Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/11/08

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: Why a 35mm lens? - Now with Contax overtones
From: Simon Stevens <simon@camera-craftsman.com>
Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2000 07:53:35 -0500

>All I can tell you is that i am running right down the wire 242 against
242 as
>to a Contax RTSIII or a Leica R8.
mark rabiner

Dear Mark,

I spent months agonizing over whether to get a Contax. The one I really
wanted was an RTS II. It's just a gorgeous body and although I have
never owned one I have been in love with the thing since I used to sell
them in the Eighties. But Leica also beckoned which is why it was such a
difficult decision. In the end I joined the Contax list and lurked &
that's where I started finding out about the level of product support
Kyrocera provides. It turned out that parts for the RTS II I wanted had
already been cut off. I'm sure that across the industry discontinuing
parts after a camera has been obsolete for ten years is fine, but to me
it isn't OK with a camera of that quality. Put simply, I think that
Contaxes are of Leica quality, and if they want to be considered in the
same breath the support should be similar. Ten years is just too quick -
after all the car I drive is fifteen years old and I can get parts for
that, so why should a professional-level camera be any different? And we
know that Leica supports cameras a whole lot older than that.

Given that the N1 system is coming out, I would be worried that the
whole MF line is going to end up like Olympus OM - an orphan. After that
happens and the price of MF Contax gear plummets on the used market as a
result I may still get one. But in the mean time I'm loving my new M6
TTL, which is a camera I know I can keep and not be forced to junk
because of someone's planned obsolescence.

(And my new 35mm f2 asph!)

Simon Stevens