RE: [Leica] why buy old stuff? (was "notoriously crappy" lens)

["B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>]

Well, let me p--s off a bunch of folks....IF money is the issue, then using
the old screw mount bodies and lenses to get into Leica photography makes an
enormous amount of sense - having been there myself :-)....But, if money is
not the issue, and serious photography is, I find myself asking, why use the
old stuff, other than to own say, a single body and lens with which to
"play" once and a while. There are myriad reasons why the M bodies were
developed, likewise why the newer lenses were refined and developed. If the
goal is to buy the best tools for the job, then it's hard to understand how
a III with a 1949 collapsible Elmar is ever the "best tool," unless, of
course you are trying to produce photos that look as though they were taken
prior to the Korean War....

And now I'll log off for a while..;-)

B. D.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of Guy Bennett
> Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2000 3:17 PM
> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: [Leica] why buy old stuff? (was "notoriously crappy" lens)
>
>
> CapsTeeth (???) wrote:
>
> >In 1999 I have to wonder why anyone would buy a 50's collapsible
> Summicron
> >vs. the 80's (or even 70's) version in the first place...
> >[snip]
>
> here's one possible explanation: to use with a camera from the same era.
>
> i would gladly buy a '50s collapsible summicron tomorrow if the price were
> right, mainly because it's faster than the '50s elmar i currently use and
> from which i get results i'm quite happy with. i wouldn't mount it on an
> m6, however; i have a current summicron 50 for that.
>
> to paraphrase your question: why buy a iiic, iiif, iiig, or m3 (or m2, m4,
> or m5, for that matter) today, when we've got m6's (and konicas and
> cosinas)?
>
> guy
>