[LRFlex] Re: Leica DMR
- From: "David Young" <telyt@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2005 13:44:19 -0700
Hi Peter!
Hmmm... I'm apparently not making myself clear. I agree, the Canon is good,
but not a Leica, by any stretch. Their glass, though I'm sure some is good, is
not of Leica quality, either.
My point is one of economics. I simply cannot afford to pay the price of DM-R
for a product with a very short life cycle. Improvements are being made every
year to 18 months. Significant improvements. The DM-R Mark II will be better
than the present version, I have no fear.
All of this is why I will spring for a Leica digital back/slr at some point
when I can see my investiment lasting many, many years, as it does with Leica
film bodies.
In the meantime, my budget dictates Canon bodies, which produce better results
with Leica glass in front of them than with the Canon glass they come with. At
least, that's my impression, so far.
If, as people say, the Canon bodies will expire in a few years (and I believe
them... Rose's Pentax body died after 5 years of light service), it's OK, as I
will then buy the later, improved version. I can do this several times for the
price of the DMR.
Actually, it's all rather sad, for I'd love a DM-R, but simply cannot afford
(or justify) it at this point in digital's developement.
Best regards,
David.
*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
On 08/06/2005 at 10:18 PM Peter M.C. Werner wrote:
>David,
>
>> As I stated earlier, other than the joy of using a body that is
>superbly
>> crafted, the essence of Leica photography is in the lenses... the
>LeiCanon
>> option allows for the quality of photography Leica users exepect.
>
>Allow me to disagree.
>
>The results will not be the same at least in terms of color rendition
>and noise; the DMR and the 20D are quite different in that respect.
>Why use Leica glass at all?
>Can you really tell the difference?
>
>Ask a convinced Canon user and he will tell you we Leica users are just
>talking nonsense. Be honest and admit you do not want to invest the
>money needed for Leica equipment and that second best has to be good
>enough. After all, it is the photographer, not the gear.... You can make
>excellent photos even with $500 digicams.
>
>Canon gear (including Canon lenses) is excellent, there is no shame in
>it. Just do not pretend there is no difference with Leica.
>
>Peter Werner
>www.leicaphoto.net
>Route. de l'Etraz 2 - 1183 Bursins - Switzerland
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: leicareflex-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:leicareflex-
>> bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of David Young
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 21:21
>> To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: [LRFlex] Re: Leica DMR
>>
>> Karen:
>>
>> I don't think anybody (certainly, not me) is arguing that the 20D is
>> anywhere near the build quality of any Leica.
>>
>> However, in the fast changing world of digital, if my 20D lasts 5
>years, I
>> can buy an improved replacement. And if that camera dies in 5 more
>years,
>> I can buy an improved replacement and I'll have still spent less than
>a
>> DM-R.
>>
>> The ONLY problem with the DMR is not it's longevity. In fact, that is
>most
>> likely it's worst feature, given the rapidly changing digital scene.
>>
>> As digital matures, I will eventually invest in an R11 digi-body - if
>such
>> a thing is ever made. But I cannot afford to support Leica at their
>> current prices and with the current short product life cycles.
>>
>> As I stated earlier, other than the joy of using a body that is
>superbly
>> crafted, the essence of Leica photography is in the lenses... the
>LeiCanon
>> option allows for the quality of photography Leica users exepect.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>> David.
>>
>> *********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
>>
>> On 08/06/2005 at 9:09 AM Karen Nakamura wrote:
>>
>> >> > ... the 20D comes **very** close at 1/4 the price
>> >>
>> >>No disputing the value represented by the 20D but this begs the
>> >>question.... hasn't Leica always been a premium brand? Haven't
>> >>there always been lower-cost alternatives delivering good quality?
>> >>It appears that to many on this list the 20D's performance is good
>> >>enough - so why have you used Leica before? Were the lower-cost
>> >>film cameras not good enough?
>> >
>> >Doug -
>> >
>> >I agree! Were we having this discussion ten years ago? I could
>> >imagine: "I could buy a EOS Rebel for $200 at Walmart. Why should I
>> >buy a Leica R6.2? It can't even do auto-focus. I can use all my R-
>> >lens on my Rebel with an adapter."
>> >
>> >The 20D isn't a Rebel, but it isn't even an EOS-3, it's about an
>> >EOS-5 or EOS-7 in build quality.
>> >
>> >The proper comparison with the R9/DMR is the Canon EOS 1D Mark II.
>> >Similar crop factor, similar size, and similar build quality, and not
>> >that different in price.
>> >
>> >Karen
>> >
>> >--
>> >Karen Nakamura
>> >http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/
>> >http://www.photoethnography.com/blog/
>> >------
>> >Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
>> > http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
>> >Archives are at:
>> > www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
>>
>>
>>
>> David Young,
>> Logan Lake, BC
>> CANADA.
>>
>> Personal Web-site at: http://www.horizon.bc.ca/~dnr
>> Leica Reflex Forum web-page: http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
>> www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
>
>
>------
>Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
> http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
>Archives are at:
> www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
David Young,
Logan Lake, BC
CANADA.
Personal Web-site at: http://www.horizon.bc.ca/~dnr
Leica Reflex Forum web-page: http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
Archives are at:
www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
Other related posts:
