Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/10/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 07:50 AM 10/10/96 -0400, you wrote: >2. Several comments regarding the CL was related to the fact that it >was related to Minolta. For those who 'looked down' on it for this reason, >what is your opinion of the R series, since they were derived from Minolta >bodies? They are not "derived" from Minolta. They use some parts from Minolta to build their own cameras. They are very different inside, except for some parts. The Shutter in the XD-11 and R4 are the same, but the mirror boxes, prisms and electronics (selective metering stuff etc.) are completely Leica. And Minolta is no slouch. They pioneered autofocus, and they make quite fine cameras for the market they cater to. As for magazines that cater to photographers that avoid advertising, there are a few. A writer or Outdoor photograher George Lepp has his own newsletter. Moose Peterson does too. But he's very biased for Nikon. There's a very expensive Photo Magazine in Germany that runs BAS tests that seems to be good, but they take advertising I belive. I could never justify springing for the subscription price. =========== Eric Welch Grants Pass, OR