Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/01/30
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]>Yeah, but you can't put Leica glass on it. And yes teh R8 might cost an >extra $560 with winder and it's only 1/4 the speed of the F5. Don't get me >wrong, as far as I'm concerned, the F5 is the best thing about the Nikon >system. With Leica, it's the glass. > I am inclined to have a different perspective. The Leica glass is indeed very important and one of the main reasons for buying the products of the 'Haus'. The M and the R-8 too, in themselves, are products with a beautiful and very competently executed ergonomic design that inspire one to take photographs in that classical 30's and 50's tradition that define the golden age of photography. The simplicity of handling and dedication to one style of photography are the other reason to buy Leica. I at least would not buy an F5 or an AX even if the quality of the glass were up to Leica standards. The Contax is a living proof. No one would deny that Zeiss produces lenses second to none (even Leica would admit it), but the Contax RF and the Contarex and the Contax RTS and AX are testimonies to the fact that glass alone is not a very compelling reason to buy the product. A more apt analogy would be the G2. Its glass rivals and (who am I??) sometimes almost equals the Leica offerings.Still it no match for the M (every model, bar the CL and M5). Erwin