Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/10/29
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]In a message dated 10/29/99 6:04:18 AM, mrabiner@concentric.net writes: << Let's not forget that it's the Leica R that is not doing well and that the Leica M IS doing well. >> If, as it seems, we are entering a phase of renewed interest in non-slr cameras (the Contax G, the Bessa-L, the new Konica), that can only be good for Leica. As more and more semi-serious photographers begin to understand the virtues of rangefinders, etc., some percentage of them will make the decision that they might as well own the best and will naturally turn to Leica. The Leica M camera is not for everyone but for those who appreciate rangefinders, it's the best. That alone should ensure at least some level of survival. The bigger issue seems to be the SLR. There just isn't enough to distinguish the Leica line from everything else. The mystique will only go so far. Lots of slr makers offer outstanding lenses. The photographer looking for the most complete/versatle/practical system combined with co-comprimise optics has lots to chose from. Leica simply does not stand out of the slr crowd like it does in rangefinders (yeah, I know, they were the only game in town so that almost doesn't count). One really must ask the question, Why in the world buy a Leica R -- OK for many in this group it makes sense but for most mere mortals, it doesn't. Bob (cockroaches, Cher and Leica rangefinders will always survive) McEowen