Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/01/01
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]feli, the canon 50 1.4 is 400usd and the leica 50 1.4 is 3k, do you think for 2~3k canon can not make a good 50mm lens that is even better the the leica? you need to look @ the price point when you compare lenses today, putting out a good design or using good optics is something that canon can do but the marketing stratagy,the people they sell to decitates other price points. canon took over the digital world, the pro world, .. my point in all of this is trying to find why would canon buy leica? leica patents are old and not worth much in the digital world and unless sony is doing something that is scaring canon, i see no reason for the purchase On 1/1/06, feli <feli2@earthlink.net> wrote: > > On Dec 31, 2005, at 7:13 PM, mehrdad wrote: > > > canon does not need leica for anything and i mean nothing. they make > > better camera and lenses than leica already and financially there is > > nothing leica puts on the table for canon. if this is true, leica > > shareholders lucked out. they got some money!! > > > Uhhhh, -no. Canon makes a few very good lenses, but as a whole their > entire > range can't hold a candle to what Leica makes, especially from 50mm > on down. > Once you've held one of their plastic wonders, you'll come running > back to Leica, > just for the assembly quality. My Canon 1.4/50 feels like something > you get out of > a Craker Jack box. > > The 1v is one hell of a camera, and overall better than the R9, but > they don't > even make a rangefinder at the moment. > > > feli > > ________________________________________________________ > feli2@earthlink.net 2 + 2 = 4 > www.elanphotos.com > > > NO ARCHIVE > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > -- ------------------------------------- regards, mehrdad