Re: Leica SLR, why bother?

[jbuf@ix.netcom.com (John Irvin Buford)]

You wrote: 
>
>I thought the only "real" Leica was an M.  I thought the superiority 
of the
>optics was largely a matter of the design possibilities that a 
rangefinder
>allows.  I mean if you are going to shoot SLR, why not Contax or 
Nikon?
>And then if you must shoot Leica SLR, it would seem that an SL or SL 2
>would be the only way to go. You know, German through and through, not 
some
>Jap/German hybrid, which is neither fish nor fowl.  That's from my 
limited
>observation.  I personally would never spend the kind of cash that's 
needed
>for a current R series.
>
>        Even the Leica M-6 is over priced.  It's an excellent camera 
and
>the optics are unsurpassed, but it's far from perfect. I sold mine and
>bought a Mamiya 6.  I don't have enough cash for both.  I'm doing it 
out of
>curiosity.  That's the same reason I bought the M-6.  Some day if I 
ever
>become wealthy enough, I will get another Leica.  But for now I am 
going to
>explore MF.
>
>                                                        Claude.
>
>
>
    You thought wrong.
John