[Leica] Re: [leica] Schwallberg (was dr. strangelens and...._]

[ralph fuerbringer <rof@mac.com>]

ed meyers wrote: bob told leitz in 1980 to get out of the camera business.
some are  saying he was a nut for that statement.  i've already proved that
as a perfectionist he preferred a rigid to a collapsible lens. now lets
look at the leitz condition in 1980. their premier product was a flumoxed
version of the superb minolta xdll with cds cell instead of
silicon/gallium,etc. the m? the superlative m4 had one of its critical
features removed to save a buck--the self-timer, invaluable for
slow speed shooting. build quality of the m? the recent posts indicate it
even now is  below the m4. not having a timetable handy, i dont know
when they first  decided to flumox my pristine m2 finder with double frame
lines, again saving a few bucks. with new frame lines of they would have
sold  more lenses, adapters, to those who dont like clutter in the
viewfinder. i'd just love to hear bob on the sygma--it coulda been a
contender-zoom . love to hear him comment on the r8.i found it
it unpleasantly plump when first seeing it under ideal conditions
in a leica ad. i think he would have agreed with this recent post : "when i
first picked the8 up it felt like a pregnant brick."  bob didnt mince words
ever. his advice to leitz to get
out the camera busines where it was loosing its shirt--probably included
what money-makers to concentrate.possibly microscopes and who knows what
else
he suggested. besides a technician he was a very sharp business reporter and
evaluator. if alive today his advice to leitz would be on the money just as
in 1980 , then he felt correctly that their camera technology was years
behind the times and could be fatal to the entire company. here's to Bob:he
could be discussing w/gododsy and mannes how kodak put dugal into bankrupsy
w/green 120 kodachrome.
 ralph
 


immediately commented my first on a professional ad possibly making it
better looking than it actually is-a pregnant brick.