New Leica Compact

On Jun 12, 2015, PeterN wrote
(in ):

On 6/11/2015 11:50 PM, Savageduck wrote:

I am well aware of the formatting for a SIG delimiter and that is what I
use.
With the exception of you, RichA, and whisky-dave (and they are using that
abomination G2/01) all others who have responded to my posts have my sig
stripped from their responses.

--

Regards,
Savageduck

Not mine. I use Thunderbird. I have to manually strip. (The sig line.)

I guess I have a certain developer I have to report this to.

--

Regards,
Savageduck

On 6/12/2015 12:46 AM, nospam wrote:
In article 2015061121445683871-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:


maybe in the past you had it correct, but currently there is no
trailing space.

I don¹t get it I have changed nothing with my sig file and I have
formatted it correctly in all my Usenet clients including the now
defunct, (MT-NW), and currently Unison (1.8.1 and 2.2) and Hogwasher.
I will repeat this reply with both Unison and Hogwasher.

...and this is the Unison 1.8.1 response.

working


And yep!

--
PeterN

On 6/12/2015 4:45 AM, David Taylor wrote:
On 11/06/2015 20:34, PeterN wrote:
On 6/11/2015 3:07 PM, android wrote:
[]
If you want mirrorless then there are Nikkor adapters for Fuji, Sony and
EOS-M. And 4/3 if you can accept such a small censor.

The sensors are too small to satisfy my liking for WA.

Not sure what wide-angle you want, but for my MFT camera I have a 9-18
mm (eq. 18-36 mm) zoom, and a very compact 9 mm (e.g. 18 mm) fisheye.
The latter costs around US $120.


I like a minimum of 15mm (FF equivalent)
I know wider is available, but I also want the ability to use filters.


--
PeterN

On 6/12/2015 10:41 AM, PeterN wrote:
On 6/11/2015 3:51 PM, android wrote:
In article ,
PeterN wrote:

On 6/11/2015 3:07 PM, android wrote:
In article ,
PeterN wrote:

On 6/10/2015 10:05 PM, android wrote:
In article ,
PeterN wrote:

On 6/10/2015 5:14 PM, Mort wrote:
android wrote:
The camera looks nice, but not the pricetag... It's a compact
after all!

http://www.shutterbug.com/content/le...-full-frame-le
ica-q-compact-camera-full-resolution-test-images
http://tinyurl.com/ntt2x38



At $4,250.-, all I can say is O.M.G.

Mort Linder

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus
software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


Actually if isn't that much if you compare it to my D800 + lens.

Nah, and your a cheepoo that hasn't upgraded to the D810. People like
you are killing Nikanon dead!


Actually I am thingkin about the 750. It has an articulating EFV, and
reportability good low light capability. Realistically though i
want to
see a mirrorless Nikon.

If you want mirrorless then there are Nikkor adapters for Fuji, Sony
and
EOS-M. And 4/3 if you can accept such a small censor.


The sensors are too small to satisfy my liking for WA.

I have a fisheye...

The widest I have for DX is a 10.5 semi fisheye. When I straighten out
the lines, it equates to about an 18, FF. The widest FF I have is 15mm.
I did not go wider because I also like to usse ND filters, for longer
exosure, and polarizing filters, for obvious reasons.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/Booth%20Bay%20Sunset.jpg


I did not mean to imply that the above shot was taken with the 10.5.


--
PeterN

On 12/06/2015 16:17, PeterN wrote:
On 6/12/2015 4:45 AM, David Taylor wrote:
On 11/06/2015 20:34, PeterN wrote:
On 6/11/2015 3:07 PM, android wrote:
[]
If you want mirrorless then there are Nikkor adapters for Fuji, Sony
and
EOS-M. And 4/3 if you can accept such a small censor.

The sensors are too small to satisfy my liking for WA.

Not sure what wide-angle you want, but for my MFT camera I have a 9-18
mm (eq. 18-36 mm) zoom, and a very compact 9 mm (e.g. 18 mm) fisheye.
The latter costs around US $120.


I like a minimum of 15mm (FF equivalent)
I know wider is available, but I also want the ability to use filters.

Understood, Peter. Not a requirement I have, as it happens.

