Pretenders to the Throne

[Stephen <cameras@jetlink.net>]

> At 00:43 15.10.1997 -0500, Eric wrote:
>
> >I am not ignoring the point, I'm disputing the claim that Leica R
> cameras
> >are not REAL Leicas. That's just plain foolishness.

I don't think so.

Leica rangefinders have always been at the forefront of rangefinder
design, always offering the best of the best--or at the very least
competitively competing for that edge.   In contrast, Leica has  always
been playing catch-up in SLR design---and rather badly at that.

While R lenses are certainly among the best, Leica SLR bodies have
always been YEARS behind the times compared to the best from Nikon and
Canon.

Leica admitted as much when they when they switched from their own
designs to Minolta's for the R3 to R7.  Leica was cash poor with no
technology, so they tried to import it from the mind of Minolta.

Now in 1996 they introduced their R8 to the same old problems.  They
still don't have a production R8 motor or even a winder.  Leica
pathetically doesn't have a clue on SLR AF.  Their BIG metering advance
in matrix  metering was only 12 years AFTER Nikon introduced matrix
metering with the FA.  Big Deal.  Continuing in Leica's  great tradition
of confused R lens  meter coupling, the new R8 lenses do not couple to
the Leicaflexes, and even  3 cam R lenses do not offer complete metering
on the R8.  The R glass is great, but the design of the bodies leaves a
lot to be desired.

Leica knows Rangefinders and glass, but when it comes to figuring out
those new fangled SLR things, look out.  Nope, I don't find Leica's SLR
body designs up to snuff, and in that sense, I don't consider them
Leicas.

You see, to be a REAL Leica, it has to be among the very best of the
very best.

Stephen Gandy