Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/07/06
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
Ok. This is pure sophism. Leica cannot put a metal shutter into an M
without major retooling of the body. I'm sure that lack of money plays a
large role in the decision to leave things alone. M cameras are probably
only marginally profitable as they are.
And it doesn't run forever without maintenance. But electronic shutters (and
even competitors' metal-foil shutters - same idea) do. After searching to
the ends of the earth for a Leica III with a working shutter, I discovered
than Canon LTM rangefinders were (1) just as quiet as an M3; (2) ran more
smoothly without maintenance - in the case of my Canon P for 40 years in a
closet - with speeds still within tolerance; and (3) don't automatically
require maintenance. One thing I can say for newer motor-driven electronic
shutters is that they are (1) more accurate and (2) don't need scheduled
tune-ups. That means that they aren't money traps.
Finally, with regard to batteries, there is nothing exotic about lithium
batteries, which are easier to find than most mechanical shutter parts...
And there's not much to being able to operate without them - just in case you
go to somewhere really exotic - and those CR2s are just so damn heavy at 1/2
oz apiece.
>>>But that would be giving up one of the most important parts of an M
camera; the mechanical shutter that runs just about forever and doesn't
need batteries.
John Hicks
jbh@magicnet.net
- ----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
Return-Path: <.daemon@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Received: from rly-yg01.mx.aol.com (rly-yg01.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.1]) by
air-yg05.mail.aol.com (v75.18) with ESMTP; Thu, 06 Jul 2000 13:05:32 -0400
Received: from mejac.palo-alto.ca.us (mejac.palo-alto.ca.us [192.147.236.1])
by rly-yg01.mx.aol.com (v75.18) with ESMTP; Thu, 06 Jul 2000 13:05:11 2000
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
by mejac.palo-alto.ca.us (8.9.1/8.9.1) id KAA05878; Thu, 6 Jul 2000
10:02:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dfw-smtpout3.email.verio.net (dfw-smtpout3.email.verio.net
[129.250.36.43])
by mejac.palo-alto.ca.us (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA05868; Thu, 6 Jul
2000 10:02:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [129.250.38.62] (helo=dfw-mmp2.email.verio.net)
by dfw-smtpout3.email.verio.net with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #7)
id 13AF2n-0002tH-00
for leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us; Thu, 06 Jul 2000 17:02:33 +0000
Received: from [216.78.184.139] (helo=jhicks31)
by dfw-mmp2.email.verio.net with smtp (Exim 3.15 #4)
id 13AF2n-00063s-00
for leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us; Thu, 06 Jul 2000 17:02:33 +0000
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.20000706130237.007b3ab0@pop3.magicnet.net>
X-Sender: jbh@pop3.magicnet.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (32)
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 13:02:37 -0400
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
From: John Hicks <.jbh@magicnet.net>
Subject: Re: [Leica] Aperture Priority M6+Leica Medium Format
In-Reply-To: <.B5898C6C.AE82%chrislee@mac.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
>>