Re: [Leica] M7 Fantasies

[Thomas Kachadurian <kach@freeway.net>]

Ted:

Alright, I'm off my high horse now. So far I've only responded to others
post. Allow me to make my position clear.

I love the simplicity of the M. I don't want a differnt M, just an updated
one.

At a recent Leica clinic the Tech tested the shutter on my M4-P It was
close, but within a only 1/3 stop at a few speeds. He was perfectly happy
with that. The M6 shutter is a workhorse, but not precise.

My expectations for Leica are high, perhaps too high. When I pick up my
ideal M7, first and foremost I want it to feel exactly like my M6. I want
the same accurate rangefinder, the same small size, and the same solid feel. 

I don't want to know there's an electronic shutter in there, I want the
exact speeds that only an electronic shutter can give.

I don't want buttons and switches. I want the meter to work the exact same
way, but with a small chip in the body that allows it to read a matrix
pattern, even if I have to adjust it myself.

I am not in the group that suggests that Leica should ape the Contax G
cameras, The G's are a great idea with absolutely terrible execution. They
could not have been designed by a photographer.

I don't want a Leica MZ23. I want the M7, a small subtle change that adds a
few modern improvements to the already great camera.

How can you argue with that?

Tom

At 12:27 AM 2/13/98 -0500, you wrote:
>Tom K wrote:
>
><<<<<Why can't those of us who prefer rangefinders enjoy the same modern
>technology that you use every day?>>>>>
>
>Hi Tom, 
>
>My M6 isn't a blast from the past as you mentioned in another post, it's an
>everday tool much like you do. Accept I'm uslly working 3 or 4 cameras at
>the same time, depending what I'm working on. Quite often I use three M6's
>at the same time and I still can't understand why you guys want the new
>bits and pieces installed in an already perfectly excellent camera.
>
>I haven't seen anything posted yet that would make me get all hully gully
>over electronic shutter, faster flash sync. (now that's one I just can't
>imagine at all! Why?) But I guess if one needs it good for them. I prefer
>shooting with what I see motivating me.
>
>I've never paid any attention to looking at the G whatever they are
>cameras, but they sure get alot of attention in here with all the elctronic
>stuff and autofocus.  I might suggest to those who would want the M6
>changed to function as a G whatever, maybe they should save there time and
>just get the G whatever.
>
>Quite frankly there isn't anything I, or any others who are champions of
>keeping the M6 as it is, are going to say or do that will make any
>difference one way or the other, if Leica in Solms found there was a viable
>market for a whiz bang all electronic version.
>
>If that were the case, that's their call. I would only hope that they keep
>production up on the M6, certainly as mine have been worked very hard since
>1985. I could use a few new ones and maybe I'll have a go at the new
>version when I get one in my hands and up to my eye.
>
><<< Do you like your Whiz-bang R-8? Why don't you still shoot an SL?>>>>>
>
>As you well know I have championed it since it's birth! :) And the only
>reason I shoot with it and not my lovable old Leicaflexes which had motors
>I could make go like a scared cat, is that I earned so much money from the
>dear old machins that I could afford to buy R7's which got me enough money
>to buy now R8's! :)  And motors when they are available.:)
>
>But you know what? I wouldn't have changed to Canon or Nikon if my old
>machines were the same as they were. They were "KISS" cameras and it didn't
>take being a computer whiz to know how to drive them like you almost have
>to be with the NIKON and CANON's of today.
>
>As far as I'm concerened as long as Leica keeps the simple M6 on hand and
>available at a reasonable price, what you guys think would be improvements,
>"Well,Quite frankly I don't give a damn, Tom!" :) Or whatever Rett Butler
>said to Charlotte! :)
>
>ted
>
>