[Leica] WAS Re: LUG Year Book - JIM

[mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner)]

It just reminds me of the a key " not a Spotmatic" thing.
And that?s a spot.
We assume the Spotmatic had a spot meter in it.
It did not. They were going to put one in but it didn?t happen.
But they called it a Spotmatic anyways.
I used one often in the early 70's as I'd take one out for the weekend from 
school.
Could never find the spot.

 
 

-- 

Mark William Rabiner
Photographer

?On 10/1/19, 4:22 PM, "LUG on behalf of Philippe via LUG" 
<lug-bounces+mark=rabinergroup.com at leica-users.org on behalf of lug at 
leica-users.org> wrote:

    Jim,
    
    On top of my Spotmatic F, I had an ESII which was probably the last 42mm 
issued before the K series. It had the 42mm thread, but was not a Spotmatic 
;-)
    
    Some of the lenses were great!  I miss my younger years more than the 
42mm thread though :-)
    
    Amities
    
    Philippe
    
    
    
    > Le 1 oct. 2019 ? 22:14, Jim Hemenway <jim at hemenway.com> a ?crit :
    > 
    > Gerry:
    > 
    > Over ten years ago, I was a member of a Pentax group whose membership 
was 50-50 screw mount and bayonet.
    > 
    > The former didn't want any posting which referred to cameras newer 
than Spotmatics, (1967) and would do much ranting whenever their wishes were 
not adhered to.  These members were known as the "Takumars"
    > 
    > Whenever someone made a post about digital Pentax cameras there was 
hell to pay.
    > 
    > It was like having a raven nipping on your shoulder spitting out a 
"Nevermore" whenever you broke their "rules"
    > 
    > Eventually when I realized that the Takumars were really just camera 
collectors and not necessarily camera users... I left the list along with 
many others,
    > 
    > There is no moral to the story.
    > 
    > JimH
    > 
    > P.S. A five year frequency? How many of us do you think will still be 
alive in five years.
    > 
    > 
    > On 9/22/19 12:32 AM, Gerry Walden via LUG wrote:
    >> I have come to the decision not to participate unless it is a LEICA 
yearbook and not a yearbook of general photographs taken on everything there 
is. If non-Leica images are deemed to be acceptable by others making 
decisions, then at the very least there should be a clear differentiation 
(i.e. a separate section) for the non-Leica images at the back of the book 
after the Leica section.
    >> 
    >> As for general thoughts on the time frame, and because a number of 
people are shooting less with their Leicas, would it be an idea for these to 
be done every five years thus allowing for a (hopefully) bigger submission.
    >> 
    >> Gerry
    >> 
    >> Gerry Walden
    >> www.gwpics.com
    >> +44 (0)23 8046 3076 or
    >> +44 (0)797 287 7932
    >> 
    >> 
    >> 
    >> 
    >> 
    >> 
    >> 
    >>> On 22 Sep 2019, at 05:13, Brian Reid <reid at mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> 
wrote:
    >>> 
    >>> 
    >>>> Just sharing my thoughts about this. Of course Brian will be 
holding the
    >>>> mike and have the final say.
    >>> The reason I haven't announced anything yet is that I've been hoping 
that more people will offer suggestions or express opinions.
    >>> 
    >>> _______________________________________________
    >>> Leica Users Group.
    >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
    >> 
    >> _______________________________________________
    >> Leica Users Group.
    >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
    >> 
    > 
    > _______________________________________________
    > Leica Users Group.
    > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
    
    
    _______________________________________________
    Leica Users Group.
    See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information