Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/12/15
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]sometime around 12/15/99 4:19 AM, Gaifana@aol.com at Gaifana@aol.com was heard to write: > As I pointed out earlier, the much earlier rangefinder base is the same. The > limiting factor is your ability to focus the camera, and that's the only > place the shorter effective base length comes into play. And by what reasoning is this "only?" What do you mean by much earlier? IIIF? The M6 has a better viewfinder for focusing because the magnification is higher. Magnification and rangefinder base determine accuracy of focusing. And The M6 .72 can focus a 75 Summilux and 90 Summicron just fine. And if you think there is no size/weight advantage to those lenses and an M6, then you haven't used them, and the equivalent in SLRs. There is a major difference in bulk and weight. Especially bulk. Just becuase it doesn't turn your crank doesn't mean they aren't still an advantage. And if you think the only lenses 80% of Leica users buy is the 35 f/2 and 50 f/2, well you don't know a large component of Leica users - professionals. Let along amateurs who use 28s, 21s and increasing numbers using 24s. Let alone 90s. If what you say is true, Leica would have stop selling the longer lenses a long time ago. Think outside the box. - -- Eric Welch Carlsbad, CA http://www.neteze.com/ewelch Zen master to hotdog vendor. "Make me one with everything."