Re: [Leica] Leica (AND canon AND nikon....)

[Alan Ball <AlanBall@csi.com>]

Martin,

I recognize myself very much in your behaviour, except I have not opted
for C but for other AF high tech SLRs. Whatever the brand is not
important, it is the complementary functionalities that count. 

I'm trying right now to do all my 35mm images with the M and to use a
modern 645 system for SLR work. Since I have no usage for long teles, I
do not suffer from any 'strategic' loss of functionality compared to
what is offered by 35mm AF (except AF, but I have the option to choose
AF 645s now). I find that if the choice is between light, highly
portable, fast and discreet 35mm RF and a cumbersome, heavy, flashy SLR,
I might just as well opt for the real imaging advantage of MF when going
SLR...

Alan


Martin Davidson wrote:
> 
> On the subject of mix and matching Leica with "the others", here is my
> experience...
> 
> I find using a Leica M in conjunction with an EOS makes you appreciate them
> BOTH more.  To me, it is just such an obvious thing to do - I use an M6 with
> 28, 35, 50 and 90 lenses, and an EOS 1, with 20, 24 T/SE, 28-70, and 70-200
> f/2.8, and a couple of extenders, plus macro tubes and close-up lens, plus
> 540EZ flash.  The Leica primes outperform the zooms, but sometimes I want AF
> and zoom flexibility (photographing children, say); sometimes, however, I
> need the discretion of the M6, (taking publicity pictures of a presenter,
> for example, a man who actually punched a pro once who had stuck a
> motordriven Howitzer in his face once too often!!)  I go from one to the
> other as simply as breathing.
> 
> Harder though is the question of Canon versus Leica primes.  My 20mm cost
> 380 UK pounds; about a QUARTER of the new 21 asph, and without the hassle of
> a separate viewfinder (go on confess, how many have YOU lost??  Mine would
> last about a week....)  And yet I know that soon, the siren of that 21 asph
> will be cooing in my ear.
> 
> Every now and again, I shoot off some Velvia, a Canon 50mm f1.8 (60 UK
> pounds) versus my 50 Summicron (600 UK pounds).  Well, I think there is a
> difference, and I think I can now tell them apart in a "blind" (as it were)
> test, but it is very, very, very close.
> 
> But for TTL flash, fast motordrive, perspective control, autofocus (like
> lightning on the EOS 1, even in dull conditions), the Canon is wonderful.
> And have you tried the new Image Stabilising system - utterly extraordinary;
> I was shooting Velvia with the 300 down to 1/60th second and producing
> razor-sharp slides (out of a shop, haven't sprung for one yet, but it is
> tempting).
> 
> But then, after the bulk of the EOS and its bulbous, heavy and SLIPPERY
> lenses, the M is just heaven; actually, first out of the bag and last back
> in.  With a gun to my head, I would go M before EOS; but nothing less than a
> gun would make me choose.
> 
> So, in conclusion, surely there is nothing stupider than the either/or
> dichotomy.  It simply does not exist.
> 
> 
>                      Name: winmail.dat
>    winmail.dat       Type: WordPerfect Document (6.1) File (application/x-unknown-content-type-WPWin6.1File)
>                  Encoding: x-uuencode