Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/09/05
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Excuse me? Am I missing something here? How can you do anything approaching true valid comparisons of what is essentially a special purpose camera for which there are only two - slow - lenses, and auto-everything camera, and a fully manual, full-purpose, camera? This sounds a bit like doing a comparison review of a pickup truck, a Lincoln Town Car, and and Volvo 850 wagon. (okay, you disagree with the vehical choice, but I'll bet you get the idea. :-) > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of sam > alexander > Sent: Friday, September 04, 1998 7:04 PM > To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > Subject: Re: [Leica] XPan, G2 and M6 test > > > just read the current (29 August) issue of Amateur Photographer - > feature article is a comparison test between the Hasselblad (?) XPan, > the Contax G2, and the Leica M6. The final scores are: > XPan: 88% > G2: 86% > M6: 81% (!) downgraded primarily for value and features. > The reviewer, Doug Harman, calls the XPan ". . .a new classic." > Two strange things. . .I don't think the word Fuji appears anywhere in > the article. . .and the reviewer mis-loaded the M6 and shot a whole > roll without advancing. This undoubtedly affected his review. > The lens test portion, just generalized, judges all equally > excellent. However, the test shots consist of a medium close flower > shot and a seaside long shot, both in bright sunshine. > There is much more to the test and the ". . .panoramic upstart." > > >