Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/07/23
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 03:33 AM 7/23/96 -0400, you wrote: >Tho I've never used an R6, I assume that most of its functions are >battery-dependent. My analogy between the Leica M and the Nikon FM is based >on their freedom from electrical power. True, the FM and the Leica M have >battery powered meters, but those meters will not affect the mechanical >operation of these two fine cameras. When you're working a hundred miles from >nowhere, my choice would be either one of these stalwarts as primary or >backup insurance. You need to read a brochure. The only battery dependence of an R6 is the meter and the self-timer. The TTL works anyway. >I regard the MR meter on my Leica M3 a spot meter. It covers the area roughly >the perimeter of the a 90mm lens as outlined in the M3 viewfinder. I use the >center circle of the FM the same way. I interpret what they tell me as a There is no way the FM2's meter gives you the accuracy of the selective meter of the R6, or the MR meter. When I was forced to use an averaging meter, I would use the palm of my hand as an incident meter (with a +1 adjustment), and that's why most of my exposures were dead-on from the very beginning. >I heard about the Canon 1.0 for the SLR. But we're not involved with SLRs, >and their iffy focus. We're CRF people here. The Noctilux on an M is in its That is exactly why Leica doesn't build a Noctilux R (other than a prototype 90mm Noctilux). Becuase it can't be focused accurately enough with an SLR and human eyes. And now that it's been shown that AF cameras are not as accurate as eye-balling it, I suspect the Canon has a rather dubious value. =================== Eric Welch Grants Pass (OR) Daily Courier NPPA Region 11 JIB chair You'll get what's coming to you ... Unless mailed