--
Cheers,
David
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu

Savageduck wrote:
Then you haven’t checked on the Sony RX100 II posing as a Hasselblad. In
their case the “artware� is the camouflage done on the camera body.
http://www.hasselblad.com/compact/stellar-ii




De gustibus non disputandum est.(Spelling?). Fake camera coverings do
not make art to me.

Regarding a Sony in a Hasselblad wrapper, remember that you can put a
sign on a cow's forehead that reads, "I am a racehorse". It is still a
cow. Similarly, a Cadillac Cimarron is still a Chevrolet.

Mort Linder

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On Sat, 13 Jun 2015 20:57:31 -0400, Mort wrote:

Similarly, a Cadillac Cimarron is still a Chevrolet.

You must be very, very, old. Like me.

On 2015-06-14 01:07:26 +0000, Bill W said:

On Sat, 13 Jun 2015 20:57:31 -0400, Mort wrote:

Similarly, a Cadillac Cimarron is still a Chevrolet.

You must be very, very, old. Like me.

Not that old.

I believe there are a bunch of us of similar vintage in this room who
are well aware of the GM shell game which persists to this day.
The relationship of Australia's Holden and Germany's Opel to various US
GM vehicles is downright incestuous. Holden provides us with the
Caprice, Commodore, and Chevrolet SS. The Opal Insignia is currently
rebadged as the Buick Regal. The Buick LaCrosse is a long wheelbase
version of the Opal Epsilon II.
The Saturns were rebadged Opel Astra and Opel Vectra.
The Opal J-body was the basis for the Chevy Cavalier and the Cadillac
Cimmaron. There was one othr Cadillac. The Cadillac Catera was a
rebadged Opel Omega.

Then never forget that Chrysler gave us the "K" cars, and Ford brought
in the Taurus, Capri, Merkur XR4Ti, Scorpio, Contour (known in Europe
as the Mondeo) and Mercury Sable in from the Cologne, German subsiduary
Ford of Europe. The Ford Escort came from Ford UK.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2015-06-14 00:57:31 +0000, Mort said:

Savageduck wrote:
Then you haven’t checked on the Sony RX100 II posing as a Hasselblad. In
their case the “artware� is the camouflage done on the camera body.
http://www.hasselblad.com/compact/stellar-ii


De gustibus non disputandum est.(Spelling?). Fake camera coverings do
not make art to me.

Regarding a Sony in a Hasselblad wrapper, remember that you can put a
sign on a cow's forehead that reads, "I am a racehorse". It is still a
cow. Similarly, a Cadillac Cimarron is still a Chevrolet.

Actually the Cadillac Cimarron was a rebadged Opel, but it is GM, so
who actually cares.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Sat, 13 Jun 2015 19:59:40 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2015-06-14 01:07:26 +0000, Bill W said:

On Sat, 13 Jun 2015 20:57:31 -0400, Mort wrote:

Similarly, a Cadillac Cimarron is still a Chevrolet.

You must be very, very, old. Like me.

Not that old.

I believe there are a bunch of us of similar vintage in this room who
are well aware of the GM shell game which persists to this day.
The relationship of Australia's Holden and Germany's Opel to various US
GM vehicles is downright incestuous. Holden provides us with the
Caprice, Commodore, and Chevrolet SS. The Opal Insignia is currently
rebadged as the Buick Regal. The Buick LaCrosse is a long wheelbase
version of the Opal Epsilon II.
The Saturns were rebadged Opel Astra and Opel Vectra.
The Opal J-body was the basis for the Chevy Cavalier and the Cadillac
Cimmaron. There was one othr Cadillac. The Cadillac Catera was a
rebadged Opel Omega.

The Catera was certainly an Opel, but I believe the J cars were all
American garbage. Those things used strictly domestic powertrains,
which were uniformly awful, along with the suspension. The Opel might
have been a rebadged Cavalier. I made my living fixing GM's disasters,
and I still feel like puking every time I think about some of these
cars. The Saturns did have their own powertrains, separate from the
usual GM crap of the time. Of course, that doesn't mean they weren't
crap, too.

And Holden seemed to be the company that made the good GM cars, like
the GTO & Cruze. I hate to see them go.