RE: OT - Leica Digilux 2 - must see this

[Rob Brigham]

Don't get me wrong, I am not against elec vf completely.  My Camcorder
has one and that doesn't bother me. Its just that it seems exactly the
opposite of what I would see a typical Leica user desiring.

It does have one advantage in that you can have DOF preview without
making the view so dark you cannot see anything, and compared to other
compacts needs no parallax adjustment.

But it does eat more juice and it does make focus judgement much more
difficult, not to mention it just doesn't feel as nice.

I just have grave doubts about its appeal to a normal Leica user.  Who
knows maybe it will start a new customer base for them...

> -Original Message-
> From: Leonard Paris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: 03 December 2003 13:13
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: OT - Leica Digilux 2 - must see this
> 
> 
> I don't know about that.  Having an electronic viewfinder is 
> as close to 
> having an SLR as you can get without having one.  With the 
> basic size of an 
> M camera, and the fact that this one appears to be optimized 
> for PJ use, I 
> think it has a chance of being a big seller.  I kind of like 
> it.  I wonder 
> what the price will be?
> 
> Len
> ---
> * There's no place like 127.0.0.1
> 
> 
> >From: "Rob Brigham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Subject: RE: OT - Leica Digilux 2 - must see this
> >Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 12:56:28 -
> >
> >I imagine many wont like the electronic viewfinder, but 
> other than that 
> >it must surely be the answer to many people's dreams.
> >
> >Seems odd though.  Not that I am dissin' the electronic vf, but the 
> >target market for a camera of this sort would be exactly the type of 
> >person I would expect to be put off by that.  I suspect they 
> would have 
> >preferred a rangefinder?
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Sent: 02 December 2003 12:49
> > > To: pentax list
> > > Subject: OT - Leica Digilux 2 - must see this
> > >
> > >
> > > <http://www.dpreview.com/news/0312/03120101leicadigilux2.asp>
> > >
> > > Dear Santa, yes please, love Cotty
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >   Cotty
> > >
> > >
> > > ___/\__
> > > ||   (O)   |  People, Places, Pastiche
> > > ||=|  www.macads.co.uk/snaps
> > > _
> > > Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
> > >
> > >
> >
> 
> _
> Get holiday tips for festive fun. 
> http://special.msn.com/network/happyholidays.armx
> 
> 

RE: OT - Leica Digilux 2 - must see this

[Leonard Paris]

I don't know about that.  Having an electronic viewfinder is as close to 
having an SLR as you can get without having one.  With the basic size of an 
M camera, and the fact that this one appears to be optimized for PJ use, I 
think it has a chance of being a big seller.  I kind of like it.  I wonder 
what the price will be?

Len
---
* There's no place like 127.0.0.1

From: "Rob Brigham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: OT - Leica Digilux 2 - must see this
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 12:56:28 -
I imagine many wont like the electronic viewfinder, but other than that
it must surely be the answer to many people's dreams.
Seems odd though.  Not that I am dissin' the electronic vf, but the
target market for a camera of this sort would be exactly the type of
person I would expect to be put off by that.  I suspect they would have
preferred a rangefinder?
> -Original Message-
> From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 02 December 2003 12:49
> To: pentax list
> Subject: OT - Leica Digilux 2 - must see this
>
>
> <http://www.dpreview.com/news/0312/03120101leicadigilux2.asp>
>
> Dear Santa, yes please, love Cotty
>
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>   Cotty
>
>
> ___/\__
> ||   (O)   |  People, Places, Pastiche
> ||=|  www.macads.co.uk/snaps
> _
> Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
>
>
_
Get holiday tips for festive fun. 
http://special.msn.com/network/happyholidays.armx

RE: OT - Leica Digilux 2 - must see this

[Cesar Matamoros II]

Eleanor,

Welcome back.

Pity about the vf.  I was just looking at the Digilux 1 brochure.  Very
enticing and with an optical vf.  I have handled cameras with vfs and have
put them down immediately...

Feeling that there is a Leica in my future somewhere,

César
Panama City, Florida

-- -Original Message-
-- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 3:13 PM
--
-- > On 2/12/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
-- >
-- > >I imagine many wont like the electronic viewfinder, but
-- other than that
-- > >it must surely be the answer to many people's dreams.
-- > >
-- > >Seems odd though.  Not that I am dissin' the electronic
-- vf, but the
-- > >target market for a camera of this sort would be exactly
-- the type of
-- > >person I would expect to be put off by that.  I suspect
-- they would have
-- > >preferred a rangefinder?
-- >
-- > Egad. I spotted it just before I had to dash out to work,
-- and missed the
-- > electronic VF part. YUK. Cancel my order please Santa.
-- Optical all the way!
-- >
--
-- Maybe they'll put *that* on the Digilux 3. I intend to wait and see.
--
-- (can't afford anything named Leica right now anyway -- my
-- car has a new clutch,
-- and the price tag leads me to suspect there's a red dot somewhere on
-- *that*.)
--

Re: OT - Leica Digilux 2 - must see this

[Shel Belinkoff]

Even funnier that you can remember things ... 

