Totally biased opinions

["Jeff Segawa" <segawa@netone.com>]

When it comes to the purchase of a luxury item, I like to get my money's
worth-and then some. But over time, my definition of the term "Money's
worth" has changed somewhat. In the past, I've been particularly drawn to
top-notch cameras of yesteryear (and more modern "retro" designs), as many
are especially nice to behold in all of their brass, chrome and aluminum
glory. But today, this love of nice gear is tempered by a certain cynicism
which forever asks "So what have you done for me-lately?"

 Over the years, I've been fortunate to have owned or been allowed to fuss
with a number of classic cameras. I can fully understand the delight in
handling a camera which feels substantial in the hand, and which has the
feel of an expensive piece of machinery. A very clean, late production
black Nikon F2 w/meterless finder might be an excellent example of a camera
which is lavishly built, very rugged and fairly uncluttered.

But I've also come to realize that there's a lot to like about some of the
new cameras out there, most of which have been designed primarily for use
as programmed-mode automatics, and which work extremely well as such,
allowing fine exposure control via a flick of a handy control wheel, all
the while providing feedback through the illuminated LCD display.
Polycarbonate covers are far more impact-resistant than most metal
stampings, and advances in casting and molding technology have allowed
cameras to assume new shapes, which are often much more comfortable in the
hand than cameras produced by more traditional means.

In the end, I worked out a means to reconcile these seemingly conflicting
wishes:

(1) I've learned to  expect newer technologies to be a little (sometimes a
lot) uncomfortable at first, but many quickly become second nature. Some
new gear looks bizarre and the layout may seem all wrong. Some may, in
fact, be bad ideas or poor implementations of good ones. But sooner or
later, good stuff does emerge, often in an unfamiliar guise.

(2) Once the new technologies have been tried and evaluated, the older
products can be judged for their relative merits and employed as
appropriate.

(3) I try to avoid brands with a history of forced product obsolescence, or
anything likely to consume a lot of non-rechargeable batteries: I figure
that the local landfill has got enough business without my helping things
along! It's my understanding that lithium is a particularly nasty, reactive
substance, so I'm surprised at the lack of data covering the disposal of
such cells by means of landfilling or incineration.

What I make of the Leica M at this point: It costs too much, and I was very
disappointed to find that I could not put together a basic, secondhand
system for around $850, as I might've been able to do only a couple of
years ago. Yet it remains an enjoyable-to-use camera and it's relative lack
of electronics (more specifically, batteries) makes for a smallish package
of moderate weight. A better meter display (with +/- 3 stop range) and
highly selective metering pattern (maybe corresponding to the 135mm area)
might be nice, as it would make M much more Zone System-friendly. The
reissue of the collaseable Elmar as a user's lens was most welcomed. I'll
be keeping my eyes on the Contax G-series too. 
- ---------------------------------------------------
Specializing in interesting, quality junk.
Sherline items sought
- ---------------------------------------------------