Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/07/05
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Regarding the rangefinder camera comparison article in June's "Practical Photogrpahy" magazine, B.D. asked: "Just how superior was the M body to the Hexar, and superior how - in what ways?" The article was written by Daniel Lezano and is entitled "Can't afford a Leica M6?". The premise, obviously, is that there are now viable and affordable rangefinder camera alternatives to the Leica. Mr. Lezano predictably faults the M6's "fiddly" film loading and wishes for a built-in handgrip to aid handling. He's also unhappy with the PC socket position which, he says, interferes with viewfinder access when using studio flash. He praises the Leica's superior rangefinder focusing ("sweetest of the bunch"), overall superior build quality, durability, smoothness of operation and shutter quietness. The M6 is presented as the standard by which the others are measured. He concludes: "You can understand why this is the camera rangefinder buffs aspire to owning...it gets on with its job quietly and efficiently and turns in fine results time and again. But it is very expensive." Using test data from multi-title Leica book author Brian Bower, Lezano rates the Leica rangefinder the most accurate followed by the Konica and...some distance behind...the Voigtlander. I forgot to mention earlier that the Contax G2 is included in the comparison, though...as the author points out...it's not a true rangefinder, "but rather an autofocus camera with an electronic manual focus option." He concludes; "it isn't a true Leica variant, but for grab shots it's faster than the others." The Konica, he says, "looks and feels like a Leica." He lauds its die-cast aluminum shell and titanium cover, rubber coating and small handgrip as well as the focusing feel of its lenses. He also mentions that the viewfinder is slightly brighter than the Leica's. The downside, however, is the rangefinder focusing. It may be accurate in tests, but it's hard to use in practice with critical focusing considered "tricky." Overall, however, Lezano considers the Konica "a gorgeous camera to use." He doesn't seem to consider the somewhat clanky, noisy Voigtlander in the same league as far as build quality goes. But then, considering that it costs a mere fraction of the others, he was surprised at how well the Bessa-R works. In the end, he tags the Voigtlander the "best value" of the group. Optical sharpness of moderately wide and mild telephoto lenses from each of the cameras is demonstrated by using 36x blowups from a test chart. The Leica lenses tested were the 28mm Elmarit and the 90mm APO Summicron. All test frames were shot at f8. A couple of the shots were spoiled by AF or operator error (the Contax automation and the Konica's tricky rangefinder). Other than those it's...quite frankly...darned near impossible to tell the lenses apart. These are measures of sharpness only. Other more subjective lens performance characteristics are not addressed in the article. Craig Boston