Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/06/04
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]hello jim, a couple of comments to your post: >But what is the R system's unique place in the photographic world? What are >the characteristics that set it apart from Canon, Nikon, et al? Is it >better suited than any other brand of SLR for sports? journalism? studio >work? Are the ergonomics of the R8 better than the Nikon F5 or Canon EOS1n? >No, the only factor that you can rightfully point to that sets the R system >apart from all others is the lenses. And I'd argue that the incremental >improvement in image quality in the R system over other top lens lines is >too small to matter in most cases. perhaps a more appropriate comparison would be between the r8 and the nikon fm2n and whatever other manual slrs (if any) canon, olympus, minolta, etc., are currently manufacturing. at least in the case of nikon, their continuing production of the fm2 is testimony to that camera's popularity, supposedly even among pros. my wife has an fm2n and i have used it extensively. it feels and behaves like the fine camera it is. while i've never shot with an r8, i have eyed its specs, and it has a number of features that the fm2n - or any other manual slr, i'll wager - doesn't have. from this point of view, the r8 seems to stand somewhere between the fm2n-type slrs and the auto-slrs. it has many of the pro-level features, it's just not automated. (actually, this whole discussion presupposes that slrs should be automated...) >On the other hand, I understand that camera manufacturers make very little >money from pros. The consumer market is where the big money is made. But >are most consumers more interested in a reasonably-priced product filled >with the latest electronic features and bearing a name they see >professionals using? Or, are they interested in finely crafted Geman >machinery that works with fantastic lenses that cost as much as some compact >cars? to reiterate a point from my previous post, i don't think that leica is marketing their cameras to 'most consumers', nor do i think they have to. they already have a part - small, even tiny though it may be - of the market, from amateurs like myself who only take pictures for pleasure, to pros like yourself, who even own not only other cameras, but other camera systems, yet who still use leicas - for whatever reason - when the mood strikes them. that last item in itself is a testimony to leica's, if not the r8's implicit worth. i cannot imagine someone, pro or otherwise, who works with the canon or nikon system, but who still keeps an r8 and a few lenses around, just for fun. an (innocent) question for all leica and other slr users: if leica came out with the auto-everything slr to beat all auto-everything slrs and the price for the body alone was $10,000. would you invest in it? why or why not? the answer to the last question might well be what makes leica/the r8 more/less desirable than nikon or canon. guy