[Leica] Which camera to take to Israel?

[steve.barbour at gmail.com (Steve Barbour)]

On Sep 29, 2010, at 11:46 PM, Peter Klein wrote:

> It looks like we are going to Israel for 2 weeks later this fall. It will 
> be our first time there. We'll be spending the first week in and near Tel 
> Aviv and Haifa, sometimes on our own and sometimes with relatives who live 
> there. Then we'll take a weeklong bus tour around the country. We'll be 
> moving around quite a bit, mostly on foot or in buses. So whatever I take 
> will be carried around a lot.
> 
> I'll have a decision to make about cameras. I could take:
> 
>    * M8, 28/3.5 VC, 35/2 or 35/1.4, maybe 50/1.5 and/or 90/3.5 VC.  This 
> is what I usually travel with.
>    * G1, 14-54 f/4-ish  kit zoom, 20/1.7, and VC 90/3.5. This worked 
> pretty well for me on my recent Canada trip.
> 
> Right now, the heart is saying Leica and the head is saying G1. I have a 
> painful "frozen" right shoulder, which probably won't get better until 
> next year sometime, so it's better to keep things light on my neck and 
> other shoulder.  I'm also developing a cataract on my right (shooting) 
> eye.  So far it's just softened things a little and lowered my visual 
> contrast.  My glasses still correct my right eye to 20/20, so it's nowhere 
> near the surgery stage.  It's not really hurt my ability to focus yet, but 
> it has reduced my confidence.
> 
> In favor of the M8:
> 
>    * Higher image quality.
>    * If I want a big print for my wall, likelier to have sufficient IQ.
>    * Better low-light ability for family, dusk & night shots, or cloudy 
> days.
>    * Optical VF and no blackout, so faster to shoot and get what I saw.
>    * No issues with autofocus focusing on the wrong thing
>    * All the controls are where God and HCB intended  :-)
>    * What's the point of having a Leica if I don't take it on a 
> highlight-of-my-life trip?
>    * Camera is insured
>    * I could take a fanny pack or photo vest to keep some of the weight 
> off the bad shoulder
> 
> In favor of the G1:
> 
>    * Image quality, while not Leica, is probably good enough esp. in 
> sunlight and 8x10-ish or less.
>    * Significantly lighter, smaller kit
>    * The 20/1.7 is a great lens; I'm still covered for reasonable lower 
> light, though not for true "available dark"
>    * Won't be changing lenses nearly so often.
>    * More versatile.
>    * The 90/3.5 makes a great almost-200m equivalent.
>    * Don't have to worry about focusing (except for the 90).
>    * If it gets damaged or stolen, it's not the end of the world.
>    * Built-in flash for family snaps if necessary, and for fill in the 
> bright desert.
>    * Won't have to worry about cleaning the sensor (dust-buster built-in).
> 
> What do you think?  There are some genuine trade-offs here, and I really 
> could go either way.


have fun Peter,  take the Leica...

or both...


Steve


> 
> --Peter
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information