Re: [Leica]M6 vs F100

[Mark Rabiner <mrabiner@concentric.net>]

Bill O'Connell wrote:
> 
> I was trying to say it was a personal opinion, guess it didn't get thru.
> My very first trip to the track was a Grand Prix in Germany with a Rollei TLR.  I
> didn't know any better.  I wasn't bad.
> My years of shooting races with SLRs no doubt contribute to my liking them over
> the M6.  I have used mf and af, I prefer af for the flexability - that is, I can
> use which ever suites the need.  One problem with the M6 is the lack of a long
> lens.  I find that I use the 200 most of the time unless I'm not trackside, then
> I use the 300.  My longest M lens is the 90.  I have semi been looking for a 135
> but have no desire to get a viso, will stick with the Nikon for the long stuff.
> Quite happy with the noct and will probably end up using it quite a bit.  I find
> the biggest draw back though is the focus time when using a shallow f-stop.
> There is no guess work with hyper focus there.
> The biggest plus for the Nikon is the total ease of use in a fast moving
> environment, from changing lenses and film to grabbing quick shots both close and
> far away with a simple twist of the zoom.
> Would I like a Leica R9 with all the features of the F100/F5?  Sure but till it
> gets here I'll 'suffer' with Nikon stuff - is sure is way better then the TLR was
> :->
> Bill

IF you really need a 200 than a Leica M6 is not your camera is it? 
I have a new 135 for my M and the results I get from it would discourage
me from bringing one of my Nikons with my 200 Nikkor along. 
That lens sits on the shelf with most of my Nikon gear and tries not to
collect dust. 
I feel this new 135 APO redefines what can be done with a Leica M. 
But it cost a chunk of change. 
Your not going to get it if you have been "semi been looking for a 135". 
You might have to stop by the bank first.
Then go to the camera store.
And loose some of your undying love for Nikon SLR.
Mark Rabiner