Re: [Leica]Konica Hexar...It ain't no Leica..

[Thomas Kachadurian <tom@kachadurian.com>]

Dante:

I posted some positive comments about the Hexar RF about 10 days ago. 
I got a few positive responses via private email, but NO ONE even 
mentioned it on the list.

The problem is too many of the leica "users" on this list aren't 
users at all, but people who love their cameras for what they 
represent.

Rather than looking at the Hexar as another way to use their lenses, 
they look at it as a threat.

But over time the camera will speak for itself. It won't be long 
before 1/3 of the people on this list have Hexar RFs in their bags.

Tom

>You're right. It's not an M6. The finish and materials are nicer than a black
>chrome M6. The styling is cleaner. The controls are better. The on/off switch
>is better. The loading is easier, with one hand. You can see the 28mm frames.
>You can shoot wide-open with high-speed film. The shutter is stepless and
>quartz-timed. You can synch at twice the speed and shoot at twice the speed.
>The metering pattern is more usable. No, it's not better.
>
>>>>Sadly the camera looks a lot better on the net than it does in your hands.
>
>The squared frame makes is look like a plank of wood, and it feels a bit
>like one in your hands.
>
>If it's a plank of wood, then planks of wood have much better natural grip
>surfaces than do the M6. I think that it's pretty tough to hold onto
>something as small as the right end of an M6 - they're not designed for
>bigger hands.
>
>>>>The lens mounted in a very un-Leica way...Sticky!  It felt like I was
>jamming a chisel into a block of wood..
>
>Zzzzz. I have one in front of me, and it's pretty hard to duplicate your
>negative experience with this. And it's irrelevant to any performance
>measure.
>
>>>>The viewfinder was bright and clear, with only a hint of pincussion
>distortion of the 28mm frames.  The rangefinder was a little antsy.  It may
>be the shorter base line, but it was easy to overshoot your target of focus.
>  The biggest flaw with the finder to me was the lack of contrast in the
>focusing patch. Focusing an M6 is really easier in low contrast situations.
>
>This is a nice rationalization, but the M6 patch is neither as bright nor as
>flare resistant. I have tried for about a week to flare out the RF on the
>Hexar, and it so far hasn't worked. When I compared it to an M6 directly, the
>M6 came out quite poorly in the flare department. There is nothing lacking
>about the RF, and if you can see, you can focus.
>
>>>>My biggest gripe is with the shutter speed dial placement. It is a thumb
>wheel and it is very difficult to work the dial while keeping your index
>finger on the shutter button.  Clearly Konica expects users to keep this
>thing in Aperture Priority most of the time.  The meter is a bit hard to get
>used to, with shutter speed numbers dancing up and down on the left side of
>the veiwfinder.
>
>Three responses to that:
>(1) Shutter speed numbers dancing in the margin shouldn't be hard to get used
>to for anyone who has bought a camera in the past twenty years. And if you
>compare that to an M6, I'd rather have numbers in the margin, which I can
>ignore, rather than 3 LEDs right in my field of vision. In addition, since
>you know what speed the shutter is at, you can tell just how low it is going.
>
>(2) The shutter speed wheel is fine and so is the EV comp dial. In fact, the
>key advantage of the placement of the controls is that you can switch the
>camera on and off by feel, which is not possible with the M6TTL.
>
>(3) And if you have AE with exposure lock and a thumbwheel for compensation,
>why does it matter if you never take it out of AE? If you're going to pull
>out a handheld meter, it is easy enough to set the shutter speed by hand.
>
>The shutter and motor were about as quiet as the Contax G's, and
>the quality of materials was similar but without the beautiful shape and
>color.
>
>The G2's color is a liability. And it's materials simply aren't as nice. And,
>frankly, it's pretty ugly compared to the Hexar.
>
>>>>I know this sounds pretty negative, but I really expected more considering
>the hype and the price of this camera (1950.00 with 50mm F2).  The handling
>really leaves something to be desired, especially considering the fact that
>all they had to do was match a camera that has been on the market since the
>50's.
>
>I would expect, for $2200, more than a camera body made in the 1950s. If it's
>not a match, I would have to ask you where the waiting list for M6s is.
>
>If you have bigger hands, the handling is superior to the M6, which I suspect
>was a continuation of the design of the M3, which in turn is a lot like the
>screwmounts, which are TOO DAMN SMALL TO HOLD.
>
>>>>The excitment over this fairly average camera really points out the void
>in
>the market for an Aperture Priority M...Leica, are you listening?  Contax
>should also be looking at this market.  I'll wager that a manual focus G
>would out-sell the auto be a large margin..
>
>Which is why Contax is making it? Leica is probably not listening.
>
>Cheers
>Dante

Thomas Kachadurian
- -------------------
www.kachadurian.com