Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/03/15
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Here's my opinion of the M-5 after owning one for about two years. Compared to the earlier M-series, the M-5 was an oversize, clumsy effort to field a Leica with a built-in lightmeter. The silly moveable lightmeter arm that smacked the back of the two wide angle lenses was always a nuisance. After years of living with the M-3's and M-4's, the M-5 was like getting out of an elegant 911 Porsche and into a Volkswagen "BEAST." Therefore, I am in 100% agreement with B.D.'s assessment of the M-5. If the "THING" had not been such a clumsy design, and had been as well received as the earlier M series, it would still be marketed. There were just not enough Leica fans that wanted a massive 35mm camera that hung from one end like a Kodak. Don R. - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Leo Hufener" <ljhuf@tiscali.nl> To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2003 5:38 AM Subject: Re: [Leica] The truth about the Leica M5 > Please look in your ,mirror to see un ugly pig and stop that irrational > snobby nonsense > about the perfect M5. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Martin Howard" <mvhoward@mac.com> > To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> > Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2003 2:56 AM > Subject: [Leica] The truth about the Leica M5 > > > > B.D. Colen wrote: > > > > > What Leitz was unhappy with was the reactionary > > > Leica buyers who didn't know what to make of the M5. Yes, it's bigger > > > than the M4 was - but not by very much. The real curse of the M5 was > > > that it had an internal meter - a very good one as a matter of fact - > > > and the all mechanical Leica aficionados just weren't ready for the > > > built-in meter at that point, nor were they ready for a "bigger" > > > camera. > > > > You're missing the point, just as Leica did at the time. Leica > > rangefinders are not rational choices. They are emotional choices. > > The Leica M5 was, is, and always will be, an ugly pig, an aethetical > > abomination. This is even more apparent because of the exquisite > > beauty of the lines of the old LTM cameras and their updated cousins in > > the M2, M3, and M4. I don't care how damn good the M5 is as a camera, > > how great the meter is, or how insignificant the size increase is. The > > fact remains: it's fugging uckly. > > > > It's as though Porsche had decided to build a five-door estate version > > of the 911. > > > > These days, of course, Leica has got the point almost too well: they no > > longer make cameras, only fashion accessories. Take a look at Stephen > > Gandy's site at the list of "special edition" M6s. QED. > > > > (Then, of course, we have the Cayenne. Let's not mention that any > > more.) > > > > M. > > > > -- > > 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 > - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html