Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/09/20

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Real word was: Consistent underexposure problem
From: "Raimo Korhonen" <raimo.korhonen@pp2.inet.fi>
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 1999 22:19:19 +0200

Ah, but it is so in real life - defects are inevitable (as you have
learned) and you have to live with this fact (as you will, I´m sure). If
you really think everything is perfect ask your wife - or your mother in
law for that matter.
All the best!
Raimo
Photos at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen

- ----------
> From: Anthony Atkielski <anthony@atkielski.com>
> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: Re: Re:Re: [Leica] Consistent underexposure problem
> 
> From: Bob Keene/Karen Shehade <kabob@tiac.net>
> Sent: Monday, September 20, 1999 15:21
> > Don't be an idiot- EVERYTHING in life has an occasional
> > defect or miscalibration!
> 
<snip> That doesn't mean that one should expect and accept defects.  And
it's not
> strictly true that defects are unavoidable.  It's easy enough to
implement a
> zero-defect policy at the factor: any widget that fails to meet all the
> standards is rejected--no exceptions.
>