Re: [Leica] Re: R state-of-the art?

["Bryan Willman" <bryanwi@seanet.com>]

I've not read the whole thread, but I think
it helps to use cameras according the
"theory" they are designed for.

So an Eos1n or Eos1nRS are intended
to be driven by auto-exposure and auto-focus.
You don't drive the camera, you drive the controls
for the AF and AE and let them drive the camera.
This works well.  It's really not "intended" that
you check a hand meter or try to outguess the camera
meter or autofocus, but rather, that you adjust their
behavoir.

The M6 is clearly meant for direct control.  You are not
intended to blindly believe the meter.  It is expected that
you will practice with the rangefinder, and adjust exposure
base on what you see.

The Canons produce very consistent and high-quality results.

The M6 produces more inconsistent (at least in my hands) results
some of which are just to-die-for.

So, while an R8 doesn't appeal to me, whether it's "state-of-the-art"
is less important than how well the R8+lens+human system produce
results.  Handling, predictable behavoir, etc., to a given person.

(Classic note: To a Canon person, all the dials on Nikons go the wrong
 way.  To a Nikon person, all the dials on Canons go the wrong way....)


In short, the "this is camera is in all ways better than that one"
debate is often kind of tangential to real applied work and results.
(That said, I love my M6s and my Canons...)

bmw