Walt's R-phobia (with smileys; was Re: [Leica] Re: Friday FS/WTB

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

Aw, I really like the heavy bastards....just had to stir things up a bit..
I mean, where else can you get a camera with such a history?
Even Leica was embarrassed...they didn't put their real name on 'em 
till they bought what they thought were decent cameras from japan..
WAlt


On Thu, 11 Feb 1999 00:10:31 -0500 Doug Herr 
<71247.3542@compuserve.com> wrote: 
> On Wed, 10 Feb 1999, Walter S Delesandri wrote:
> 
> <SNIP>
> >Everyone to his own opinion  (none of you have problems sharing them 
> >with ME) BUT----
> >
> >I'm MUCH more offended by the R-leica posts (any) than all the
> >underwear, scotch, and FS/drivel combined......(note lack of smileys)
> >
> >Leica "R" history:
> >1964-1978 -- built mediocre, clumsy,heavy, ungodly complicated
> >             SLRs...with good lenses
> <SNIP>
> >Hehehe.....thought the list needed a little more stirring up....
> 
> well Walt ya got me stirred up 'cuz yer diss'n my all-time fav-o-rite SLR!
> 
> no comment on the Leicaflex Standard except to say the external meter
> wasn't the only questionable design "feature".
> 
> I'm not looking at the Leicaflex SL from the inside out like any decent
> repair tech oughtta [that's you Walt :-)] I'm lookin at it from the outside
> in.
> 
> Mediocre?? The SL's feature list was paltry compared with all the crap you
> could have gotten piled on by the others in the marketplace but that's one
> of the reasons I like it; aside from the view/focus system it's feature
> list is real close to that of an M6.
> 
> Clumsy??  No way  - I started using the SL after 10 years with N**** F's
> and after a week with the SL the F's were feeling clumsy & crude.  BTW the
> SL's meter is still working and accurate.
> 
> Ungodly complicated??  well Walt you must be lookin at the insides, a part
> of the SL I'll never see, 'cuz using the outside's as simple as can be.  As
> long as it helps me make better pictures and doesn't break (hasn't yet) I
> don't care what's under the surface.
> 
> Heavy??  yup...gives it a nice, solid feel.
> 
> As far as the innards go, then Walt you're the man! :-)  I've got no
> grounds to say what innards are better or not.  I do know that I've gotten
> many more "keepers" with the SL than I ever could have with other hardware
> and it's not just 'cuz of the Leica glass; for me, that's what makes a
> camera better.  Even now I'd rather use the thumb-wind, manual-metered SL
> instead of nearly anything else. 
> 
> Having written all that I gotta admit that I've got a bad case of M-lust
> and if using a 280 or 400 or 560 or macro lens weren't so clumsy on a RFDR
> my wallet would be a whole bunch lighter.  I'm not gonna diss the RFDR
> concept; I just can't use it.  For dudes and dudesses who think a 180mm
> lens is a wide-angle the R-cameras are a great way to use Leica glass. :-)
> :-) :-)
> 
> Doug Herr
> Sacramento