Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/07/23

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Re: Why is Leica no longer the choice of many Pros?
From: Jim Brick <jimbrick@photoaccess.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 15:53:20 -0700

At 03:25 PM 7/23/99 -0700, Paul Schiemer wrote:
>
>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?
>

I guess there are numerous ways of looking at something. Just an OK
mechanism doesn't last for the long run. If it were "just ok" it would have
changed years ago.

How does one determine that "it costs too much for what it does?" I can
never figure out these kinds of statements. Where is the reference? Costs
too much for what? Photography?

And TTL. I personally do not know anyone that wanted a TTL M6. I think the
"TTL" was thrown out there as an "offering" for those few who were
complaining just to hear themselves complain. What does it buy you? The
ability to use a flash and continuously adjust the f/stop. There are
selectively few souls who need to do this. A cheap automatic flash with
aperture selection will do nearly exactly the same thing. And always has.
This is not rocket science.

M6 and TTL flash seems sort of oxymoronish to me. But that's me.

An M camera is an M camera is an M camera. This is exactly why it is so
popular and has cult status. It shouldn't try to be something else. I
believe Solms knows this.

Jim