Re: [Leica] Leica - R8 not quite right M6 only just perfect

[apbc <apbc@public1.sta.net.cn>]

Eric,

you wrote
>
>I'm not persuaded by my own experience? I pulled it off a Ouiji board? What
>insult are you implying here?
>
>You are entitled to your opinion, but to say the R8 is 15 years behind
>other cameras is balderdash. An anti-R bias. There is only one thing it
>lacks, technologically, besides the motor, and that's AF.



Oh dear oh dear no insult whatever - I guess I better spell it out more 
clearly to you but first let me quote my sentence in its entirity since 
the half sentence you quoted does sound odd (perhaps you read too 
quickly? <g>):
I said 

> Unlike Eric I am persuaded by my own experience and 
>observation to believe that Leica R cameras have no significant part >of the 
pro market.

by which I mean that perhaps one in a thousand pro photographers that I 
have seen working in the 50 or so countries I have worked in the last 15 
years were using Leica R. You have consistently stated, with PDN survey 
info to back you up, that Leica are No. 3 most used (or is that 'most 
owned'?) 35mm camera by US pros. This just does not concur with my own 
observation, even if the PDN survey was only about Leica Ms. 

In fact I have never seen anyone at all using an R8 though I do know one 
keen amateur who has one. I think this is a pity since Leica make 
wonderful lenses. I also think it is a pity that I cannot justify moving 
from Canon EOS equipment to Leica R because the cost in overall 
performance, not to mention the inadequate service and supply, is 
unacceptable to me in my situation.


  And AF that
>functions on a professional level is more like 4 years old beginning with
>the EOS1n. AF before that was not up to Pro standards, including the F4.

Well there are many thousands of pros who switched to EOS1s in 89 or 
whenever it was introduced and they must have thought the AF had some 
use. As for the F4 I would contend that the AF was in 99% of applications 
worse than useless: my yardstick being 'does it help me get the picture?' 
and in the F4's case IME its AF screwed up more than it got right. To be 
fair Nikon touted the AF as an available option on the F4 not the prime 
modus operandi.

I would still contend that the R8 offers no significant new technology 
that has not been around in Nikon or Canon cameras for the last 15 years: 
yes they have packaged a very nice set of features and in some cases they 
are more elegantly presented and you may feel this is in and of itself a 
reason to feel the R8 is streets ahead. I don't. In any event the absence 
of a motor drive leaves it beyond the consideration of the vast majority 
of pros. The flash system is also, with the exception of the (excellent 
and very useful) metering feature the same as mid-80s Nikon only the Metz 
flashes are more cumbersome, slower and have poorer user interface IMHO 
(I use and dislike the 40MZ-2!).

As for other things it lacks - perhaps a fast 20-35 (though I am told a 
Japanese made 21-35/2.8 is coming for Photokina) a fast standard zoom 
such as 28-70/2.8, fast wide-angles wider than 35mm, a 1.4 teleconverter 
that works with the 70-180 and 180/2.8 APO just to name a few areas from 
typical pro outfits where Nikon and Canon beat Leica. I believe all these 
deficiencies will eventually be addressed by Leica - and can only hope 
they do it quickly. The 70-180 came about 12 years too late to give Leica 
a competitive advantage in the pro market. I am talking in terms of 
marketplace realities here not in the absolute ability of a Leica R user 
to get a great photo so please do not come back with arguments about how 
a great photographer can manage without all the latest whizz bang gizmos 
because history has already told us that Leica adopts these gizmos in its 
own time, whether they be AE, plastics in construction, LCD displays, 
zoom lenses and AF too if we look at some of the cheaper offerings in the 
line: Leica's reputation was after all founded upon an ability to 
innovate not simply to catch up.

You don't need to get so hot under the collar when people criticise the 
R8 - if it works for you then that is good. I wish it was the camera for 
me and feel it is quite legitimate to weigh in with my observations on a 
discussion group that exists for the purpose of discussing such matters. 

One other issue - I would love to see a new M with some of the features 
of the R8 such as faster shutter, better flash facilities, more metering 
options, auto bracketing and a (real) motor. Functionally and in terms of 
manufacturing efficiencies it would make a lot of sense to share 
electronics and key components such as the shutter and metering systems. 
Just keep the size and sound down and don't mess too much with the RF/VF 
is all I would ask. Oh and keep the M6 in the line - or perhaps an M6.2 
that matched the R6.2 with TTL flash, more info in the finder and a 
decent motor option. Whatever they do with the M it should be ahead of 
the competition - which is only other, older Ms these days. And yes I 
have a G2 system too but I use the Ms 10x more often.

Respectfully yours,

AdriaN

 

Adrian Bradshaw
Photojournalist
Shanghai, China