Re: Pretenders to the Throne

[Jim Brick <jim@brick.org>]

At 09:26 AM 10/15/97 -0700, you wrote:
>
>I don't think so.
>
>Leica rangefinders have always been at the forefront of rangefinder
>design, always offering the best of the best--or at the very least
>competitively competing for that edge.   In contrast, Leica has  always
>been playing catch-up in SLR design---and rather badly at that.
>
>While R lenses are certainly among the best, Leica SLR bodies have
>always been YEARS behind the times compared to the best from Nikon and
>Canon.
>
>Leica admitted as much when they when they switched from their own
>designs to Minolta's for the R3 to R7.  Leica was cash poor with no
>technology, so they tried to import it from the mind of Minolta.
>
>Now in 1996 they introduced their R8 to the same old problems.  They
>still don't have a production R8 motor or even a winder.  Leica
>pathetically doesn't have a clue on SLR AF.  Their BIG metering advance
>in matrix  metering was only 12 years AFTER Nikon introduced matrix
>metering with the FA.  Big Deal.  Continuing in Leica's  great tradition
>of confused R lens  meter coupling, the new R8 lenses do not couple to
>the Leicaflexes, and even  3 cam R lenses do not offer complete metering
>on the R8.  The R glass is great, but the design of the bodies leaves a
>lot to be desired.
>
>Leica knows Rangefinders and glass, but when it comes to figuring out
>those new fangled SLR things, look out.  Nope, I don't find Leica's SLR
>body designs up to snuff, and in that sense, I don't consider them
>Leicas.
>
>You see, to be a REAL Leica, it has to be among the very best of the
>very best.
>
>Stephen Gandy

This dissertation, of course makes sense, except for the "REAL" part (last
sentence.) If it looks leica Leica, feels leica Leica, sounds leica Leica,
and has the name "Leica"... it must be a Leica! You know... the duck analogy!

Real, as opposed to... fake ?

Jim