Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/07/12

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Which to choose, SL or SL2?
From: Mark Rabiner <mrabiner@concentric.net>
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 10:56:26 -0700

Mikiro Mori wrote:
> 
> Bud, Nathan, and Horst,  Thank you very much for your description and
> advice.  Now I am getting some idea how good they are and how they differ.
> 
> I first started using Leica with R six years ago and have gradually shifted
> to M.  Now that I use R only occasionally, I am downsizing my R system to,
> hopefully, one body with a 60 macro.  Then I came up with an idea of using
> SL/SL2.  If I do not have to carry two bodies and four lenses, they are very
> good!  I have played with my friend's SL only briefly, but its feel was
> better than my RE and R6.2 which are excellent tools but do not make me
> cheerful as M's do.
> 
> I hope I will have chance to "meet" nice SL/SL2.
> 
> Thanks again.
> 
> Mikiro

What about one body with the 100 macro? More logical in some way's in
doing what the SLR does well. Especially the SLR in question: Leica R.
Plus the lens is more legendary though pricey. Sorry if I missed the
beginning of the thread and that was already discussed. Like you I will
always be a 99% M type of person with my 35mm. The Letter M works for me!
Mark Rabiner