Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/05/05

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

Subject: [Leica] Ten years behind? I think not.
From: Jim at hemenway.com (Jim Hemenway)
Date: Wed May 5 12:19:21 2004
References: <000101c432c4$7e51ded0$6401a8c0@CCA4A5EF37E11E>

Hi BD and Ted:

I take your collective points and agree that by providing autofocus on 
the R cameras, that Leica probably would have sold far more SLRs.

However that?s less important to me than the resulting photographs.

I already know how to focus, from my 11x14 to my 6008i to my R8. I used 
to think that it was necessary for wide angle until Ted told us how to 
focus those lenses. Autofocus isn?t as important to me as it is to PJs 
and those who need to shoot sports and other quickly moving subjects.

An integrated motor rather than the ?remember to clean the gold contacts 
every time you attach it? would have been more desirable as well.

I bought the motor only to be able to auto bracket, but after becoming 
more confident with the R8 metering, I don't need auto bracketing very much.

OT: Same with my Rollei 6008i, I hardly ever need to bracket with it 
because the metering is so accurate. A little less so with the 30mm 
fisheye, but then again I?m still getting used to that lens.

Would I have bought Leica-R glass if it had been available to fit my F5? 
  I don't know because believe it or not, after handling an R8 for the 
first time, I didn't want to go back to Nikon, I like both the looks and 
feel of the R8 in my hands... being a southpaw may have something to do 
with it since I find it very easy to maintain focus on the R8 with that 
hand.

Butt ugly?  Oh BD, you're so cruel!  Are you certain that you're not a 
closet Republican?  :-)

I think the R8 is an example of great modern industrial design... but 
?One man's meat is another?s poison??

Unless used only on manual by me, most transparencies came out slightly 
overexposed with my Nikon cameras.  Two Nikon FA units and then the F5. 
  Too washed out skies!!!  Only the mere EM gave me consistently well 
exposed slides.

Flash... I really can?t speak to that because I don?t require it much, 
but I have an old Nikon SB-E flash which I?ve occasionally used and with 
success on the R8.

For me it?s the quality of the photographs that Leica lenses produce 
that?s most important.  That glass is ten+ years ahead of the others.

Jim




B. D. Colen wrote:

> BUT...And I am NOT looking for a fight with the R crowd...by modern SLR
> standards, those same R8s with what you say is great metering and that
> great Leica glass, are definitely at least a decade behind the curve in
> terms of features. R8 aficionados may not want those features, but they
> are a given in the rest of the photo world, and that - and pricing -
> severely limits the R market.
> 
> BTW - to what Nikon are you comparing the R8's metering?
> 
> B. D.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org
> [mailto:lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of
> Jim Hemenway
> Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 12:07 PM
> To: Leica Users Group
> Subject: [Leica] Ten years behind? I think not.
> 
> 
> Hi Ted:
> 
>  >>> Leica were ten years behind all other SLR manufactures and to date 
> haven't caught up <<<
> 
> Together with Leica-R lenses, both of my R8s, (with the best metering 
> this side of Rollei 6008) are ten years ahead of the rest in terms of 
> the quality photographs they produce.  My Nikons have been gathering 
> dust for four years.
> 
> Jim
> 
> 
> Ted Grant wrote:
> 
> 
>>B. D. said:
>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>The bottom line is that most PEOPLE don't know that Leica ever 
>>>>>>existed,
>>>
>>>or exists. Since at least the 1970s Leica has been a boutique brand in
> 
> 
>>>a WalMart world.....<<<
>>
>>
>>Hi B. D.,
>>
>>I don't think you could say it any plainer! And it's been going down 
>>hill ever since, quite possibly to oblivion as we know it today.
>>
>>Yep at one time in the photo world "it was THE camera!" Period, no 
>>question. Unfortunately the company did not evolve with an evolving 
>>world and is now struggling to save the life boats, let alone the ship
> 
> 
>>that sank some years ago.
>>
>>If you do not evolve with world changes, time and cameras do not stand
> 
> 
>>still for no man nor woman! No matter how good, excellent or wonderful
> 
> 
>>the product is, the world demands drive the wheels that allow it 
>>survive.
>>
>>Leica were ten years behind all other SLR manufactures and to date 
>>haven't caught up, let alone in the digital manufacturing of a digital
> 
> 
>>camera. Yep the digi back is coming? So are twelve blue moons in the 
>>southern sky! If it works as they claim that's great, yes some folks 
>>will buy it, but at what cost? It isn't like buying an amazing piece 
>>of Leica created glass.
>>
>>Their constant wail about a digital "M" style camera being impossible 
>>was all of a sudden turned around as soon as another manufacturer came
> 
> 
>>up with a similar machine. Where they were ten years behind in SLR 
>>production it would appear they're worse off in the digital world. 
>>Unfortunately.
>>
>>However, I feel there'll always be those of us who'll use film even 
>>along with digital. And our choice for film camera will always be a 
>>Leica. Certainly mine will be...... no matter what kind of digital I 
>>have in the other hand!
>>
>>ted



Replies: Reply from henningw at archiphoto.com (Henning Wulff) ([Leica] Ten years behind? I think not.)
Reply from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] Ten years behind? I think not.)
In reply to: Message from bdcolen at earthlink.net (B. D. Colen) ([Leica] Ten years behind? I think not.)