Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/11/29
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I admit discussions comparing bikes and cameras are way off-topic, but if this tread is heading towards that direction, you ought to understand cycling, and there is a resemblance between manual Leicas and the state-of-the-art digital cameras. Traditionally, Italian bikes are all handmade and only until recently, they stay away from any other frame material other than traditional steel. Their bikes are crafted by just a handful of craftsman. They are all beautifully made with lugs. Also they are NOT heavy as you stated. Their use of mostly butted "Columbus" tubing and hanging top of the line Campagnolo components, creating a bike that weighs no more than 18 pounds. The greatest cyclist of all times, Eddy Merckx won quite a few Tour de France on Italian DeRosa bikes. For the knowledgeable cyclist, these bikes possess a magical ride that bikes build from all the other exotic frames are still trying to duplicate. Now let's all get back to Leicas and photography. - --- Austin Franklin <darkroom@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > Patrick, > > > There are similarities to the pure Leica question. > > Traditional materials and craftsmanship vs. new > high > > tech materials and manufacturing techniques. > > I don't associate "vintage steel bikes" with > "traditional materials and > craftsmanship". Material and craftsmanship are two > entirely different > things. A Leica is hardly "vintage steel". I don't > know how anyone can say > that new bikes aren't made with the same > craftsmanship old ones are...I'd > even say new bikes are made with MORE craftsmanship > than old bikes are, and > you certainly can not say that about new cameras vs > old cameras. > > Leicas ARE made with higher craftsmanship, in my > opinion, than most other > cameras, and so are NEW bikes. Old "vintage steel > bikes" aren't really made > with much "craftsmanship", at least the ones I've > seen...they are made > heavier duty, but that isn't craftsmanship. > > As far as materials go, it's the proper material for > the job. For bikes, > LIGHT weight is an issue. For a Leica, heavier IS > better, as it dampens the > camera for use with the very fast lenses that Leica > offers. Is there > anything wrong with the material used in the Leicas? > Not that I am aware > of. Is there anything wrong with the material in a > "vintage steel bike"? > Yes. Steel isn't conducive to light weight. > > Again, I still don't understand the comparison. > > Regards, > > Austin > > > > > > > > > To give another example of Leica vs digital is > a > > > > cyclist who only rides vintage steel bikes, > and > > > would > > > > never straddle a bike made of titanium, carbon > > > fibre, > > > > or any of the other exotic materials. > > > > > > Henry, > > > > > > I don't understand one bit how that is a > comparable > > > comparison. > > > > > > Austin > > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html