Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/11/15

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

Subject: [Leica] Re: Leica Minilux (WAS: Leica bashing)
From: Pascal <cyberdog@ibm.net>
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1998 15:54:44 +0100

On 15-11-1998 09:20 Nathan Wajsman wrote:

>As for the Minilux placing well behind the GR1 in a review of compacts, I 
>am not the least surprised. When I did my own comparison recently, I 
concluded 
>that the only thing the Minilux had over the Ricoh was the red dot. All the 
things 
>that actually matter were better on the GR1

Nathan:

Like you I have also been testing the Minilux (not the Zoom) for a couple 
of months. I have run only print film through it (Fuji Reala 100 ASA and 
Fuji NPH Professional 400 ASA).
My feelings about the camera are mixed as I have told already a while ago:
- - the finish is superb and very stylish. Also the motorised film 
transport is very nice to hear, almost silky. The boxed shaped is easy to 
hold. And it has the red dot.
- - the handling is easy as long as you don't need special settings. 
Otherwise you'll have to plough through many different manipulations 
(like the flash setting modes you have eloquently described in another 
posting).
- - there are a couple of major design flaws:
- -- not a single piece of information in the viewfinder. I would at least 
like to see the shutter speed at which I am working (it is only indicated 
on the top panel LCD display - not very useful in practice when taking 
pictures because you can hardly pull your camera away from your eye to 
check the speed for every picture)
- -- it's too easy to inadvertently switch from AF to manual focus, there 
is no safety button. I have met at least two people during the LeicaCard 
meeting who had experienced this problem themselves, of course, with 
unsharp images as a result. Leica must have realized this was a problem 
because there is now a safety button on the Minilux Zoom.
- - as for the image quality: it is good on average. But obviously not as 
excellent as a Summilux-M or R 50/1.4 IMO (and I have used two different 
Miniluxes). The lens is IMO very average wide open. I would dare to say 
that the 2.4 max lens opening will not give you impressing results. 
Moreover if you use the camera wide open in low light, with a slow 
shutter speed, the risk of shaking the camera is great (it's far easier 
to have shaken images with a small camera like this one than with an M6 
or R8. This is aggravated by the fact that you don't see in the 
viewfinder at what speed you make pictures).

I also own a Nikon 35 Ti since the beginning of 1994. Now the inescapable 
question: which one is the better camera?
Difficult to say.
I only note that the Nikon has some exceptional features (like the 
excellent fill-in flash system and exposure with an identical Nikon's 3D 
matrix metering as the F90x) and often outstanding results. I have made 
several enlargements (20x30 cm) from exposures taken on Fuji Reala that 
can stand comparison to the Leica M or R. The Nikon has a tendency to 
overexpose slide films a bit, however. This is quite obvious if you mix 
slides taken with the 35 Ti and the R8. And its results wide open (2.8) 
are not too impressive either. The curse of compact cameras somehow... ;-)
Maybe I should testdrive the Minilux with good slidefilm to be sure where 
it stands in comparison:-)

Just my (interim) opinion.

Pascal

- --------------------------------------------------------
See my photo pages at http://members.xoom.com/cyberplace/
- --------------------------------------------------------
<<< PGP public key available on request >>>