Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/11/11

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: Leica Urban Myth #44
From: Paul Schliesser <paulsc@eos.net>
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 97 02:14:21 -0400

>>The III is bigger and taller than the
>>II; it's tall enough that it leaves an empty space between the bottom of
>>its prism and the camera top plate; I'm not sure, but I think this is so
>>it can be used on the M5, which is taller than a normal M body. The II
>>will definitly not fit an M5.

>Er, the Viso III was introduced in '63, the M5 in '71.  There was no way
>that Leitz was thinking of the M5 when they designed the Viso III:  they
>don't think ten minutes into the future, much less eight years.

Marc,

I got it backwards. I guess they designed the M5 to fit the Viso III.

Why did they make the III so tall? I've never actually used a III (I have 
a Viso II); is there some reason it needs the extra height?

- - Paul