Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/02/18
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]On 18-02-1998 23:32 T.Lavrakas wrote: >(snip) >There is nothing in the article about trading it in for an M6 and whatnot; >apparently he is quite pleased with the camera, and is using it in his >professional work. > >Pascal, are you privy to a side of this story that we are not? Or did you >just make an honest mistake? Either way, please let us know. Thanks. > > No mistake and I'm not Madame Soleil either :-) . I feel I might have been misinterpreted by some. It was not my intention to start another "Leica quality" issue, but I just wanted to share the info found on the web. Just check the comments page on this review. It will tell you that the same Norwegian guy who first said he was quite pleased with his R8, subsequently dumped it and switched to the M6 and Canon EOS 1N. I mentioned the exact URL in my first message, but for the sake of clarity I'll repeat what I've said on the subject in my original message: "After he got back his own R8, not only did the meter fail again, but also the pre-flash metering system and the flash-sync (see: http://db.photo.net/com/philg/photo/leica/index.html). So he dumped his R8 and instead got an M6 and an EOS 1N. His R8 now enjoys a second life at the Leica Academy in Solms..." I do think this R8 failure is an unlucky event and nothing more. As Ted has already pointed out, this case is rather exceptional, and we should really not attach too much importance to it. But feel free to add your own comments on the Leica comment page at http://db.photo.net/com/philg/photo/leica/index.html Regards, Pascal - -------------------------------------------------------- t h i n k d i f f e r e n t a p p l e - -------------------------------------------------------- <<< PGP public key available on request >>>