Re: [Leica] Useful camera features?

[dannyg1 <dannyg1@IDT.NET>]

Doug,

> One would think that an effective "street" camera would need as
> many automatic functions as possible

During a Polaroid product advisory board I took part in two years ago, a man that was a 
Kodak marketing rep (and was then with Pola.) told me a story. Whenever Kodak asked 
photographers what they wanted in an E6 film the photographers always had the same 
answers: '100% accurate color reproduction, not too high contrast, good push/pull 
response, no glowing color'. 

As Kodak went farther in improving its films to the standards requested, Fuji started to 
gain a foothold in the market and 'old standby' films like Ektachrome 64 began to have 
stronger sales (which is why it's remained, as it is, in the line for all these years) as the 
new films died horrific deathes. 

When Kodak changed the way they'ld been quizzing the photographers ( by doing 
double blind slide comparisons instead of asking questions), they found that 
photographers are particularly bad at articulating what exactly it is that they want. 

Their preference for an ideal slide film, you see, was a film that was contrasty as all hell, 
had a color response decidedly skewed towards the red and yellow ends of the 
spectrum, pushed _terribly and glowed color. The film they preferred overall was (and 
probably still is) Fuji Velvia.

Some automated functions would increase the M6's sales in a huge way IMO, though 
no-one wants to see an M6 automated to the level of a Contax G camera. I would say 
the pinnacle in Rf camera-dom was reached eons ago with Robot's Royal 36s and even 
that had a motor drive built in (late '50's). It was still silent (actually quieter than the M) 
and was, in every way, a small brick.

> Would RF users be as satisfied with an electronic M-camera, or has
> standard SLR design become too cluttered with superfluous features?
> Your opinions, please.

IMO the answer to your question is yes to both points.

Danny Gonzalez