Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/05/21
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Dan, >The HM is a great photo making tool, a great camera. Yes, a great "tool". >Who cares if another model 'looks the way an M should'? I do, and also maybe, all the people who love the M3, the M2 and the M4 (black paint and silver chrome). >On what stone is it written how an M camera should look? In which holly book is it written that a Leica need a Red Dot, plastic protection above the strap eyelets, plastic leatherette, Leica M6 engraved on the front and improvable black chrome finish ? I don't see why it's a better "tool" because of that. For the moment it's just a great camera. ;-) IMHO, if you remove the red dot, the engraving on the front, the plastic protection and improve the black chrome (more like on black G2) and the leatherette, you will have both a great and a perfectly designed camera, who will last in the future like the 3 above classic M cameras. The M6 finish is to much "dated" (80's) The classic M design is "intemporel" In an other aera, the watch design from 1930-60 was (often) perfect. During the 70's and 80's the designers tried to improve, and (often) made ugly results. Now they are coming back to much more beautiful classic design, but perfectly matching our needs after all. The M6 is not ugly, but IMHO, it's a weak copy of the M4. Like the M4-2 and M4-P. The M4 design was perfect, why weaken it ? (Maybe the "Leica" in script on the top cover is not essential today ?) BTW I like very much the design of the R8, maybe because of the strong ergonomical design. And because I can hide the red dot with my middle finger. ;-) Lucien