Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/06/02
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]The SL is like a tand in the same way as an M3. My old Nikon F was reliable and CLUNKY! The SL is reliable and elegant as well. It operates smoothly like an M camera. Ken Wilcox At 3:57 +0000 6/2/0, a fine scholar, William Gower wrote: > >Regarding the SL: > >I've been pondering how to jump into Leica R for a while now. The used >market is the most cost-effective method, however, the main thing >discouraging me is the electronic shutters on the R series. And R3 and R4's >are getting to the 20 year old mark now. > >While I agree that Leica's are wonderfully overbuilt cameras, an electronic >shutter is still an electronic shutter, and eventually, they WILL die, parts >become unavailable, etc. Ok, sure ANY shutter will eventually fail, but most >likely someone, SOMEWHERE will be able to fix our mechanical shutters. Even >if they have to make the parts by hand. > >...but the SL and SL2 suddenly appeals to my inherent love of mechanical >cameras. > >How "like a tank" is it ? My Nikon F and (even more so) my F2 (both with >standard non-metering prisms) are the most "tank like" cameras I've ever >hauled around. Wonderfully durable hand-built cameras, titanium shutters and >mirror assemblies, black enamel finish - love them or not, to disregard the >F and F2's legendary durability would be simply ignorant. > >Is the SL even more so ? I'd be curious to hear people's opinions who have >extensively used both. > > >Regards > > >William - ---- Ken Wilcox Carolyn's Personal Touch Portraits preferred---> <wilcox@tir.com> <kwilcox@gfn.org>