Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/08/20
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 12:53 PM 8/20/96 PST, you wrote: >** Reply to note from Jack Campin <jack@purr.demon.co.uk> Tue, 20 Aug 1996 00:09:12 +0000 > > >> did the Minolta XK people are talking about here have another >> designation for the European market? While the SRT-series are common >> here, I've never heard of that one. > >I doubt it. That was back in the days before the grey market was a big >problem. The XK was a 70s vintage camera that lasted into the 80s. >There's a copy of one at our local camera store in the historical >section. They were bricks. Big as an F2 with a massive prism. They were >built as tough, or tougher, than a Nikon F according to one guy I talked >to who used them, and they had a seperate versoin with the motor >permanently attached on the bottom, and that was massive! > >Great camears, lots of accessories. It really could have changed the >Leica's future if the R system had been based on that, but the price? Oi! >The Minoltas were more expensive than the Nikon or Canon pro cameras. > >Regards, > >Eric Welch >Grants Pass, OR > Interesting thought--base the R3 on the XK. I owned an XK once, and the body was the same as the R3 and its Minolta ancestor, the XE5-7. The difference was on the top where the finder was added. I wonder if the XK really had any better mechanics, or whether it differed primarily in the addition of the removable finder and the unusal manual/electronic shutter? Charles E. Love, Jr. 517 Warren Place Ithaca, New York 14850 607-272-7338 CEL14@CORNELL.EDU