Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/06/07

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

Subject: [Leica] Ads
From: "TSL" <eno22@enter.net>
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 1999 23:04:26 -0400

>A great Advertising campaign for Leica cameras M and R could be:

>Leica
>Who do you think you are anyway?
>You don't deserve them. You can't have them. Forget about it.
>The Leica Camera company.
>CO Mark Rabiner
>>
Yeah...
This is good in any case...  Leica needs some horsepower.
Leica excelling in Leicality
Auto to unimaginable advancements.
A boundary here - but how and can it be defined. Is it plausible.  I'll
defend my M stuff without giving this any thought or care.  But then come
the complexities..
Two questions:
(1)If we take this idea and assume that Leica 'can' do 'their own thing'
(excuse the generalities...) then we can bypass the exponentially
progressive  inventions in autoeverystuff.  Of course we they're not
mutually exclusive.  But pretend they are (easy enough).

So Leica does not follow the automass, but continues to be Leica, the way we
like 'em (..u know)
Then the 'isolated' question is one that I surely cannot answer or even
predict - How (assuming Leica "CAN")
much 'better' can it get without getting progressively more assimilated into
upcoming accuracy, etc. in auto...?
I ask this as a technical question.  Those with a more advanced knowledge of
optics, etc may have some insights.  As Mark's ad is not Yet on the current
lens boxes, what can we expect of Leica's words "Highest optical performance
to the limits of technical feasibility."  We have seen a new generation of
lenses that do indeed (more than they do not) push the limits of technical
feasibility.  For example - the 35 M.  It is now available as asph. which we
could consider an improvement.  Fast?  Well, it's tough to assess the summic
vs. summil in terms of pushing performance.  Leica used the words "highest
optical feasibility" not applications.  So extra-stops may be useful, but
can we assume more precise? Perhaps. Presently the 35 summilux has shown no
improvement over the 35 summicron (both asph) 'across the scale' .  If
anything the summicron will, under given conditions, 'optically' perform to
the limit.  So are we to think in terms of 'conveniences' or 'optical
precision'.
And if the latter, how far can this go without really spilling over into the
autoworld?
(2)As I print my good slides (1/72) (all color) I am falling into digital
output (yes...they are running me through the fujix 4000 as a special
test...)  All my M-ness - how much is gone? None? Interneg/R-prints
Ilfochrome/Lightjet/Inkjet/Summijet - are any of these 'preserving' my
M-ness?  Was printing 20 yrs ago anymore 'in bounds' to what the M offers
than now?  Why (not)? If this is not answered properly, I'm throwing
everything away - except my limited-edition stylus epic.
New Ad:
Leica:  Old, not improved!  or  Leica:  Highest nanometer precision to the
limits of the unseen!