Re: [Leica] Leica's future + changing the M6 and the balloon festival

["Joe Stephenson" <joeleica@email.msn.com>]

I'm with you, Doug. At work today I was called in to help get a camera
working. I was an automatic job with all the latest features. I wasn't much
help despite having 40+ years of experience with all kinds of cameras. There
were two Ph.D's and two other people with much education. None of us could
really get the thing to do what was wanted, i.e.: take a picture.
Nobody has mentioned it, but I find the extra 2mm that is added to the top
plate on the TTL M6 annoying. Somehow it spoils the clean apperance of the
M6. Am I over the top in being a picky traditionalist?
Finally, if anyone is coming to Albuquerque for the Balloon festival next
month, or at any time, really, we would be glad to offer accomadation and
help. Drop a line.
Joe Stephenson
joeleica@msn.com
- -----Original Message-----
From: Doug Herr <71247.3542@compuserve.com>
To: INTERNET:leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
<leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Date: Tuesday, September 29, 1998 5:09 PM
Subject: [Leica] Leica's future

I agree *in principal* with Jim and Ted on this issue.  Leica's products
must be the best tools for working photographers or the company will fail
in the marketplace.  As much as I praise and rely on the old Leicaflex SL
and 400 f/6.8 Telyt, I would eagerly embrace modern equipment if it met my
needs.

IMHO, the principal failing of most modern equipment is battery dependance:

1) I often find myself dozens of miles, if not hundreds of miles, from
sources of replacement batteries.  The weight and bulk of all the spare AA
batteries cuts down the film and lenses I'm willing to carry into the
field.  I'd rather carry film than @#*& batteries.

2) I've had far more battery/electric/electronic failures than mechanical
failures.  I especially hate it when the camera suddenly decides the
batteries have died.  This invariably happens at a crucial moment.  At
least with a mechanical camera I can guess exposure and bracket like crazy.

3) In my experience, auto-exposure is handy for "people" photos,
particularly with negative film, but for my chromes of wildlife subjects
where the important details in the image are often in very bright (egrets,
for example) or dark (bison, otters, crows, many other birds) critters,
auto-exposure has failed far more often than the SL's manual spot meter.  I
have little or no need for the features made possible by battery
dependance.


My understanding is that the R6/R6.2 cameras are delightful to use and they
have some features I wish the SL had but there are several features of the
SL that I'm not willing to forego:

1) the continuously-variable shutter speeds.  With long lenses and active
subjects, whether hand-held or stuck to a tripod, I need the fastest
possible shutter speeds.  I need to set the correct exposure by varying the
shutter speed with the lens at maximum aperture.  An aperture priority
auto-exposure mode will give me continuously-variable shutter speeds at the
cost of exposure accuracy (see #3 above).  The R6/R6.2 cameras have only
full-stop shutter speed increments; the R7's and R8's half-stop increments
are almost good enough but not quite.

2) the SL's viewscreen is much easier to use with slower lenses like the
280 f/4.8 and 400 & 560 f/6.8 than any R camera I've used.  After using
R-cameras for 15 years I can still focus on moving critters much more
quickly and accurately with the SL than with an R body.  (I haven't used an
R8 yet.  I would like to see how it handles under my field conditions.)

3) the R4 through R7 bodies are too small for my hands, particularly since
my left eye is stronger.  I feel like I'm holding them with my fingertips
where I have a more secure grip on the SL using my whole hand.


A new mechanical camera with a continuously-variable shutter based on the
R8 body shell would get my attention.  Until something like this is
marketed the SL will be my primary camera body.


There is also no suitable modern replacement for my primary lens, the 400
f/6.8 Telyt.  I would dearly love APO optical imaging and the advantages of
internal focus but if it comes at the cost of quick, battery-less hand-held
performance then it will not meet my needs.  Aside from the Novoflex, there
are no long lenses that can be used hand-held as quickly and easily as the
400 and 560 f/6.8 Telyts.

I've read many posts from LUGgers saying (in effect) that Leica must copy
feature-for-feature the oversized, over-featured flagships from N**** and
C**** in order to compete in the marketplace.  The M-series cameras are
successful not because they are copies of something else, but because they
are uniquely useful.  With the R-series cameras Leica can do better than to
copy the competition's features.

Doug Herr
Sacramento