RE: [Leica] A Red Dot story

["Carleton, Sam" <Sam.Carleton@FMR.COM>]

As not to upset any luggers, the full posting is below, this is what I am
focusing on:

- -:> The other down side with these guys wanting all
- -:> the twitchy things is, they probably couldn't
- -:> afford a Leica if Leica installed them! The camera
- -:> cost more than enough as it is and everytime
- -:> something is added the price goes up, not by a
- -:> dollar or two, but by a whole bunch of dollars.
- -:> And what follows?

I have been trying to figure out why folks had such a problem with adding
something like a higher flash sync to the M6. I understand that they don't
feel the need for it because they don't use a flash, but then there are a
lot of features on my F5 that I don't use, but I don't mind if the camera
has the features.  Why should I care if the camera has functionality that I
don't use?  The F5 does for me what I want it to, thus I use it and love.  I
don't moan and groan because it does MORE then I need it to. 

I think I have it now why folks are moaning and growing about making the M6
a better, more modern camera.  As Ted stated, he would not be able to afford
the new M6, along with the others moaning and groaning.

Giving the M6 a faster flash sync would not make it require batteries, would
not give it any auto anything. I do believe a higher flash sync would also
result in a higher top shutter speed.  In all respects the camera would be
the exact same as what you non flash photographers are using today, with the
exception of the cost, it might go up a few hundred.

If Leica where to upgrade the flash sync, I will be the first one on the
waiting list for it.  I CAN AFFORD a Leica.

Sam

	-----Original Message-----
	From:	Ted Grant 
	Sent:	Thursday, May 31, 2001 10:41 PM
	To:	leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
	Subject:	Re: [Leica] A Red Dot story

	Guy Bennett wrote:
	>>For example, I personally don't give a flaming fig what the speed
sync of
	the M6 is since
	I never use flash. A faster sync speed is immaterial to me. The same
is true
	of AE, AF, and other electronic "improvements" - don't want 'em,
don't need
	'em; that's why I chose to use an M camera.
	>
	> Now, the ability to use a 24 or 21 lens w/out an external
viewfinder (i.e.
	> with internal brightlines), *that* would be an improvement for
me.<<<<

	Hi Guy,
	Yep! You and me buddy, all the wish lists for changes to an M camera
are
	completely meaning less for me also, I never use flash with them as
it's
	much easier to shoot with the light that turns one on with
motivation.

	And yes there are times when a shoot I'm doing requires flash, on
the "flash
	camera... the R8!"
	Then it's used 99% of the time bounced off the ceiling or some other
light
	surface.

	As far as I'm concerned the M6 can be left as it is, or if Leica
were to
	make every little nuance of  "extras" that's fine, but just make
sure they
	keep making the time tested and proven M6 for those who truly make
them work
	quickly and quietly.

	The other down side with these guys wanting all the twitchy things
is, they
	probably couldn't afford a Leica if Leica installed them! The camera
cost
	more than enough as it is and everytime something is added the price
goes
	up, not by a dollar or two, but by a whole bunch of dollars. And
what
	follows?

	The whining and complaining about the price increase of the product!
So guys
	you can't have it both ways!  Just be happy campers take lots of
pictures
	un-encumbered by "thingies" and you'll be better photographer's for
it.
	In my humblest of opinion. ;-)
	ted

	Ted Grant Photography Limited
	www.islandnet.com/~tedgrant