Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/08/10

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

Subject: [Leica] M9 - not much more expensive than M8?
From: imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser)
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 18:25:48 -0500
References: <C6A658BD.166B%lug@steveunsworth.co.uk> <4A80A933.8000505@san.rr.com>

and in 1963 or 4
$6,000
would get you
a Jaguar xke

now it will get you
tires and wheels

maybe

Regards,
George Lottermoser
george at imagist.com
http://www.imagist.com
http://www.imagist.com/blog
http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist

On Aug 10, 2009, at 6:11 PM, Jerry Lehrer wrote:

> LUGers,
>
> The word is "inevitable"!  Isn't it?
> It is not sensor size, or even pixel mega-size.  It is how low  
> angle rays are handled.  A
> little progress here; a bit more progress there (from Leica and  
> Kodak)  Et voila!  A full
> frame digii-M.
>
> I do remember when $8000 would buy TWO brand new Porsches.  Yes, in  
> 1955 the
> Porsche 1600 Normal Speedsters were $3000 each!
>
> Jerry
>
>
> Steve Unsworth wrote:
>> Given the third world nature of the dollar it probably is <grin>.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>
>> On 10/8/09 22:40, "Richard Man" <richard.lists at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> with Leica? $8000 sounds almost like a good deal!!!
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information



In reply to: Message from lug at steveunsworth.co.uk (Steve Unsworth) ([Leica] M9 - not much more expensive than M8?)
Message from glehrer at san.rr.com (Jerry Lehrer) ([Leica] M9 - not much more expensive than M8?)