Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/09/27
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]This is true, but Nikon was well known to PJs LONG before Ehrenreich started enticing the pros away from Leica......hehehe.... Look at it objectively, without your Leica religion.....if it were 1957, would you take an M3DS with a goggled Summaron?....or a Nikon SP with a 35 1.8 Nikkor?.....a "hektor" or a 105 2.5, perhaps the best all around lens EVER?.....what about the SP body?????...Leica didn't successfully motorize their RF cameras till the M4-2, if you can call that piece of crap a motor......(yeah, I had 2 of 'em)... BTW, the 1974 Toyotas were EVERY bit as good as I remember..... I'm a pro-American, buy American, (or German, or Canadian) anti-eastern- my-folks-didn't-fight-in-the-pacific-for-nuthin'...REDNECK.... who happens to drive a Nissan or a Toyota, and uses Nikons..... CUZ THEY WORK>>>>>>>> It wasn't the Japanese (they did other stuff)...and it wasn't Ehrenreich.....the stuff was simply better...AT THAT TIME... EVERYBODY's building garbage today, it's just that Leica M is the best JUNK on the market..... I'd like to see a "stripdown" report (A LA Norman Goldberg-l970s) on the Bessa R.....I fully believe it to be a piece of crap, but I'd LOVE to be proven wrong....so Leica might get another taste of RF competition.....even tho they didn't learn a damn thing in the late 50s/60s..... Walt On Tue, 26 Sep 2000 Krechtz@aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 9/26/00 6:09:15 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > howard.390@osu.edu writes: > > << Which, I assume, is a contributing factor to why Nikon became so popular > with photojournalists around that era. > >> > > That - and the fact that Nikon (actually Ehrenreich, the US distributor, if > memory serves) was giving them the bodies. > > Joe Sobel >