Re: Leica Minilux

["Jordan Koussis" <jkoussis@compulink.gr>]

Dimitri,
an ueleis pare me thlefvno sto 49.14.461 gia na soy pv gia tis Contax.
( Sorry gia ta kinezika, alla molis tvra katalaba oti o Explorer moy den
exei ellhnika sto mail.)
An pali eisai ejv apo Auhna , gia na mhn plhrvneis yperastiko, pesto moy
gia na soy steilv E-mail.
                            Jordan.

- ----------
> From: Dimitrios V. Lyridis <dimitris@central.ntua.gr>
> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: Leica Minilux
> Date: =CA=F5=F1=E9=E1=EA=DE, 20 =CF=EA=F4=F9=E2=F1=DF=EF=F5 1996 7:25 =EC=
=EC
>=20
> About three weeks ago I entered a photo store in Biel (Switzerland) and
> intended to buy the Leica Minilux as an everyday camera. And just then =
I
> asked the old man at the counter how he would choose between the Leica
> minilux and the Contax T2. That was out of curiosity but what I heard
just
> made me change my mind and ended up buying nothing.
> Specifically, he said that this Leica was no M6 (he told me that even
most
> parts of the R series are made by Minolta). The quality for one. The
plastic
> parts inside (he said: "no, no german puts these thins inside, the foam
> around the cover used for tightness, how long do you think is going to
last,
> the film holder, the curtain in the back..."). Instead the Contax had I
> think a ceramic back, not foam  (was it rubber) around the door, metal
parts
> inside. But the most important was that the viewfinder of the minilux
looked
> like plastic while that of the contax was saphire glass. You could most
> certainly see the difference.  In the viewfinder of the contax you coul=
d
> also see focus info plus other stuff. That of the Leica... Well if you
put
> the distance manually you don't know when its focused. That's very
useful,
> yeah, especially at f2.4! And then he went on about the lens difference=
s
> (leica is warmer, contax has more contrast) and finished: "this is of
course
> Leica (it says so) and this is contax; you make up your mind".
> Of course I couldn't, because I wanted the leica but I knew that contax
was
> better.
> My question is (since then I looked up camera catalogues) that I cannot
> realize why nobody talks about the ideal for me point and shoot camera
which
> is the Contax Tvs (with a very useful zoom: 28-56, although a rather sl=
ow
> lens and a good price).  If by next month that I am going back to CH
Leica
> don't come up with something I think this is the one I will buy. Unless
of
> course anybody has any suggestions...
>=20
> Thanx
> Dimitris