Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/11/26
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Marc & Steve ---I was speaking of my own experience among IATSE still camermen in the 60's. At that time, major Studios were still furnishing the camera gear instead of letting the photographer use his own. It was a stupid thing to do but the Studios didnt want to pay rental at that time. The Majors had ties with both Nikon & an independent camera repairman Mel Pierce and they could get exceptional service from either. There were a few Leicaphiles that insisted on using their own cameras but they were in the far minority. I met Life photographer Alan Grant, who sold me one of his LTM/M 50/1.4 Nikkors & told me about D.D.D. & others that were now using them in preference to the Leitz 50/1.5 Summarit which in com- parison was not only soft focus but lacked contrast wide open. Nikkors really blew the socks off Leitz til the advent of the Summilux 50/1.4 in '59. Of course the Summicron was every bit, if not a better lens in 50/2. Marvin Moss ======================================================== In a message dated 97-11-26 19:18:14 EST, you write: << I never said, incidentally, that I considered the Leicaflex 'competitive' with the Nikon F: I merely contested Marvin's critique that the Leicaflex was severely outdated by the time of its introduction. I agree it set no new boundaries, but still see the Leicaflex as competitive in terms of the general market. I do not contest that, had I been a pro entering the market in '64, I'd have opted for the much fuller Nikon system or, if I could have afforded the price of admission AND had the muscles to tote it around, a Contarex. Marc