Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/06/17
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Oh, for heavens sake! MLU is not always "extremely important", even if you are a professional. It all depends on what you're shooting. I'd hazard a guess that the majority of the worlds sports photographers who use fast AF bodies and long tele lenses couldn't give a wet shoelace whether a body had MLU or not. The same is probably true for most newspaper photographers (photojournalists? Do they still exist?) Reading the F100's spec, it's pretty obvious that this is the chief market, along with amateurs who want "pro" gear. Making an pro SLR without MLU is not "pathetic", it is being sensitive to your market's needs. If every damn function imaginable was added, we'd have Word 97 in a Nikon package. I don't know about you, but I sure wouldn't want it. M. Jim Brick wrote: > > To make a "professional" SLR these days WITHOUT MLU is really > pathetic. I personally would not even remotely consider a reflex > camera if it doesn't have MLU. This is why I moved up from R4sP's to > R6 and R7. MLU is extremely important. > - -- Martin Howard, Grad. Schl. for Human-Machine Interaction, | HMI/IKP, Linkoping University, SE-581 83 Linkoping, Sweden.| Just Tel: +46 13 28 5741; Fax: +46 28 2579; ICQ: 354739 | say "DOOH" E-mail: marho@ikp.liu.se; www.iav.ikp.liu.se/staff/marho/ +------------