Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/05/30
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Ted I must risk being the brunt of your infamous wrath! 2008/5/30 Ted Grant <tedgrant@shaw.ca>: > I'm not going to get into any kind of discussion about future Leica digital > SLR's and auto lens stuff simply because at the moment it's a complete > waste > of time until we see them for real. For guys like me who have to make critical purchase decisions on a relatively meager budget the judgement of others is valuable if not always totally reliable. I agree with you that real hard evidence is best. At the end of the day, my own experience is the most reliable for my own purposes but I can not afford to play with everything. I recently tried a M7 largely on the advice from this group; maybe it was a bad one but it soon went as the electronics was unstable despite been "repaired" by Leica. My M6TTL remains my main M work horse; it serves me well. My M3 and IIIf remind me of Leica's strength in mechanical engineering. I can note that over 30 years of Nikon use only one camera needed repair - after 20years of service the mechanics in the head on my F2 Photomic failed and parts were hard to obtain. I have not suffered electronic problems with any of my Nikons. When it comes to digital I face a real decision in the next few months so I do read with care any evidence that is made available. If I was to make a decision today on hard evidence then it is likely I would go 100% Nikon for digital. It's there and its tested and the glass is rapidly improving - the Zeiss lenses are most promising and the newest Nikons are good - well I can speak to the new Nikon 60mm Micro. I am not sure I can wait for the hard evidence on where Leica R is going. Retirement looms and when it happens my purchasing power will fall heavily. I have a small window of opportunity. I look to this group to keep my faith in Leica but it gets harder. Chris B