Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/02/26

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

Subject: RE: [Leica] Re: olympus vs leica
From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 14:13:51 -0500

Nor does Olympus, or any other
manufacturer, make lenses that are across the board as durable as Leica
lenses.
- ---------
In terms of all the recent discussion of Olympus v. Leica, this is the
statement that rings the most true: Leica lenses, with the rare exception
that slips through QC - and I've owned one - are built like brick s..t
houses with windows of the finest crystal. Nothing compares in that regard:
not Olympus, not Nikon, not Canon. Our children and grandchildren will be
enjoying this equipment long after everything else has fallen apart.

In this life-time, however, if you like the M for its size, quiet, and image
quality, and you want a reflex as well, the OM3 is the M6 of reflex cameras.
The lenses may not be "quite" as good as the M lenses, but they're damn
good. Take a look at Gene Richards' shot of "Tom" emerging from a steam
grate in Manhattan, or the photo on the cover of Cocaine Blue...and tell me
that they would be any better had they been shot with a 21 2.8 leica lens,
rather than with an OM3 and a 21 f 2 Zuiko..,.