Re: [Leica] Leica and a new M?

[Bill Carson <poppie@fidalgo.net>]

Nobody asked for it, but here is my opinion re the field of 35mm SLR cameras:
In spades, NIKON wrote the book and still leads in every respect; mechanics,
electronics and optics and durable quality of all!.  Say what you will about the
Leitz glass but they have nothing even remotely comparable to the 20~35-2.8D,
the 35~70-2.8D and the 80~200-2.8D.  These three lenses will take care of 99.99%
of most photographer's needs and, aside from the fact that the 80~200 is big and
heavy, make a wonderful 'kit' for just about any type of photography.  And,
Nikon stuff is tough; it'll take the jarring, jolting, knocks and shock as well
as any and better than most.  Camera, optics and accessories all go together
beautifully plus the Nikon marque offers lenses up to 2,000mm and down to 8mm --
along with accessories that fill just about every photographer's conceivable
need.  A couple of thoughts Re the M-6: Their electronic exposure design is a
disaster with the Switch-Off via Shutter Speed Control and the matching of
arrows powered by a battery that is both expensive and short lived.  Adjustment
of exposure setting via Aperture Ring on the lenses is not good design because
there's  1) a different 'feel' for each lens and 2) is difficult at best with
several of their lenses (#11831 50mm ElmarM).  The camera and current M lenses
are absolutely  beautiful sweat hearts tho!
I'll be signing off  the LUG for about a month to cruise from Athens to
Singapore but I'll have the M-6 and Nikon gear + 35 rolls of Tri-X with me for
pix.  Enjoyed spectating for awhile and will listen in later. Wiedersehen.  Bill
Carson KE7GM

> > Bob! don't you think the R8 is a very unusual approach in
> > design, size and
> > function for an SLR in today's market.
> > I think it is just as unusual of a choice as the M and
> > certainly stands out
> > among the Nikons and Canons. The reason starting with a
> > fondness for focusing
> > yourself that excludes AF at all:
> > THE GLASS
> > Mark Rabiner
>
> Mark - Not to start a micturation match, but this is where we get to the
> issue of emotion versus hard reality. The only advantage the R8 possibly has
> over, say, the Nikon F3, is the glass. And that advantage is might slim, and
> limited to the lenses in Leica's limited offerings.
>
> The M cameras are unique, because they are the only interchangable lens
> mechanical rangefinder cameras left in the world. They also offer a unique
> level of quality, quiet, etc. If a photographer wants to work with a manual
> rangefinder, the M is it. And then there's the glass...Although the new
> Japanese offerings, at 1/4 to 1/3 the price of the Leica glass, at a quality
> level that will probably satisfy the great majority of potential buyers, is
> going to create some competition - which is healthy, of course.
>
> But when it comes to the reflex line...Yes, the R8 design is "unique," or at
> least strange. I personally don't like it, and I personally think the camera
> feels shoddy for the price. (But that's just my opinion and all it means is
> that I wouldn't buy one.) The R6.2 is a nice, compact mechanical SLR, but,
> again, so is the F3. So, for that matter, are the Olympus OM3 and 4.
>
> If Leica is going to really compete in the overcrowded reflex field, the
> company is going to have to come up with a product that either offers
> something the competition doesn't, in terms of features - not in terms of
> the last .5% in the glass - or it's going to have to produce something that
> is far and away from the competition in terms of quality....
>
> But everything above is just my usual less than humble opinion.
>
> B. D.
> http://www.a-day-in-our-life.com