Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/03/25

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] leica vs medium format
From: "Steve LeHuray" <>
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 13:25:11 -0500

> While I agree with you and everyone else who has sung the praises of the
> Rollei, I disagree when you dismiss it for "press work." In the 50s the
> Rollei was one of the most popular cameras for photojournalism. Once you
> really learn how to use it, and get comfortable with it, you can do
> almost anything with it that you can do with the standard lens -
> including sports and other action photography.

In addition to being a Leica nut I am also a car nut and love watching
'Legends of Motorsports' on Speedvision which mostly shows European car
races from the 1950's. The overwhelming camera to be seen used by the PJ's
of the day is a TLR. Nary a Leica anywhere.
> My first "job" in photography was as a 16-year-old unpaid photographer
> for a weekly paper in suburban Connecticut - and all I had to use that
> summer was a Rollei. And I did fine.

Ditto. When I started on a small up-state New York daily it was all Rollie
TLR's. The first time I heard the word Nikon was in 1963 when a freelancer
showed up with one. I never even heard of a Leica till the mid '70's (but
then I do not read the photo magazines--then or now).
> Sure, a Leica is easier for action, but then there are cameras that are
> more suited to sports photography than a Leica - M or R - but no one
> wants to hear about that on this list...;-)
> B. D.
How true.