> I didn't really
> get on with the D2/LC1 design anyway and you invested in
> one so I suppose neither of us are going to resolve this
> one
If the D2 had not been an analogue camera I'd probably not have got one, it and the LC1 are still unique in this respect.
> I didn't say there was or at least that it's proven - what
> I meant was, hypothetically if Panasonic started selling
> shed-loads of Four Thirds bodies and lenses, how could
> Leica not want to profit from this.
boy is that a hypothetical question, if Oly has problems selling 4/3 cameras why should Pana succeed?
> It's not
> fundamentally a sensor size issue with Four Thirds, but an
> electronics and engineering challenge.
The reason for Oly getting into bed with Pana?
The E-330's initial
> performance says to me that this challenge is starting to
> be met.
Too little too late?
> I can't see Panasonic making an APS camera unless Four
> Thirds becomes a failure, so Leica would almost certainly
> have to go it alone and I just don't think they have the
> technical or financial resources to do this.
Maybe Pana will do both, Leica keep ruling out any 4/3 involvement, and true Leica has enough problems with the digital M to start any other hares running.
> Well, let's see what happens. At least we should get some
> insight into what Panasonic plans to do in a few days time
> at their press conference. If I get the chance (unless
> someone beats me to it) I'll certainly be asking if a
> Panasonic Four Thirds camera will get the Leica re-work
> treatment.
Yes it will be interesting to hear Pana's side of this story.
Tony