Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/12/06
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I have thought that it is just this very thing that appeals to the Leica traditionalists - that so little has changed from the M3 of 1954. Raimo photos at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen nyt myös Kameralehden juttuja suomeksi - ---------- > From: Kotsinadelis, Peter (Peter) <peterk@lucent.com> > To: 'leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us' > Subject: RE: [Leica] your opinion about G2 > Date: 06. joulukuuta 1998 5:25 > > Man, are you gonna p.o. a lot of Leica lovers with this comment. Imagine > telling them their M is actually little changed since 1954....blasphemy I > tell you. It plain blasphemy. > > Peter K > > > ---------- > > From: TEAShea@aol.com[SMTP:TEAShea@aol.com] > > Reply To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > > Sent: Saturday, December 05, 1998 2:58 PM > > To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > > Subject: Re: [Leica] your opinion about G2 > > > > << I would classify the G2 as an "interchangeable-lens point-and-shoot" > > rather than a high-tech Leica M. >> > > > > The G2 is certainly not a point and shoot. It is a very fine camera that > > excels in many ways. The construction and finish are excellent, with high > > quality control in the finish of the camera and lenses. The G2 is > > remarkably > > capable. Although I prefer my M6's for certain situations, there are many > > others where I choose my G2 system. > > > > I suppose the reference to the Leica M being high tech is a joke - > > compared to > > the G2. Of course (funny remarks aside), the M is very low tech and the > > G2 is > > quite high tech. > > > > Tom Shea > >