Re: [Leica] Comparison of Leica SLR and Contax SLR Systmes

[Martin Howard <howard.390@osu.edu>]

Steven A. Melnyk jotted down the following:

> Now, my question (and I hope that I don't offend anyone with it) -- what are
> the pros and cons of the Leica system compared to the Contax SLR system?

I was in a simliar position about a year ago -- I wanted to complement my Ms
with an SLR and the coice was essentially between Contax and Leica.
Eventually, I went with Leica for the following reasons:

* Leica has a much more substantial lens program.  Both the current ones and
the second hand market provide a greater choice than Contax.  In addition to
the dedicated Leica R and Leicaflex lenses, if you buy a 14167 adapter, you
can also use Visoflex lenses on your Leica R camera.  This gives you access
to even more lenses -- and the Viso lenses tend to be quite cheap, yet there
are a number of remarkably good performers tucked away among them.

* If you are shooting with a 1925 Leica A and it breaks, you can still get
it factory repaired.  You can get your Leicaflex standard serviced (although
parts (especially electronics) may be getting scarce for it).  Many people
still use the Leicaflex SL.  In other words, the economic longevity of a
Leica camera is much greater than that of a Contax.  At least, this is true
of the mechanical cameras.  Electronics being what they are, it's difficult
to say whether or not you'll be able to get a Leica R8 repaired in 2043 any
easier than a Contax ST.

* Coupled to the former point: Leica SLRs hold their value much better than
Contax SLRs do, especially the mechanical ones.  Unless you pay some
outrageous price for a body, it should be possible to recap your investment
when you sell it (if you sell it -- it's difficult to let go of Leicas once
you've got your hands on them ;)

* Contax users tote the built-in motors of the Contax SLRs as an advantage,
but I *like* the idea of being able to manually advance film when I want to
- -- in quiet settings, in very cold weather, and when I simply don't want to
drag around the 300g extra weight that batteries, motor, and gears drives
would mean.

* Leica's can be cheap.  The trick is to not be in a rush to buy anything.
If you wait, sooner or later, someone is going to be desparate to sell that
mint- 280mm f/2.8 lens they bought on in the stock market frenzy when they
were being paid by their dot-com in options now that the payments on the
Porsche and mortgage are due.  I'm sure it's quite possible to -- over time
- -- put together a Leica outfit that doesn't cost that much more than the
comparable Contax one.

* Leica has been investing heavily in the M line in recent years, which the
R line has been lagging.  With the exception of the 50mm f/1.4, a few zooms
(including the very tempting 80-200mm f/4) and some modular, high-end,
tele-exotica, not much has been happening in the Leica R lineup.  I suspect
that some of the research from the M line is going to trickle over into the
R: like the 90mm APO-ASPH, or 135mm f/3.4 APO.  The 24mm f/2.8 is due for a
tune-up and to be brought in-house.  This will mean two things: a greater
number of the current lenses will hit the second hand market as people
desparate to own the latest stuff will want to upgrade, and there will be
new, sexy, desirable versions of old favorites to beg, borrow, or steal
funds for.

Hope this helps with your decision -- whichever system you choose.

M.

- -- 
Martin Howard                     | "I am Pentium of Borg.  Division is
Visiting Scholar, CSEL, OSU       | futile.  You will be approximated."
email: howard.390@osu.edu         |                            -- Unknown
www: http://mvhoward.i.am/        +---------------------------------------