Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/02/24
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 02:30 AM 2/25/97 +0800, you wrote: >Now that you have mentioned it, it is true, why can't the thing motor-wind >in such a huge body?? > >At 02:27 PM 23-02-97 -0500, you wrote: >>As I see it, the R8 is actually quite an attractively designed camera. >>While it is somewhat on the chunky side, that doesn't really bother me >>because it handles well. My main objection is that within that bulk >>there isn't a winder, let alone a faster motor drive. >> >>The Contax RTSIII, for example, has a 5fps motor within a quite >>similarly sized camera. Many much smaller camera bodies incorporate >>winders so it is quite a puzzle. This is complicated. The Contax RTSIII is much heavier than any R camera; even heavier than a Nikon F4 with big battery pack. I have never seriously considered the RTSIII because I don't want to carry all that weight to get 5 FPS that I'll never use. I think Canon has it right with the EOS-1. The camera by itself is of a reasonable weight and has a built-in winder. If you want a fast drive, there's an add-on accessory. So you don't have to carry all those batteries and mechanics unless you need them. What I can't figure about the R8 is why autobracketing is restricted to the drive, rather than being provided for both the drive and winder. Charlie Charles E. Love, Jr. CEL14@CORNELL.EDU