Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/12/27
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]You are quite right on the ergonomics issue. It is a pet rant of mine that ergonomics had only short lived popularity from adoption to rejection (perhaps for styling reasons). The ergonomics of Canon cameras is pitiful compared to Leica so I still much prefer to us a Leica, be it a R8 or M6, but I can't be bothered with film anymore, neither from a convenience or ultimate quality point of view, so the Leicas only come out to do slides. I use a monopod but it is not as ergonomic as the Leica shoulder stock and trombone focussing. The 400 and 560 f6.8s are really amazing aren't they. Frank On 27 Dec, 2004, at 00:11, Doug Herr wrote: > on 12/26/04 7:42 AM, Frank Dernie at Frank.Dernie@btinternet.com wrote: > >> Certainly the difference in resolution between a Leica lens and others >> will not be exploited most of the time without a tripod and high >> resolution film. > > This is an important point, yet I'm still struggling to find the right > support for the Canon FD 400/2.8 I bought from Joe DiMarco. I'm not > getting > the detail and microcontrast the f/6.8 Telyts deliver but I'm not > certain > the support is adequate. > > More significant differences I notice between the Canon 400/2.8 and my > Leica > lenses are in the handling and ergonomic areas. The Canon isn't in > the same > league so I'm missing some photos while struggling with the > ergonomics; if > this is typical of L lenses (and of the better Nikon lenses) it's no > wonder > the N and C market demanded AE and AF. > > Doug Herr > Birdman of Sacramento > http://www.wildlightphoto.com > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >