Leica R6.2 / R7 / R8 vs Nikon FM-2
Le Pascou
Sorry, such a comparison should not be done, but I am wondering if is the
quality difference is worth the price difference.
Thank's
Jon Pear
<pas...@bluewin.ch> writes
working. Quality? I have 20 x 16 enlargements from both types. Lenses
not bodies give you the pictorial quality. I don't know what experience
you have but it takes a very experienced eye to notice quality
difference in work from different quality lenses. If even then I ahve
sen some very experienced pro's come a right cropper trying.
The quality difference boils down to the law of diminishing returns. At
some stage you will pay more for less.
best of luck.
--
Jon Pear
John Halliwell
<j...@wolfseye.demon.co.uk> writes
> No it is not. Two different camera types, two different ways of
>working. Quality? I have 20 x 16 enlargements from both types. Lenses
>not bodies give you the pictorial quality. I don't know what experience
>you have but it takes a very experienced eye to notice quality
>difference in work from different quality lenses. If even then I ahve
>sen some very experienced pro's come a right cropper trying.
I can't possibly argue buying a Leica for image quality alone. I use
mainly Pentax and haven't yet found a Pentax lens I've been disapointed
with. All three Leica's are massively overpriced (on spec) and the
lenses are so expensive, I'd be lucky if I'd be able to own a 50mm!
>
>The quality difference boils down to the law of diminishing returns. At
>some stage you will pay more for less.
Very true, if you want better image quality, a cheaper option than a
Leica is medium format. Virtually all medium format cameras will leave a
Leica standing on image quality and several will also give them a run
for their money on mechanical quality.
--
John
Pentax MX, LX, Super-A, SFXn & Z-1.
Mamiya C330f & 645SV.
Lubitel 166.