Mat Maessen wrote:

>  Funny the things you remember...
>

Re: OT - Leica Digilux 2 - must see this

[Mat Maessen]

I actually flew Laker on my first trip to England, when I was all of 5 
years old. Funny the things you remember...

-Mat

Malcolm Smith wrote:
I remember the slogan 'I'm a Laker Liker' for Freddie Laker's cut price
airline. I had the smiley face sticker on the family washing machine for
years when I was a schoolboy.

Re: OT - Leica Digilux 2 - must see this

[Keith Whaley]

frank theriault wrote:
> 
> C1's are nice looking cameras - but IIRC, w-a-y slow lenses (like f11 at the
> longest focal length?).

Oh, heck no! f/10.5 at 105mm.
Clear down to f/4.0 at the widest, which is 38mm.

> I've heard some say that QC is a real problem with them.  Lots of reports of
> inability to properly focus at longer focal lengths, IIRC - almost sounds
> like alignment problems with the glass or something.

I personally think it's the IR sensor. I know darned well it won't focus
thru glass, but one expects that, right? Stay away from aquariums! I
finally put it back in my pocket and acted the grump the rest of the
day, mumbling to myself. . .

> But, if you have a good sample, they're supposed to be nice cams.

They are. Out in the open.
Nice, sharp, clear photos, nice color, good contrast, etc.
Zoom, self-wind, auto-load, and so on. 
Nice specs. A decent P&S.

keith whaley
 
> regards,
> frank
> 
> "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds.  The pessimist
> fears it is true."  -J. Robert Oppenheimer
> 
> >From: Keith Whaley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Subject: Re: OT - Leica Digilux 2 - must see this
> >Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2003 14:06:22 -0800
> >
> >I have an almost brand new Leica C1. I understand the body was made by
> >Matsushita/Panasonic.
> >
> >It is very nicely made, but I have a problem with the rather odd controls.
> >Someone else might not think they're odd at all. It's probably just me.
> >
> >keith whaley
> >
> >graywolf wrote:
> > >
> > > Panasonic, Panasonic, Panasonic...
> > >
> > > Do you suppose Leica does extra quality control before or after they put
> >their
> > > name on it? Nah, probably not. If you have an older digital Leica you
> >can say
> > > Fuji, Fuji, Fuji... But then if you have a Leica CL you can say Minolta,
> > > Minolta, Minolta...
> > >
> > > Tell me again how much better a Leica is than a Panasonic, Fuji, or
> >Minolta.
> > >
> > > ---
> > >
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > >>On 2/12/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>>I imagine many wont like the electronic viewfinder, but other than
> >that
> > > >>>it must surely be the answer to many people's dreams.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>Seems odd though.  Not that I am dissin' the electronic vf, but the
> > > >>>target market for a camera of this sort would be exactly the type of
> > > >>>person I would expect to be put off by that.  I suspect they would
> >have
> > > >>>preferred a rangefinder?
> > > >>
> > > >>Egad. I spotted it just before I had to dash out to work, and missed
> >the
> > > >>electronic VF part. YUK. Cancel my order please Santa. Optical all the
> >way!
> >
> >[. . .]
> >
> 
> _
> STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
> http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/bcomm&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca

Re: OT - Leica Digilux 2 - must see this

[frank theriault]

C1's are nice looking cameras - but IIRC, w-a-y slow lenses (like f11 at the 
longest focal length?).

I've heard some say that QC is a real problem with them.  Lots of reports of 
inability to properly focus at longer focal lengths, IIRC - almost sounds 
like alignment problems with the glass or something.

But, if you have a good sample, they're supposed to be nice cams.

regards,
frank
"The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds.  The pessimist 
fears it is true."  -J. Robert Oppenheimer




From: Keith Whaley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: OT - Leica Digilux 2 - must see this
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2003 14:06:22 -0800
I have an almost brand new Leica C1. I understand the body was made by 
Matsushita/Panasonic.

It is very nicely made, but I have a problem with the rather odd controls.
Someone else might not think they're odd at all. It's probably just me.
keith whaley

graywolf wrote:
>
> Panasonic, Panasonic, Panasonic...
>
> Do you suppose Leica does extra quality control before or after they put 
their
> name on it? Nah, probably not. If you have an older digital Leica you 
can say
> Fuji, Fuji, Fuji... But then if you have a Leica CL you can say Minolta,
> Minolta, Minolta...
>
> Tell me again how much better a Leica is than a Panasonic, Fuji, or 
Minolta.
>
> ---
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>On 2/12/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
> >>
> >>
> >>>I imagine many wont like the electronic viewfinder, but other than 
that
> >>>it must surely be the answer to many people's dreams.
> >>>
> >>>Seems odd though.  Not that I am dissin' the electronic vf, but the
> >>>target market for a camera of this sort would be exactly the type of
> >>>person I would expect to be put off by that.  I suspect they would 
have
> >>>preferred a rangefinder?
> >>
> >>Egad. I spotted it just before I had to dash out to work, and missed 
the
> >>electronic VF part. YUK. Cancel my order please Santa. Optical all the 
way!

[. . .]

_
STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*   
http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/bcomm&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca

Re: OT - Leica Digilux 2 - must see this

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

Really? It's just a point&shoot, no better than a Sony 717.
A digital Leica M, with an APS-C sized sensor and which accepts the best
Leica Lenses - that would be a winner. And, don't forget - it has to be a
rangefinder - a real one.

Alex Sarbu

- Original Message -
From: "Jim Apilado" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 7:34 PM
Subject: Re: OT - Leica Digilux 2 - must see this


>
> *istD?  Who needs one if Leica would come out with a digital M.  I am a
long
> time Leica user.  That Digilux 2 looks like a winner.
>
> Jim A.



---
Acasa.ro vine cu albumele, tu vino doar cu pozele ;)
http://poze.acasa.ro/

Re: OT - Leica Digilux 2 - must see this

[frank theriault]

The lens (on my CL) says "Wetzlar, Wetzlar, Wetzlar".  That has the 
Panasonics beat to hell.  Those lenses may say Leica on them, but the only 
thing Leica is the design.  Not made in Germany, Canada, Portugal, or any 
other place that Leica has a factory.  Made in the Far East (not that that's 
a bad place, but it's, as you say, Tom, a long way from any Leica QC 
person).

cheers,
frank
"The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds.  The pessimist 
fears it is true."  -J. Robert Oppenheimer




From: graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: OT - Leica Digilux 2 - must see this
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2003 16:34:39 -0500
Panasonic, Panasonic, Panasonic...

Do you suppose Leica does extra quality control before or after they put 
their name on it? Nah, probably not. If you have an older digital Leica you 
can say Fuji, Fuji, Fuji... But then if you have a Leica CL you can say 
Minolta, Minolta, Minolta...

Tell me again how much better a Leica is than a Panasonic, Fuji, or 
Minolta.




_
Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*   
http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/bcomm&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca

RE: OT - Leica Digilux 2 - must see this

[frank theriault]

I'd also like interchangeable lenses.  At least the one on there is plenty 
fast (esp for a zoom).

But no optical viewfinder?  Eeewww...

cheers,
frank
"The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds.  The pessimist 
fears it is true."  -J. Robert Oppenheimer




From: Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Egad. I spotted it just before I had to dash out to work, and missed the
electronic VF part. YUK. Cancel my order please Santa. Optical all the way!


Cheers,
  Cotty
___/\__
||   (O)   |  People, Places, Pastiche
||=|  www.macads.co.uk/snaps
_
Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
_
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/photos&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca

RE: OT - Leica Digilux 2 - must see this

[Alan Chan]

Isn't it the same as Panasonic LUMIX DMC-LC1?
http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2003/1008/ceatec01.jpg
http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2003/1008/ceatec02.jpg
Yours regards,
Alan Chan
http://www.pbase.com/wlachan


Dear Santa, yes please, love Cotty
_
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/photos&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca

Re: OT - Leica Digilux 2 - must see this

[Keith Whaley]

I have an almost brand new Leica C1. I understand the body was made by 
Matsushita/Panasonic.

It is very nicely made, but I have a problem with the rather odd controls.
Someone else might not think they're odd at all. It's probably just me. 

keith whaley

graywolf wrote:
> 
> Panasonic, Panasonic, Panasonic...
> 
> Do you suppose Leica does extra quality control before or after they put their
> name on it? Nah, probably not. If you have an older digital Leica you can say
> Fuji, Fuji, Fuji... But then if you have a Leica CL you can say Minolta,
> Minolta, Minolta...
> 
> Tell me again how much better a Leica is than a Panasonic, Fuji, or Minolta.
> 
> ---
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>On 2/12/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
> >>
> >>
> >>>I imagine many wont like the electronic viewfinder, but other than that
> >>>it must surely be the answer to many people's dreams.
> >>>
> >>>Seems odd though.  Not that I am dissin' the electronic vf, but the
> >>>target market for a camera of this sort would be exactly the type of
> >>>person I would expect to be put off by that.  I suspect they would have
> >>>preferred a rangefinder?
> >>
> >>Egad. I spotted it just before I had to dash out to work, and missed the
> >>electronic VF part. YUK. Cancel my order please Santa. Optical all the way!

