Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/09/24
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Jonathan, I agree with every counter view you have, except #1. When Anthony refers to "Leaf Shutter", he's referring to an actual leaf shutter, like those in a Rolleiflex, Hasselblad, etc., that allows for flash synch at all shutter speeds & is very quite, not the F-Stop leaves. I'm afraid that proposition would require a lot of work to make it fly with the M6. It would have to be a behind lens shutter, unless you were going to introduce a whole new line of Leaf-M lenses. Behind lens shutters were tried in the 50's & 60's on several system 35 slrs. Can you name any still around today? The Hasselblad "C" series is actually designed after the Contaflex series that Zeiss Ikon produced. A leaf shuttered lens would be great as far as giving a higher sync speed, but the leaf shutters physical size does not allow for lenses much faster than F2.0 (something many on this list would NOT stand for). Faster lenses are possible, just look at the Rollei MF lenses today, but the prices would cause your head to spin. If someone's is buying a rangefinder (for any format) for fast flash sync times, they need to be buying the Mamaya 7. For the amount of flash work I use mine for (not much) 1/50 works for me. - -----Original Message----- From: anthony [mailto:anthony@atkielski.com] Sent: Friday, September 24, 1999 11:44 AM To: leica-users Subject: Re: [Leica] What I'd like to see. From: Lee, Jonathan <Jonathan.Lee@hrcc.on.ca> Sent: Friday, September 24, 1999 17:13 Subject: [Leica] What I'd like to see. > 1. A leaf shuttered Leica. Aren't leaf shutters inside the lens assembly? > So, let's make and an M6 "lite" to sell side by > side with the regualr M6: Take and M6, keep soemthings > the same: shutter, rangefinder. Remake everything else > in aluminum and plastic with the idea of cutting the > weight of the body in half. Who would buy it? One great selling point of the M6 is quality construction and durability. Take that away, and what's left? Being able to mount M lenses is not a selling point, because anyone who can afford M lenses can afford an M6 body, too. I really don't like the idea of making any "bargain" Leicas. There are plenty of bargain brands already; we don't need one more. > Yes it will be less durable,but the point of this camera > is weight. My M6 with its tiny Summicron lens is so light that I tend to forget that I'm carrying. Just how light does a camera have to be? > 3. Market a series of modern designed collapsible lenses > of low aperature, good (not exceptional) optics and decent > construction. But lens design is not something one undertakes lightly. Where would the market be for this? Why reinvent lenses that already exist in almost the same form? > Again lightness and compactness are the primary factors here. But the M6 is already light and compact. Making it more so wouldn't change much, since there isn't really anything else that is lighter and more compact as it is. > Say a 35/f2.8, 50/2.8, 90/4.0. The body and lenses should > total to less than 2.5 lbs. You don't want to use glass elements in the lenses? -- Anthony