Re: Re-2: Leicas and SLRs from Leitz

[Jim Brick <jim@brick.org>]

At 09:39 PM 10/14/97 -0400, you wrote:
>In a message dated 97-10-14 14:23:41 EDT, Jim writes >
>
><< If you squeeze a little too much, while photographing,
> the back bends in and out. It doesn't take much. >>
>**********************************************************************
>     Jim - I used to be concerned about that also, until it was
>explained to me that no matter how much you push on the
>back of a camera, with your thumbs, the spring loaded pres-
>sure plate will hold the film in the same plane - You have to
>really think about it awhile before the idea sinks in - at least
>I did.   *************************Marvin
>

I completely understand this Marvin, but it just gives it a flimsy feeling.
Actually my camera is an FM2. Not that that makes any difference. I
recognize the fact that Nikon is a good brand and holds up under duress.
One of my roommates at Brooks Inst. (Thomas Ignatious Haynes, Iggy for
short) in 1960/61 bought a Nikon (F)? and it was not a good camera. I had
an Alpa, my other roommate (George Nakamura) had a Miranda. The Miranda &
Alpa performed heads & shoulders better than the Nikon. In 1963/64 I had a
commercial studio in Palo Alto CA with two partners Marv White & Richard
Jennings. Richard had a Nikon F. I didn't have a 35. I had a Hassy and
Sinar 4x5. I used Richards Nikon for 35 stuff and did not like it.

Please take this for what it is. My personal preferences. Probably based on
a couple of bad cameras - bad experiences. Our brain/mind plays a very
important role in our preferences. A bad experience leaves an indelible
impression, as does a good experience. My good impressions came in this
order: Argus C3, Rollei, Hassey, Graphic View II, Minolta, Alpa, Sinar P,
Leica R, Linhof Technika Field. My bad experiences were Nikon, Yashica,
Bronica, Beseler Topcon, Mamiya. I don't remember the order.

Leica R, however, has made the best impression of all.

Jim