Re: [Leica] Re: Apples and Oranges

[Walter S Delesandri <walt@jove.acs.unt.edu>]

Hello Jim, all,

I enjoyed your post.....I agree, and would like to add my (probably 
unneeded) .02 !!

Leica is NOT state of the art....they haven't been since the M3 debuted
and was surpassed in three years.....
Years ago, "Leica" meant an interchangeable lens RFDR camera, small, 
with small, light, pocketable lenses (but not necessarily great glass
 or fast, even for the time....Zeiss kicked their ass on both fronts)
Leicas were smaller, lighter, more convenient, and MUCH more durable.
Their lens mount was superior, and made for smaller lenses.

Leitz refused to call an SLR "LEICA" -- not a bad idea, still, IMHO.
Note that M-sales are stable, P/S sales are up, R sales are down and 
might spell disaster for Leica AG.  
Let's look at Leica selling points:  (here's a list, Will)

1. Leica bodies are mechanically superior to ANY OTHER. (Is this 
true today?  With an embarassing rate of warranty returns? HELL NO)_
2. Mechanical, manual camera with few frills FOR THOSE THAT WANT IT
and can/are willing to pay for it.  Still true today, but I fear that 
the next M might deviate from this tradition.
3. Small and light with small, light lenses.  Not so.  Compare an 
M6TTL to a IIIc with three lenses for each.  At least 50% bigger and 
many ounces heavier.  But still small and light compared to any 
SLR, so we might get by on this one.  But as the lenses get better, they 
get bigger.....may be an OK tradeoff, don't know.....

So r.e. Jim's comments, the Leica vs EOS/F5 comparisons are simply 
ridiculous......an extreme example of apples and oranges. (still
referring to M cameras)  I agree with Jim -- my type of photography 
doesn't require or want for automation/autofocus.....for those 
that "need" it -- well, they're not buying Leica now or ever!

As for R-user, I can't understand or explain them, I just hope the 
R-system doesn't bury Leica financially.  They need to take some of the   
money they're spending on the R-system and push the prices down on
common M- equipment and market the hell out of it, IMHO.  It's their 
"ONLY" exclusive product, and exclusive it has to be to keep them 
afloat.  Cut the price on the standard M-6, bring back the M-4P as 
an entry level camera at $800, perhaps with a new LCD MR style meter
at $100, and get the users "hooked"  -  I think drug terminology is 
appropriate for leica users based on what I've seen...........They 
WILL sell their mothers for a 75 summilux or an APO anything.   

Oh well, time will tell all, 
Walt

On
Wed, 30 Dec 1998, Jim Brick wrote:

> Well... I look at it like this. It all depends upon what kind of
> photography you like to do, and how you like to do it. Kinda like cars. My
> BMW will carry me nicely on reasonable roads, but an SUV is needed for off
> road stuff.
> 
> Some photographers like to do everything themselves (me) and others want a
> computer to do it for them.
> 
> Many subjects allow the photographer to figure everything out in due time,
> and others require split second decisions.
> 
> Sports, wild animals, action, etc, photography can be enhanced by a good
> computer camera and AF lens system.
> 
> Good thinking person pictures at f/1.0, f/1.4, etc. (Bokeh), 'scapes with
> calculated (or viewed) DOF covering exact distances, dusk/night double
> exposures, street life photography, do not need the computer and AF.
> 
> I personally do not take photographs that would benefit from AF. I
> PERSONALLY want to pick the exact focus point. I PERSONALLY want to pick
> the exact exposure after visualizing what I want the result to look like.
> 
> We have a Canon EOS 1n here in the office. We cut a hole through the back
> door and put in a six megapixel sensor. We want to use this camera totally
> in the manual mode. This in not always easy. No f/stops on the lens for
> instance. No DOF scales. There are so many buttons, modes, dials, screens,
> that I never know if it will do what I told it to do. My Leica cameras are
> simple and straight forward. Frame, set exposure, focus, photograph, repeat.
> 
> I don't want an EOS or F5. I have absolutely NO USE for any of the
> thousands of modes/options other than simply manual. And these cameras do
> not do manual very well.
> 
> So I, and I believe many many thousands of others, would be really
> disappointed if Leica changed their charter, and did a "me too" on the
> computer camera. A computer in the camera is OK (the R8 has one) so it can
> be used when P&S or other computer nicety is needed. But Leica should never
> eliminate the basic "manual mode" photography. Real lenses with f/stops and
> DOF scales, real shutter speed dials, a real manual setting.
> 
> IMHO, unless Leica retains the "Leica" genus, they will be finished.
> 
> Jim
> 
> 
> At 02:11 PM 12/30/98 -0500, Dan wrote:
> >Peter-
> >Of course you know that you'll no doubt be flamed, but this very thing was
> >something Bob Bedwell and I discussed earlier this week. For many people,
> >not just action photographers, but people with failing eyesight and other
> >physical restraints, AF is a godsend.
> >Someone had said that when the only tool you have is a hammer, all problems
> >start to look like nails... well, I agree that there are many photographic
> >problems out there, and one single solution, i.e. Leica, cannot solve them
> >all.
> >I can remember taking shots of  the football games in highschool with an old
> >Rollei TLR- I can appreciate the modern fast focusing cameras for their
> >ability to be there when it happens, and I can also appreciate the leisurely
> >pace of the old Leica LTM cameras for their qualities.... Rest assured,
> >Peter, you aren't alone in the way you think+ACE-
> >( Personally- I think if Leica is smart, they'll have an R9, AND an AFR-1 
> >+ACE-)
> >Best of both worlds :)
> >Dan
> >dwpost+AEA-msn.com
> >
> >
>