Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/09/28
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
At 01:25 PM 28/9/96 -0400, you wrote:
>I have been a life-long fan of Leica optics, using M2s and M3s when I was a
>photojournalist in the 70's. Today I have an M6 with 4 lenses.
>
>But, I've never cared for R series camera bodies, even though I know that R
>lenses are as good if not in many cases superior to their M series cousins.
>
>The R8 changes the equation. I was in Europe last week and spoke at length
>with someone who'd attended Photokina and spent some time with the R8. He
>had exceptionally positive comments. I've also read most of what's appeared
>here and on the net.
>
[snip,snip]
I am sure that the R8 is a fine camera. My basic question is this; how
fundamental an improvement is the R8 from the R7? For that matter, I have
always wondered how the R7 was that much better than the R5. Don't get me
wrong, I too have an M6 with a full compliment of lens, but the M6 is in a
class of its own. The same cannot be said of the R series, where there is a
lot of competition such as the Nikon FM2 and various Contax models, all of
which are first rate cameras and a good choice for someone looking for a
"traditional" SLR but at a fraction of the price of the Leica. I just get
the feeling that Leica is having problems marketing the R series of cameras,
and is constantly tweeking the camera, hoping for a winner.
Dan Cardish <dcardish@spherenet.com>
<http://www.spherenet.com/dcardish/photo.htm>