Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/04/19

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

Subject: RE: [Leica] Re: Hexar RF (was ODDS and ends)
From: Paul Chefurka <Paul_Chefurka@pmc-sierra.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 12:54:50 -0700

Odd - I was able to purchase a body only here in Canada, at 2/3 the price of an M6.  I wonder if Konica have different sales policies in different markets?

About your other points - they show that no camera will ever be all things to all people.  I love the HRF exactly as it is, and the only thing I'd wish for is that the viewfinder was a bit brighter.  I'm not saying it's the chimerical "perfect camera", just that it seems to be exactly what a lot of people were asking for (and castigating Leica for not producing) a couple fo years ago.  So if there are enough people like me out there, Konica will recoup there investment.  I feel very fortunate - I got my ideal "adjunct camera".  I hope someone makes yours soon.

Paul

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Nemeth [mailto:azn@nemeng.com]
> Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 3:08 PM
> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: [Leica] Re: Hexar RF (was ODDS and ends)
> 
> 
> Guy Bennett <gbennett@lainet.com> wrote:
> 
> >Not to generalize based on only two examples (but of course 
> that's exactly
> >what I'm going to do), but this would suggest that 
> real-world demand for an
> >electronic Leica-like RF was not as strong as some 
> (including many here on
> >this list) believed.
> 
> I don't think so.
> 
> The main market for this camera would have been as a motorised
> AE adjunct to the M6.  For this to work, the camera would have
> to be sold body only for @ $US 1000 (or less).
> 
> They got the price wrong (same price as a M6-TTL in Australia)
> and insisting you also buy a flash & 50mm as a 'kit' doesn't
> help either.