Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/08/06

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

Subject: RE: [Leica] why buy old stuff? (was "notoriously crappy" lens)
From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 19:54:17 -0400

Not arguing at all - just discussing.

First, I wasn't referring to the R series at all...

Why use a rangefinder when there are computers disguised as cameras? I use
both, a revel in both. I use the rangefinder for normal to wide angle
lenses, where I find it easy and accurate to focus, and certainly better for
use in low light, which is where I often find myself working, than the
autofocus cameras with wide angles.

I also use a Nikon F100 for longer lenses because, a.) if I'm using a lens
that brings me in closer, I want to see what I'm getting; b.) I find the
autofocus very useful, as are the numerous metering modes, and, when the
light that's available is either insufficient for good exposures or needs a
little help, the flash capabilities of the F100 are superb.

That's why I use a rangefinder. But if I use one, I want to use a modern
one - which for me means any M...

B. D.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of
> Krechtz@aol.com
> Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2000 6:22 PM
> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: Re: [Leica] why buy old stuff? (was "notoriously crappy" lens)
>
>
> In a message dated 8/6/00 5:12:22 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> bdcolen@earthlink.net writes:
>
> << I find myself asking, why use the
>  old stuff, other than to own say, a single body and lens with which to
>  "play" once and a while.  >>
>
> That question has been pretty well answered here in recent days.
> For you and
> no doubt many others, the answer is that there is no reason
> whatever.  For
> others, it is the question itself that makes no sense.
> It really is a matter of personal preference, not subject to legitimate
> debate.  By the way, does everyone reading this agree to a universally
> accepted definition of "serious photography"?  Try settling that
> issue first.
>
> How about asking who needs to use any form of rangefinder
> equipment, now that
> it has been supplanted by technologically superior infallible autofocus
> computers disguised as camera bodies?  Next time you're bored,
> try that one.
> As for me, I think I'll go out and play with my toys awhile.
> It's much more
> fun.
>
> Joe Sobel
>