RE: [Leica] "standard camera"

["B. D. Colen" <BDColen@earthlink.net>]

My only thoughts are the following:
Why invest all that money in a "state-of-the-art" body only to couple it
with an "independent" lens rather than the best the camera manufacturer
offers? (F5-Tameron) combo?

When I purchased my M6 18 months ago it was $2495 - rebate - or $2195 - Now
they are selling new for about $1700 or less. This is not to suggest that 10
years from now the M body you purchase today won't be worth more than a
10-year-old F5, but it does suggest that if you want to invest, put your
money in real estate, stocks, etc. The question is, which camera wil best
serve your needs?



> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of
> smhickel@iserv.net
> Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 1998 6:09 AM
> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: Re: [Leica] "standard camera"
>
>
> 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.
>
>