Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/03/30

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Re: Leica & Contax test
From: Alexander <mediadyne@hol.gr>
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 14:11:22 +0300

- --------------2EFACF67ACC4449EBC410A4D
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-7
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> At 12:20 AM 3/30/99 +0200, you wrote:
> >All humans are naive inductivists.  Some just don't acknowledge it.
>
> And what is this supposed to mean? That I don't know that I'm basing it on
> my experience and not on some long-term, side-by-side "objective"
> comparison test of bodies? I don't even live anywhere near a Contax dealer
> that stocks them.
>
> Why would I feel obligated to give a camera a chance when:
>
> 1: I know it does not serve my purposes for my work. (AF is not
> professionally useable for the kind of work I do. No real direct manual
> focus. Slow lenses. Sick of beating dead horses).
>
> 2: I don't like the viewfinder. (Whinny! Whack!)
>
> 3: I already am heavily invested in another system that more suits my
> needs, and I do not have unlimited funds, time or the inclination to play
> camera tester instead of making real pictures. (Note: camera testing is a
> noble pursuit, and done properly can be a major contribution to the
> photographic world. I am not one of those people, for me it would be playing.)
>
> Is that enough? Or am I missing something on this camera that is so
> outrageously great that I could overlook 1, 2 and especially 3.
>
> I'll answer that.
>
> No....
>
> ....probably. And I'm comfortable with that.
>
> Eric Welch
> St. Joseph, MO
> http://www.ponyexpress.net/~ewelch
>
> You know how to make God laugh? Make a plan. - Anonymous
>
Eric, you'r 1,2,3 plan made me laugh! lol :-)
just kidding, but seriously now:

I am one of those that uses both Leica and Contax equipment, and find the lenses
pretty much equal (some are better on on side, some are better on the other). I
also own the entire G system, and to be frank, I like it more than the M6. I don't
own a M6, I have rented them quite a few times. My main leica system is 1 R8, 2
R7s, 2 R3s and a lot of lenses. I do have an M3, but I dont use it. I just wanted
to say that the G2 is certainly not a glorified P&S, Contax makes many glorified
P&S's. The G system does allow people who are used to it capture some photos,
which to others that arent used to the M style, the pics would be lost. I am sure
the vice versa occurs too.
Now, were I am an expert it comparison is between the R line and the Contax SLR's,
there, If anyone is interested, I could do a hell of a comparison.
generaly speaking, Contax "blends" technology with tradition better, while Leica
uses a diffeent approach, bases more on "traditional" technology. The difference
is in the order of the "T" words.

Now, I better hide my plan, I wouldn't want God to laugh at me! LOL

Regards,
Alexander

http://www.mediadyne.gr/photos



- --------------2EFACF67ACC4449EBC410A4D
Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-7
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>

<blockquote TYPE=CITE>
<pre>At 12:20 AM 3/30/99 +0200, you wrote:
>All humans are naive inductivists.&nbsp; Some just don't acknowledge it.

And what is this supposed to mean? That I don't know that I'm basing it on&nbsp;
my experience and not on some long-term, side-by-side "objective"&nbsp;
comparison test of bodies? I don't even live anywhere near a Contax dealer&nbsp;
that stocks them.

Why would I feel obligated to give a camera a chance when:

1: I know it does not serve my purposes for my work. (AF is not&nbsp;
professionally useable for the kind of work I do. No real direct manual&nbsp;
focus. Slow lenses. Sick of beating dead horses).

2: I don't like the viewfinder. (Whinny! Whack!)

3: I already am heavily invested in another system that more suits my&nbsp;
needs, and I do not have unlimited funds, time or the inclination to play&nbsp;
camera tester instead of making real pictures. (Note: camera testing is a&nbsp;
noble pursuit, and done properly can be a major contribution to the&nbsp;
photographic world. I am not one of those people, for me it would be playing.)

Is that enough? Or am I missing something on this camera that is so&nbsp;
outrageously great that I could overlook 1, 2 and especially 3.

I'll answer that.

No....

....probably. And I'm comfortable with that.

Eric Welch
St. Joseph, MO
<A HREF="http://www.ponyexpress.net/~ewelch">http://www.ponyexpress.net/~ewelch</A>

You know how to make God laugh? Make a plan. - Anonymous</pre>
</blockquote>
Eric, you'r 1,2,3 plan made me laugh! lol :-)
<br>just kidding, but seriously now:
<p>I am one of those that uses both Leica and Contax equipment, and find
the lenses pretty much equal (some are better on on side, some are better
on the other). I also own the entire G system, and to be frank, I like
it more than the M6. I don't own a M6, I have rented them quite a few times.
My main leica system is 1 R8, 2 R7s, 2 R3s and a lot of lenses. I do have
an M3, but I dont use it. I just wanted to say that the G2 is certainly
not a glorified P&amp;S, Contax makes many glorified P&amp;S's. The G system
does allow people who are used to it capture some photos, which to others
that arent used to the M style, the pics would be lost. I am sure the vice
versa occurs too.
<br>Now, were I am an expert it comparison is between the R line and the
Contax SLR's, there, If anyone is interested, I could do a hell of a comparison.
<br>generaly speaking, Contax "blends" technology with tradition better,
while Leica uses a diffeent approach, bases more on "traditional" technology.
The difference is in the order of the "T" words.
<p>Now, I better hide my plan, I wouldn't want God to laugh at me! LOL
<p>Regards,
<br>Alexander
<p><A HREF="http://www.mediadyne.gr/photos">http://www.mediadyne.gr/photos</A>
<br>&nbsp;
<br>&nbsp;</html>

- --------------2EFACF67ACC4449EBC410A4D--