Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/04/10
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]That's absolutely true - and I'm 'guilty' of the same sin. But we're not talking about a lens, which will unquestionably outlive it's owner, or an M or R ;-) body which will do the same. Don't forget, the DMR is a complicated electronic add-on, built by a company that is notably weak on electronics. And even if electronics were Leica's forte, everyone here has been talking endlessly about the limited shelf-life of digital cameras. So a BACK with a limited life-span for $6K, or even $4K for that matter, is comparatively much, much more expensive than an expensive M or R lens that your grandchildren will use. -----Original Message----- From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org [mailto:lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of Doug Herr Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2005 3:50 PM To: Leica Users Group Subject: Re: [Leica] leica digital back-initial test results B.D. Colen wrote: > For anyone else who needs to even think before writing a check, it's > over priced. Because given the uses to which most camera owners put > their images, the image quality difference will not be apparent. Given the uses to which most camera owners put their images, the vast majority of us have bought way more than we need. Doug Herr Birdman of Sacramento http://www.wildlightphoto.com _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information