Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/10/12
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]A Leica M cost the same as other top > cameras, the Canon > and Nikon. > It just sticks is the craw of people to get a hand built low > tech camera without > the wiz bang of the High tech SLR's. > But in all other ways it is a remarkable analogy. An ongoing > dream for me. > Mark Rabiner Come on, Mark...I preface what follows by saying that I think the M is a fabulous camera...but...In reality the M is MUCH more expensive than the F5 or the EOS. For the price of an EOS or F5 one gets a solid, dependable, single-lens reflex camera that can be used as either an auto focus or a manual focus, with shutter speeds to, what, an 8000th of a second, built-in motor drives, an extremely wide array of excellent autofocus and manual lenses, terrifically versatile and accurate metering systems, and about a zillion accessories. For roughly the same money Leica gives you an extremely well built, dependable, rangefinder, manual focus camera with a cloth shutter with a top speed of 1000th of a second, a flash sync speed of a 60th, a choice of eight lens focal lengths and a couple of additional choices in lens speed... Is the M a terrific camera? Yes. Am I willing to pay what Leica charges? Obviously I am, as I now have two M6s. But am I getting the value for my money that someone purchasing an F5 is getting? I don't think so. The M6 is the much more expensive camera. B. D.