[Leica] Why is Leica no longer the choice of many Pros?

["Kotsinadelis, Peter (Peter)" <peterk@lucent.com>]

Paul,

Very well put.  I would tend to agree.  
Love the feel of my M3 but for many jobs it just cannot cut it.  
Sometimes technology is a necessary evil we must live with and use.

Peter K

- -----Original Message-----
From: Paul Schiemer [mailto:schiemer@magicnet.net]
Sent: Friday, July 23, 1999 3:07 PM
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: [Leica] re; Why Leica?


At first because someone said it was good. <--in the sixties.
Then I came to like the instrument for what it did optically.
Leica has always been driven by the lenses, not the mechanism.

I've owned dozens (and still have some locked away), with many different
lenses.  My favorite lens is the 21SA, bar none, fav body is an M3 SS.
But it is, and always will be, a miniature format camera.

Recently relieved myself of one of my M6 bodies and lens.  It was curious, I
felt no more remorse than if I was dumping something that didn't suit me
(for it was in excess, and because I wanted a more modern camera).
I'll probably keep the HM, stick it away in the vault.
And I still use the CL from time to time, it's a keeper as well.

Leica ain't the end all to be all, red dot or no. It's great glass and an
okay mechanism.  Though, it costs too much for what it does.
If it was so fabulous you wouldn't have to make excuses for its' performance
mechanically.  It's a twenty five year old design that [just this year] got
TTL. Have they got their head in the sand there in Solms?

The M6 body I traded away had been to Everest twice.
If I was an authentic Leicaphile I would have insisted the mountain came to
it instead.

no archive