Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/04/12
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Roger L. Beamon wrote: > Agree, Eric, BUT, adequacy is not what the Leica buyer seeks. Given Leica's > price points and reputation, clear cut superiority is demanded. If fit, Sorry, but when I said adequate, I meant that there is no reason to use anything but. I'm a picky user whose used Leicas for 15 years. Professionally for 10. There is nothing the older cameras offer that makes me want to give up a built-in meter or the newness of an M6 compared to anything else (except the M4-P maybe, which were still avialable new when my M6 was built). And sales of M6s are not diminishing. They sell every single one they build. Even the collectors editions. Used ones are even hard to find at times. Those ads in Shutterbug are often sold before it arrives in the mail. Professionals I know who are buying them always choose the M6 when buying for reasons other than price savings. I don't know a single "real" photographer whose chosen an M3 or an M4 or even an M4-2 or M4-P over an M6 except when price was a consideration. And M3s and M4s that still have a professional potential (good condition) are now pretty much out of the price argument. > finish and reliability are perceived as diminishing, so will their sales The fit and finish argument seem to be coming from people who don't use the M6 on a regular basis. Is there anyone here using an M6 who says, "I sure wish I'd bought that M4 (or M2 or M3 or M4-P) because this M6 just doesn't feel like a true Leica? It may be true, I just haven't heard fro anyone, except a few people who had some mechanical problems with their M6s, but I've heard the same from people with F4s, EOS cameras, the Contax RTSIII, etc. etc. Few and far between. -- Eric Welch Grants Pass, OR