Re: Why A Leica M

[Oddmund Garvik <garvik@i-t.fr>]

Roger L. Beamon wrote:
> 
> At 10:00 AM 11/17/96 -0800, Oddmund Garvik wrote:
> >I think the Leica M is overestimated. Paying about $5000 for a simple
> >camera, with a simple 50mm f/2 is not very reasonable.
> 
> <snip>
> 
> Feel better now, Oddmund?
> --
> Roger Beamon
>             Naturalist & Photographer
>             Docent:  Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum
>             Leica Historical Society Of America
>             Mail to:  beamon@primenet.com
> 

Well, I feel good now. I feel good quite often, unless when I am
thinking about how the world is going. I should like to do more in order
to expose the injustice and the lies, and to show the disastrous
consequences of the wstern/northern expansion, imperialism and cynism.
But we are not here to discuss these questions, even if I think they
should have at least a moral impact upon photographers, especially Leica
M photographers. 

It is a little strange not having an M any more, but I will get over it,
I think. If not I can buy another one, I still have the lenses... a good
old M2 or an M4 perhaps? For my kind of photography I do not need
inbuilt exposure meter, neither an useless 28mm frame.

I find my new Rollei 35 quite amazing, small, just heavy enough to keep
stable, and with a very good viewfinder, no lights, no nonsense. I will
try to find another one in good shape, for use with different films. 
The Contax TVS is also very good, even if f/3.5 f/6.5 is a bit slow. It
is a very convenient camera with a Vario-Sonnar T* 28-56mm zoom lens. It
is like having three lenses in the pocket all the time, 28mm, 35mm, and
50mm. I seldom zoom.

I use Tri X mostly, and this film gives good results under all
circumstances, from ISO 200 to 1600. No problem with the light. In the
summertime I find Agfa 100 fine as well.

We need to continue all these discussions. After all it is a nice forum,
even if most of you are yankees...take care.

Oddmund Garvik
Street photographer
Paris, France