Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/10/20
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]From: Pete Su <psu@esgear.com> Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 1999 13:56 Subject: Re: [Leica] More nattering from Rorschach > Intelligent use of plastics has allowed cameras to have > fast built in motor drives and other features while not > paying much more in terms of size and weight. Plastics save weight, not size. Indeed, sometimes plastic parts have to be bigger in order to provide the same strength as a small metal part. At the same time, however, plastics are better suited for some purposes. Some plastics are almost impossible to damage or dent, such as Lexan (tm). > Consider that the Canon Rebel 2000 actually with a lens > actually weighs less than a leica M body, and is smaller. Smaller than an M6? I can hide my M6 with the Summicron 35 in the palm of my hand (and sometimes I do!). How does a SLR get smaller than that? (THe Rebel _is_ an SLR, isn't it?) > I suppose it is certainly less jewel like and arguably > less robust, but very few people (i.e. the pros) use their > cameras hard enough that it would really matter. It's not that I'm very hard on my cameras, it's just that it makes me warm and fuzzy to know that I can be. If a Leica can serve a professional under dire conditions for twenty years, it should last for 100 years for someone like me. I'm willing to pay for quality. It worries me that quality is becoming so hard to find. -- Anthony