Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/06/16
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 04:38 PM 16/06/99 -0400, you wrote: >Dr. Black Tape Wonders... > >Isn't Nikon's not being able to figure out how to include MLU in the new >F100 just about as stunning as Leica's not being able to figure out how to >include both a battery and a self-timer in an M6? What is this world coming >to? > You can count the number of current 35mm SLRs on the fingers of your hands that offer mirror lockup. Even some pro cameras don't have it. I opt for using cameras with mirror lockup whenever possible, but I have two that don't have it. I don't use them when I need MLU. One argument I've seen regarding why it is not included on more cameras is that the mirrors are so well dampened that it is not needed. I suspect that may be so, in part, but not having MLU really causes problems in some applications, well-dampened mirror or not. The well-dampened mirror excuse is one way of justifying keeping down the cost of production by eliminating one additional costly feature to include. The marketplace is very competitive, and shaving off a hundred bucks off the retail price for a feature that many people don't use can help sell a product against what the competition has to offer. You're right about the F100 -- a darn nice camera, but without MLU many serious users will look for something different.