Re: "PRO" CAMERAS

["ALEXANDER Y" <YUSUF@PHARMACY.UWC.AC.ZA>]

Date:          Thu, 26 Sep 1996 00:08:36 -0700
To:            leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
From:          Eric Welch <ewelch@cdsnet.net>
Subject:       Re: Leica CL with 40mm
Reply-to:      leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us

At 09:13 AM 9/25/96 -0400, you wrote:
>What is a "'pro' camera"? I have seen and read articles for years 
which site
>this, but I have not seen a uniform definition of the term.

Of course it's all opinion at this point. But for me a pro camera is a
camera that is sturdy enough to take the banging a professional 
dishes out
without giving up too soon. Nikon rates their cameras at over 100,000
exposures before failure. I think it's probably a rather conservative
estimate for their great pro cameras - the Nikon F5/F4. The N90 is sort 
of
a pro camera, but I don't think it's truly a pro level camera - it breaks
too easy.

Also, pro cameras don't always have features that are the latest, but 
have
been proven already to be useful and contribute to the picture making
process. Hence, the camera makers often don't put the latest 
innovations on
the top cameras until they've been tested on the amateurs. That's a 
good
practice, though the F5 seems to be breaking that trend. But it seems 
to be
pretty throughouly tested.

===========
Eric Welch
Grants Pass, OR

Analogies in writing are like feathers on a snake.


 I would considered all LEICAS ( maybe not the mini P/S Leicas, 
although some "Pro's" do use them as second cameras) as "Pro" 
cameras if the definition, of being able to withstand knocks and 
bumps and  having proven features, is applied.

As the Nikon F90X is  considered  and used by many photographers 
as a pro camera, how does it differs from  the Nikon F90X  PRO? 
 Sorry for this non - Leica question. Maybe I should address this 
question to the Nikon Digest. BTW, I am a Leica M3 and Nikon SLR 
user. It is just that this question never came up yet in any Nikon 
postings.

Regards

Yusuf