Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/08/17

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

Subject: [Leica] Re: Re: the first IIIg
From: jcb at visualimpressions.com (JCB)
Date: Tue Aug 17 10:21:33 2004
References: <412238F2.5060706@cox.net> <2147483647.1092737400@dhcp-219.sql1.isc.org>

At 10:10 AM 8/17/2004, Brian Reid wrote:


>In my opinion a fake Leica is of equal value to the original, as long as 
>it is a well-made fake. A fake Leica that takes bad photographs is of 
>course not useful.


If experts have some difficulty in distinguishing between real and fake, 
then fake must be, basically, as good as real. After all, they have perfect 
original specimens as models.

If you look at it another way, a fake might be completely hand made. It 
might actually be better than the original since everything is checked, 
double checked, triple measured, hand finished, etc.

JB 


Replies: Reply from bdcolen at earthlink.net (B. D. Colen) ([Leica] Re: Re: the first IIIg)
Reply from raikorho at uusikaupunki.fi (Raimo K) ([Leica] Re: Re: the first IIIg)
In reply to: Message from doubs43 at cox.net (Walker Smith) ([Leica] Re: the first IIIg)
Message from reid at mejac.palo-alto.ca.us (Brian Reid) ([Leica] Re: the first IIIg)