Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/11/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Carl, I absolutely agree with you but I think that consistency with a sucky standard is better than us getting even more confused by having a proliferation of frame combos BoL, A. - -----Original Message----- From: csocolow [mailto:csocolow@microserve.net] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 1999 8:51 PM To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: Re: [Leica] M2-W "Stewart, Alistair" wrote: > > OOPS, correction to framelines for the M2-W > > s/be 24/35, 28/90, 50/75. > > retail - $1200, inc 3+2 Passport, (well hell they charge $300 for a new M6 > circuit board). And it it helps to save more $$$, not eliminate the dumb > winderrrrrr circuitry. Hell if you're going for the entry level model, you > sure don't need a winder high on your M wishlist. But keep the little winder > tooth cut-out so the ARW/M6 will still work, or even better, go back right > to the real deal M2 style shaft. > > Sell it as a kit for $2000 with the resurrected last non-asph 35 'cron. > > DonJr hould approve - no plastic thingy in the frame counter, neither. > > best of function over toy-value, > > Alistair > LOTS OF SNIP Alistair, An interesting approach. I never thought I would participate in one of the LUG's ongoing "what I would like" diatribes. But, here's where I differ on your viewfinder wishlist: 24/50, 28/75, 35/90. I find the 50/75 combination as it now exists in the M6 Classic a little too close when I'm working quickly. I'd rather see as much space as possible between any two displayed framelines. The rest of your proposal I like. - -- Carl Socolow http://members.tripod.com/SocPhoto/