[. . .]

RE: OT - Leica Digilux 2 - must see this

[Cotty]

On 2/12/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:

>(can't afford anything named Leica right now anyway -- my car has a new
>clutch, 
>and the price tag leads me to suspect there's a red dot somewhere on
>*that*.)

Thanks Eleanour. Best laugh of the day :-)




Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__
||   (O)   |  People, Places, Pastiche
||=|  www.macads.co.uk/snaps
_
Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk

Re: OT - Leica Digilux 2 - must see this

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "graywolf"
Subject: Re: OT - Leica Digilux 2 - must see this


> Panasonic, Panasonic, Panasonic...
>
> Do you suppose Leica does extra quality control before or after they put
their
> name on it? Nah, probably not. If you have an older digital Leica you can
say
> Fuji, Fuji, Fuji... But then if you have a Leica CL you can say Minolta,
> Minolta, Minolta...
>
> Tell me again how much better a Leica is than a Panasonic, Fuji, or
Minolta.

My Leica is WAY better than those cheap pretenders.
She doesn't even shed on my sensor.

OTOH, my Rollei goes chewy on bad people.

William Robb

RE: OT - Leica Digilux 2 - must see this

[Cotty]

On 2/12/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:

>I imagine many wont like the electronic viewfinder, but other than that
>it must surely be the answer to many people's dreams.
>
>Seems odd though.  Not that I am dissin' the electronic vf, but the
>target market for a camera of this sort would be exactly the type of
>person I would expect to be put off by that.  I suspect they would have
>preferred a rangefinder?

Egad. I spotted it just before I had to dash out to work, and missed the
electronic VF part. YUK. Cancel my order please Santa. Optical all the way!




Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__
||   (O)   |  People, Places, Pastiche
||=|  www.macads.co.uk/snaps
_
Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk

RE: OT - Leica Digilux 2 - must see this

[Malcolm Smith]

Bob Walkden wrote:

> Leica likers?

I remember the slogan 'I'm a Laker Liker' for Freddie Laker's cut price
airline. I had the smiley face sticker on the family washing machine for
years when I was a schoolboy.

Malcolm 

Re: OT - Leica Digilux 2 - must see this

[Jim Apilado]

*istD?  Who needs one if Leica would come out with a digital M.  I am a long
time Leica user.  That Digilux 2 looks like a winner.

Jim A.

> From: "Christian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 11:26:16 -0500
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: OT - Leica Digilux 2 - must see this
> Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 11:26:17 -0500
> 
> I'm waiting for the Leica M digital  Can't be too far in the future
> could it?
> 
> Christian
> 
> - Original Message -
> From: "Bob Walkden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Cotty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 10:59 AM
> Subject: Re: OT - Leica Digilux 2 - must see this
> 
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> Tuesday, December 2, 2003, 12:49:16 PM, you wrote:
>> 
>>> <http://www.dpreview.com/news/0312/03120101leicadigilux2.asp>
>> 
>>> Dear Santa, yes please, love Cotty
>> 
>> they sure know how to push all the Leicaphile* hot buttons, don't they!
>> 
>> Leica likers?
>> 
>> -- 
>> Cheers,
>> Bobmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> 
> 

Re: OT - Leica Digilux 2 - must see this

[Keith Whaley]

I shudder to think of what the price might be. . .

keith

Cotty wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Dear Santa, yes please, love Cotty
> 
> Cheers,
>   Cotty

Re: OT - Leica Digilux 2 - must see this

[Shel Belinkoff]

There are numerous reasons why it will never happen ... and maybe one or two
why it might 

Christian wrote:

> I'm waiting for the Leica M digital  Can't be too far in the future
> could it?
>

Re: OT - Leica Digilux 2 - must see this

[Christian]

I'm waiting for the Leica M digital  Can't be too far in the future
could it?

Christian

- Original Message - 
From: "Bob Walkden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Cotty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 10:59 AM
Subject: Re: OT - Leica Digilux 2 - must see this


> Hi,
>
> Tuesday, December 2, 2003, 12:49:16 PM, you wrote:
>
> > <http://www.dpreview.com/news/0312/03120101leicadigilux2.asp>
>
> > Dear Santa, yes please, love Cotty
>
> they sure know how to push all the Leicaphile* hot buttons, don't they!
>
> Leica likers?
>
> -- 
> Cheers,
>  Bobmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>