Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/12/22
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Alan, Quite the response. Thank you. AND, after having slept on this decision, I am still inconclusive. From a pure monetary point of view, the Leica will hold its value better than an F5. Reasons are many. Primarily, the "depression" in Japan will drive the Nikon prices lower. I believe lots of folks have experienced this in price cuts. This is good for the buyer but not the owner. When the F5 came out wasn't it $2995.00. Now I see them for $1795. Leica is European and their currencies (soon to be only one, the Euro commencing in less than two weeks), remain strong in face of the high dollar, especially in light of its gold reserve. True that the R8 was higher upon its initial debut, but I sense the lowerings to be less. Yet I do sense a price erosion in the form of rebates and now new pricing. Currently an R-8 offers a $400 rebate until 12-31-98. The lens remains the modicum of visual experience with the Leica. Whereas with the Nikon, I too believe that the "gadget-factor" remains its principle alure. It is the fastest this, the most rugged that. Where rubber meets road though, you tell me which of the Nikkor lenses or Tamaron or others that fit the Nikon, stand head to head in bocah, image sharpness, color rendition. I have seen the quality on my R4s, on my M6 with the 50's, and with a 35/2.8 on the R4s. Surely, the Nikkor macro 105, the 60mm, and the 24/1.4, and the 80-200/2.8 can produce surreal pictures of friends, family, and fauna, but the Leica allure is strong and unmistakeable. Well here is where my decision stands: - --not to buy anything. - --buy a Noctilux or 70/1.4 for m6. - --R-8 and 180/2.0 pre-APO. - --Nikon F5 to use with existing lenses:24/2.8 and 50-300 F4.5. - --Nikon F5 with Tamaron 28-105/2.8. - --Nikon F5 with 80-200/2.8. Such problems, eh? What is your vote??? Steve At 06:43 AM 12/22/98 +0100, you wrote: >Steve, > >A few weeks ago, I had the answer to that: obviously you should go for >the F5 (or even more to the coming F100) for a much better >quality/price/features mix and ratio. And I would have sounded quite >convincing: no real life imaging advantage for the R, no AF for the R, >etc, etc.