica vs digital is a
> > > cyclist who only rides vintage steel bikes, and
> > would
> > > never straddle a bike made of titanium, carbon
> > fibre,
> > > or any of the other exotic materials.
> >
> > Henry,
> >
> > I don't understand one bit how that is a comparable
> > comparison.
> >
> > Austin

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html