Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/03/13
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]You didn't read what I wrote. I asked about the sutuation where the "difference between best and second best is miniscule". At 09:16 AM 13-03-99 -0800, you wrote: >Dan, > >I have to disagree with you. Although the situations that I appreciate the >differences in the following examples might be the rare situation for many >photogs, these aren't unusual for me: > >- shooting wide open with a 35 summilux >- interior photography with a 24 > >In these examples, I gladly upgraded from 2nd best Leica solutions to the >best because I can clearly see the difference. The price I paid to upgrade >is well worth it because I enjoy the results so much more. > >John > > > At 11:00 AM 3/13/99 -0500, Dan Cardish wrote: >>Even when the difference between best and second best is miniscule? >> >>Dan C. >> >>At 10:47 AM 13-03-99 EST, you wrote: >>>Walt, I gladly pay the large differential for the highest quality. You are >>>correct, the best costs a lot more than second best. It is worth it. >>> >>>Tom Shea >>> >> >> >> > >