Re: M7,Tele-Elmar Focusing,etc.

[Tony Chang <stchang@ivnet.com.tw>]

At 09:13 AM 2/27/97 EST, you wrote:
>Andrew S Jordan wrote:
>
><One clear improvement in the "M7" over the M6 I would like to see is the
><incorporation of averaging in addition to spot metering. Note that the 
><spotsize in the M6 is 12mm which is significantly larger than the one in the  
><M5(8.5mm)
>
>Personally, I will prefer a real spotmeter, like on the M5.
>
><An LED readout of at least the selected f-stop or shutterspeed would
><also be handy.
>
>It's possible for the shutterspeed, but not for the F-stop because there is not
>link between the lens & the body.
>
>< Otherwise LET US LEAVE the M6 in itss essentially mechanical  
><form.Disappointed Leicaphiles should acquire the electronically superior and 
><probably optically equal Contax G2.
>
>I don't agree. I hope that Leica will offer us in a nearby future (before
>PHOTOKINA 98) the choice between the M6 and a fully electronic body, with all
>the possibilities that whe may imagine plus a silent mode. But I want to have
>the possibility to use all my previous lenses.

When a fully electronic M6 body is introduced, I expect the original M6 will
increase its value.

In my opinion, I won't buy M6 if it is a battery dependent camera.  My
friend bought a brand new G2 less than 1 month ago.  G2 body indicated that
the battery was at its 1/2 power, then the body was totally dead the next
day.  The worst thing was he didn't prepare a spare set of batteries because
he expected 1/2 power can last another MONTH!!! 
Luckly, he had another Leica R4s + 50mmf2 with him that day.

>
>On a M body, I don't think whe need autofocus. I have tried the Contax G2 and I
>was'nt convinced by the autofocus on that type of camera.
>
>By the way, I'm not a disappointed Leicaphile , but on the contrary, I'm a
>Leicaphile who want to use those marvelous lenses in a wider choice of
>situations.
>
>
>Lucien
>
>
>
Tony Chang
3B Co-Op Chemical Engineering
University of Waterloo
Ontario, Canada