Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/09/24
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
I'll give you a fourth opinion in favour of Metz, although not really
relevant. The Metz factory is owned by the same people who owned Leica
Camera before they went public.
More seriously, Metz, in my opinion, is an excellent choice for flash gear.
Gerard Captijn,
Geneva, Switzerland.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>No opinions thus far in favor of Vivitar. Three for Metz. Each of the
writers addressed the issue from differing
>experiences. Each had well thought out reasons for choosing Metz over
Vivitar (and other makes).
>
>Thanks!
>
>Glenn
>
>Glenn Thrall
>gthrall@ix.netcom.com
>
>
>Klaus Mathisen wrote:
>
>> I'm afraid you have to face up to the fact that the Metz 40 MZ-2 is probably
>> the best compact flash around. I've owned all kinds of Metzes and Vivitars,
>> as well as proprietary TTL-flashes for Nikon, Canon and Olympus, but none
>> has ever been near the performance of the 40 MZ-2. Straight ahead shots are
>> properly exposed on automatic - very few flashes achieve that. Indoors,
>> bounce the main flashead against the ceiling and use the -2 filter on
>> auxiliary head for closeups and get super portraits with just the right
>> catchlight effect. Even the Nikon F90X and SB 26 combo can't beat the Metz
>> with a Leica (except for ease of use). As a matter of fact, I've used this
>> flash in TTL-mode with SCA-adapter with Leica R-series cameras, as well as
>> in automatic with the M6. No big difference. It's simply great.
>
__________________________________________________
INTERNET PROVIDER: GROUPE VTX
CH-1009 PULLY
MAIL TO: info@vtx.ch