Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/10/04

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

Subject: [Leica] Re: New Zeiss Ikon
From: mail at (Karen Nakamura)
Date: Mon Oct 4 07:29:16 2004
References: <004f01c4aa1b$e6427350$>

>I was indeed thinking SP, Karen - and everyone else. The S3 was a
>stripped down SP - the kind of entry level camera Leica should have

BD : Err... OK then say what you mean and mean what you say. Sloppy 
thinking/writing doesn't behoove your argument.

BD said:
>  >Dream on, Mark. Feature for feature, capability for capability, M3 v
>  >S3, the S3 - as a body - would win hands down. But this is one on which

Even comparing the SP against the M3, the M3 has:

* Faster lens changing (the S/Contax bayonet is a pain)
* Availability of third party lenses
* Brighter finder / rangefinder
* Long optical  (69mm) and effective baselength (63.7mm)

The only advantage of the SP is the broader range of viewfinder 
frames possible.  Nothing that an accessory viewfinder couldn't fix.

There's a reason that Nikon dropped RF development after the SP (or 
SX) and went with SLRs. From the histories published in Japan, Nikon 
saw the writing on the wall: they could not compete with the M3.   So 
they went with the SLR which was a niche market, but had potential.


Karen Nakamura

Replies: Reply from bdcolen at (B. D. Colen) ([Leica] Re: New Zeiss Ikon)
In reply to: Message from bdcolen at (B. D. Colen) ([Leica] Re: New Zeiss Ikon)