Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/12/03

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Digilux not same as Lumix apparently (was Re: The LEICA DIGILUX 2 is announced)
From: Jim Hemenway <Jim@hemenway.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 19:46:02 -0500
References: <200312031633.IAA17183@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> <002501c3b9f9$608610e0$0501a8c0@zoomtopia>

Is it that new age Leica glow?

Jim - http://www.hemenway.com


Dean wrote:

> Hello.
> 
> I have never sent a post here, but have been lurking for a while.
> 
> Quite a sensitive issue this digital business, it seems. Anyway, my friend,
> who is fluent in Japanese, posted this on another list a while back. I
> thought I might quote him here, as some might find this interesting.
> 
> "There was an interesting artile on this in a recent issue of Asahi Camera.
> I think I've mentioned it before. The general judgement was that Leica was
> providing quite different image-processing software, and that if you liked
> the result (examples shown) it was definitely worth the difference in
> price. The pictures did look rather different."
> 
> Didn't see the mag myself, and I understand that what is quoted above pretty
> much covers everything that was said about the difference (i.e. that's all
> there is on this at this time).
> 
> Hope this was in some way useful (more virtual wheat to be ground in the
> speculation mill?).
> 
> Sooner,
> Dean Johnston
> 


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

In reply to: Message from "Dean" <dean@tbc.t-com.ne.jp> ([Leica] Digilux not same as Lumix apparently (was Re: The LEICA DIGILUX 2 is announced))