Re: [Leica] Leica vs. Contax wars

[john <bosjohn@mediaone.net>]

Mark Rabiner wrote:
> 

> Mystery John:
> With such hair splitting trivial differences between the Leica M and Contax G
> systems and lack of that ultimate convenience of zooming we wonder why you
> bother with the Leica's at all! They cost a lot of money and they don't zoom!
> Why not just sell them and get on the Contax list?
> Mark Rabiner
My MY are we being testy.  The differences in lens performance between fine
performing lenses is, in real world photography, hairsplitting.  There are so
many factors in the chain from seeing an image, photographing the image,
developing and enlarging the negative and printing the image on photo
sensitive paper that affect sharpness and contrast far more than the
differences in the performances of the lenses in question that it becomes an
irrelevancy.  All these feel good "my leica is better than your whatever"
sound like just so much justification for having spent so much money on our
equipment.  WE DO NOT HAVE TO JUSTIFY LOVING AND USING LEICAS. Leicas are not
jealous cameras, they don't mind at all being used alongside other cameras. We
Leica lovers don't need to put down the competition based on differences in
performance between lens systems that are both recognized as being excellent,
we would still love our Leicas what ever the competition. Why, because they
suite us, they feel right in our hands, they handle in a familiar and friendly
way, their viewfinders are comfortable to use, and they are made very well indeed.

I have been using Leicas since 1957 or so. In my time, I have owned and used,
lllg, lllf. lllc. M3,M4, M4-2, M2, CL, XL, R4, R4s, and many or these I have
owned and used several of over the course of years.  One CL I owned twice. I
will continue to use and enjoy using Leicas in the foreseeable future. I am
very comfortable with my fondness for Leicas and do not need to justify my
liking and using them with lens performance charts and reliability tests,
other than to know the equipment I am using will perform far beyond my
photographic needs and abilities. Some of you obviously know more Leica
history, lore, and fantasy, as well as Leica nuts and bolts, than I, but my
credentials as a Leica user and lover are in order. I can find nowhere in the
FAQ for this list that I must bash non Leica cameras and lenses to continue
reading, contributing, and enjoying this list and I do intend to do just that.
Do you have a problem with that?

I am not defending the Contax G2 as being a superior rangefinder camera, it is
not a range finder camera, it is an outo-focus camera with a manual
rangefinder capability. Comparing Leica Ms and Contax Gs is like comparing
apples and cheese. I am saying that I like my G2 and will continue to use it.
There I some times I prefer using it to my Leicas. There are some features the
Contax has my Leicas don't and there are times I can appreciate those
features.  But don't try to separate me from my Leica or fists will fly.

This Leica Contax war thread began with " More to the point than Leica vs.
Nikon is the question of Leica vs. Contax, 
namely the G2.  It's become apparent that the Japanese-made Zeiss optics are 
equal or better than many/most Leitz offerings.  Coupled with a better view 
finder,  a very good auto focus and much less money, Contax has to be the 
leader  among  35 mm rangefinders. Right??"
This strikes me as a troll, but he misses the point completely because the
Contax is, as I and others have said, not a rangefinder camera. On this basis
I dismiss the paragraph as purile nonsense.
John
John