Re: [Leica] Vintage M observations

[ralph fuerbringer <rof@mac.com>]

either you didnt read my original post on this subject 7/4 9.47 or you have
a reading disorder: i twice mentioned my 2 m2s and my preference for them or
m4s over subsequent "improvements" such as no self-timer and fudging the
single frame lines messed up. as for reflex i use the canon a2e:no other
system has 3 tilt&shift lenses, automatic depth of field between near and
far, or just from nose to ear for marvelous background suppression, image
stabilization, super spot reading at auto focus spot etc.  the message to
which i was replying in the post  you refer to stated what is obvious:  the
xd 11, the basis for the r4, is historically and practically far superior.
Leica  abandoned the unlimited promise of the sl  for backward tinkering on
obsolete foreign bodies.
 

> From: Dennis Painter <dpainter@bigfoot.com>
> Reply-To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2000 23:03:13 -0700
> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: Re: [Leica] Vintage M observations
> 
> ralph,
> 
> clearly (to ME) you prefer those Minoltas over the R3 & R4.
> 
> But I am curious, just what Leica do you USE? (there might be some
> insight here)
> 
> Dennis
> 
> 
> ralph fuerbringer wrote:
>> 
>> sorry but i have no  additional details on the minolta winders. but
>> historically the minolta xd 11 has it all over the r4 with its retrograde
>> exposure sysstem.  the xd 11 was a splendid camera, the  first  programmed
>> slr, employing a then state of the art silicon cell.
>> the copycat r4 has cds cell alresady obsolete(much less sensistive & has
>> to be conditioned to read correctly much of the time). hope this is of
>> help.rof
>> 
>>> From: Bmceowen@aol.com
>>> Reply-To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
>>> Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2000 23:34:11 EDT
>>> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
>>> Subject: Re: [Leica] Vintage M observations
>>> 
>>> 
>>> In a message dated 7/4/00 6:46:43 PM, rof@mac.com writes:
>>> 
>>> << there is also the incredible fact that the r3 and
>>> r4 were actually discontinued
>>> minolta bodies --they even accept the cheap minolta winders. >>
>>> 
>>> I knew that the R3 was an XE-7 and the R4 was an MD-11 but I did not know
>>> they took the Minolta winder. Is this true? Surely this could only apply to
>>> the R4 as the XE-7 did not accept a winder as I recall . . . BTW, one of the
>>> few reasons I have considered buying an R4 or R5 is that I really liked the
>>> MD-11. I can think of few things nicer than that body with Leica glass . . .
>>> 
>>> Bob (curious about the R world) McEowen