Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/07/02
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I have to agree that the newer SLR cameras with built in motor drives capable of 3 fps don't seem to exhibit as much "traumatic" mirror slap as the older SLRs. My older Nikons did tend to show what appeared like slight double images when I tried hand holding them at 1/15. JLS At 08:22 PM 7/2/2002 -0400, you wrote: >I am here because I own and use a Leica camera. The one outstanding asset >of Leica cameras is that they are the quietest interchangeable lens camera >I know. All the rest is myth. It is myth to believe that modern SLRs have >mirror "slap" that causes them to be less able to be used at slow shutter >speeds. MY Canon EOS 3, Minolta 5, Minolta XG-M, Contax 137 MD, and the >half dozen other SLRs I use DO NO EXHIBIT MIRROR "SLAP". In fact, the >camera that I am able to hand-hold at the slowest speed is the >hard-shooting Nikon FA with motor drive. I can squeeze out 1/4 second with >that camera and have a good ratio of usable shots. It has everything to do >with the weight and ergonomics of the camera, and nothing to do with >mirror slap. > >I question the awe some have expressed at the technological wizardry of >the M7's metering system--a metering system that is at best mid-range >consumer in the SLR world. > >Allan > > >Darrell Jennings wrote: >>OK I'll ask...then why are you here? >> >>If you don't like Leicas, don't use one...if you do >>like Leicas, then you already know the answer. That's >>like cousin Elda Mae telling me she can get great >>pictures with "one a'them thoaway camrs"...and you >>know what, for her she is right. If you can't see the >>difference any extra you spend is throwing away money. >> >> >>I use a Leica because it is light, quiet, and has >>great lenses...a reasonable compromise to hauling a >>bunch of medium format stuff around. I gave up on 35mm >>for over 25 years and ONLY came back to it because of >>these three reasons. >> >>--- Allan Wafkowski <allan@sohogurus.net> wrote: >>>The Leica myth. >>> >>>Anyone here could, for $240, buy a Minolta Maxxum 5 >>>or Canon Rebel 2000 >>>and have a more capable camera than the $2500 M7. >>>Both run circles >>>around the M7's antiquated exposure system. Gone too >>>is the lame excuse, >>>"I must have a fully mechanical camera for those >>>times when I go brain >>>dead and forget the batteries." >>> >>>The Leica myth is running out of excuses as the M >>>series becomes a >>>fairly modern camera. Soon the excuses will become >>>so thin, "It's the >>>only camera that has a red dot I can cover up", will >>>be the answer of >>>choice when asked why one paid $2000 more and got >>>less. >>> >>>Allan >>> >>> >>>Simon Lamb wrote: >>>>What I don't quite understand is, if Ted, Tina and >>>others find the AE of >>>>such benefit to get many more perfectly exposed >>>images, why didn't >>>>they a >>>>long time ago purchase one of the competitors >>>(that accept M lenses) >>>>that >>>>have the M7 features and much more? >>>> >>>>This is a genuine questions and hopefully Ted, >>>Tina or someone else >>>>might >>>>answer. > >-- >To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html