Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/09/04

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

Subject: [Leica] Digilux 2 review pt posted - many samples
From: sam at osheaven.net (Sam)
Date: Sat Sep 4 06:33:18 2004
References: <4057F0C4.2040707@osheaven.net> <OFEA8DEA9A.3EB2048F-ON86256E5A.0005E338-86256E5A.00061C45@crnotes2.rockwe llcollins.com> <A5DEF66C-77D9-11D8-9214-000A95CD9BF8@mac.com> <4057F0C4.2040707@osheaven.net> <3.0.6.32.20040317115152.008819e0@POP6.sympatico.ca> <4058B1FA.2090906@osheaven.net> <299d01c40c63$52ce1670$ce771a41@leaetrg64tja2w>

Lea, you make an excellent point. I had an EOS 3 which has since been 
sold, but I never had reason to use Canon's service dept. so I never 
experienced its efficiency.

Sam S


lea wrote:

>Interesting concepts here...what makes one buy one brand over the other.
>I have to say I disagree that most photographers are gutless winnies who
>follow the pack...well, not the photographers I know anyway.
>
>Several years ago I was in the market to upgrade out of my Olypus OM
>system to something newer with autofocus. I looked at Canon, Nikon,
>Minolta all three. I was completely new to the auto-everything
>technology so I was open to whatever my dealer had to say about
>anything. What sold me on Canon...and I now have a lot of their
>equipment...was the fact that my dealer told me their customer service
>was better than Nikon or Minolta. He said that Canon customer service
>was the most friendly, the most available and the fastest. That's what
>sold me, not the ads, not the bells and whistles, not the bright shiny
>camera bodies...I figured if I was going to buy this stuff I wanted a
>company who would back it with good service and do it quickly if I
>needed it fast. As it turns out, I've only ever used them once...but of
>course it was right before a big job and my 100mm macro went down. I
>called them, Fed Exed it out and had it back in 2 days, working
>perfectly.
>
>Sometimes what makes the sales is what goes on behind the scenes.
>Lea
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Sam" <sam@osheaven.net>
>To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
>Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 2:15 PM
>Subject: Re: [Leica] Digilux 2 review pt posted - many samples
>
>
>  
>
>>Dan, I cannot agree with you more than if I wrote your words. I've
>>    
>>
>used
>  
>
>>Minolta cameras off-and-on since the XG-M. I defy anyone to tell which
>>lens took which slide on a light table. I have no plans on going
>>    
>>
>digital
>  
>
>>in the near future, but as the talk is mostly digital these days it's
>>hard not to become involved. As I hear talk about this or that camera
>>    
>>
>a
>  
>
>>voice runs almost continually through my mind saying, "Minolta has
>>    
>>
>that"
>  
>
>>or "Minolta did it first" or "Minolta does it cheaper" or "Minolta
>>    
>>
>does
>  
>
>>it better." I've never heard one good reason not to use a Minolta
>>    
>>
>based
>  
>
>>on the product itself. Its glass is as good as any. No, they do not
>>    
>>
>use
>  
>
>>batteries more than other digitals. There might be individual models
>>that ate batteries more than is normal, but that can be said for every
>>camera maker. Minolta is the most deserved but ignored camera maker on
>>the planet because its name is not Nikon, or, more recently, Canon.
>>    
>>
>From
>  
>
>>the wonderful XK to the innovative auto focus Maxxum 7000 to the
>>breathtaking Maxxum 9, their cameras have always been top rank. The
>>    
>>
>only
>  
>
>>reason Milolta has not broken the "professional" camera barrier is
>>becasue photographers are gutless winnies who follow the pack more
>>    
>>
>then
>  
>
>>lemmings. They have got to be the most fearful people on earth. If
>>    
>>
>they
>  
>
>>find the wherewithall to break out of their shaking shells they will
>>find the new Konica Minolta line to be among the best in the world.
>>
>>I say this with the greatest respect for the talents of the
>>    
>>
>professional
>  
>
>>photographers here, if not their courage to be innovative.
>>
>>Sam S
>>
>>
>>Dan C wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Check out the following review of the A2.
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/konica-minolta-a2.sht
>>    
>>
>ml
>  
>
>>>(subtitled: "hitting one over the fence").
>>>
>>>-dan c.
>>>
>>>ps..   I have a whole bunch of decent Minolta glass.  .  For years my
>>>number one picture taking lens was my Minolta 100/2.8 macro.  I
>>>      
>>>
>honestly
>  
>
>>>doubt that any real situation photo comparisons would reveal any
>>>differences between it and similar from Nikon or Canon.   But that
>>>      
>>>
>was
>  
>
>>>then.   I've since picked up a used Minolta 85/1.4 and now both my
>>>      
>>>
>Minolta
>  
>
>>>100 and my beloved 90/2 APO Summicron ASPH are collecting dust in the
>>>bottom of my equipment bags.  So I will have no problem deciding to
>>>      
>>>
>buy the
>  
>
>>>Minolta Maxxum 7D, barring terrible reviews, prices, etc.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>At 11:09 PM 16-03-04 -0800, Henning Wulff wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>At 1:31 AM -0500 3/17/04, Sam wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>I've been preaching this camera to deaf ears, but I suggest you
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>save
>  
>
>>>>>your SLR digital money until it comes out:
>>>>>
>>>>>http://www.vividlight.com/articles/3413.htm
>>>>>
>>>>>If you put aside silly notions about Canon and Nikon being
>>>>>"professional" cameras and all the rest something less, you will be
>>>>>doing yourself a favor.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>But who's got any decent Minolta glass? Not enough to make any
>>>>difference. I'm sorry, but unless the digital Maxxum has the quality
>>>>of the Canon 1Ds at Rebel prices, it's not goint to go anywhere.
>>>>
>>>>The A2 might be something to talk about, though.
>>>>
>>>>--
>>>>  *            Henning J. Wulff
>>>> /|\      Wulff Photography & Design
>>>>/###\   mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com
>>>>|[ ]|     http://www.archiphoto.com
>>>>--
>>>>To unsubscribe, see
>>>>        
>>>>
>http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>  
>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>--
>>>To unsubscribe, see
>>>      
>>>
>http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>  
>
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>--
>>To unsubscribe, see
>>    
>>
>http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>  
>
>>    
>>
>
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>
>
>  
>
--
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html


In reply to: Message from sam at osheaven.net (Sam) ([Leica] Digilux 2 review pt posted - many samples)
Message from attinasi at mac.com (Marc Attinasi) ([Leica] Digilux 2 review pt posted - many samples)
Message from leicaman at sympatico.ca (Dan C) ([Leica] Digilux 2 review pt posted - many samples)
Message from sam at osheaven.net (Sam) ([Leica] Digilux 2 review pt posted - many samples)
Message from lea at whinydogpress.com (lea) ([Leica] Digilux 2 review pt posted - many samples)