Re: [Leica] Ted Grant's Ravings

["Robert Bedwell" <rlb@triad.rr.com>]

Thank you for the response Javier.

I love the M camera.  It is a jewel and, in certain situations, it is the
camera of choice.  I have owned many in the past but do not own one at this
time.  I am looking for a classic chrome/24mm aspheric as it  will suit a
certain type of photography that I enjoy. I also own a Contax G2 and I use
it frequently for certain types of photography.  If I could only own one
which would it have to be?  The Contax G2 because of the auto-focus.
Unfortunately I can't see well enough to see the rangefinder images in the M
viewfinder.  An M6/24 will allow me to zone focus very efficiently.
Aperture priority in an M would make it work even better.   I want the
picture and fit the tool to the subject.

Last summer I helped my niece purchase an R5 and three lenses.  She has been
using my Contax  and I am not sure that I am going to get it back.  That's
OK because my reward is seeing the wonderful pictures she is making with it.
My nephew has been borrowing it from his sister and he is taking some
wonderful pictures.  The bottom-line is that my niece and nephew are much
younger and although they love the Leicas they don't want to be bothered
with the mechanics of taking the picture. This does not make them bad does
it?

Javier, it took me awhile to determine that I was missing pictures because
the M was the only camera that I had.  I don't think that I am different
than many Leica users.  There is another world of photographic opportunities
out there that we may be missing due to the limitations of the camera.  All
of us are not Ted Grants that can use an M for every assignment with
masterful results.  I aspire to be half as good but if it doesn't happen I
am not going to lose sleep over it.  I love my photography and the many
different tools that I have.

Damn, I would consider dumping my G2 for an M with auto-focus(single,
constant, multi) or manual and a choice of auto-exposure options; matrix,
spot, 5 spot averaging and being able to use it with a Noctilux, 75mm F1.4,
35mm F1.4, 24mm.  I salivate at the thought.

This is the start of a new century....anything is possible.  Die hard M
LUGGERS  would eventually come to the table but not without bitching.

Bob

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Javier Perez" <japho@cunyvm.cuny.edu>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2000 5:15 AM
Subject: Re: [Leica] Ted Grant's Ravings


>
> >entry level model.     If the M camera is the profitable end of Leica why
> >shouldn't a new electronic M be based on a successful format.  Seems to
me
> >that an "entry model" would surely be a way to non-acceptance.
>
> >I know that it is difficult to believe that there are some of us that
would
> >welcome an electronic model.  It doesn't mean that it would replace what
we
> >have.
>
> >Bob
>
> I don't have a problem with an electronic M as long as it's solid.
> Matter of fact I've been wanting one since before the M6
> It was do-able by Leitz way before then. Only corporate foolishness
> stopped it. The whole electronics pack including electromagnets could have
been
> housed where the present slow speed mechabnism and speed selector
mechanism
> reside. And a little extra below the shutter line. Speeds could have even
been
> indicated
> on the bottom of the finder
> with two arrows or something for manual override. The whole thing was a
nobrainer
> and right now they are probably kicking themselves, though not nearly hard
enough
> for not haven taken the obvious course. IE: M4-Electronic.
>
> For those who disagree answer the following question.
> Be honest....
> How many fabulous shots have you missed because you couldn't
> get the shutter speed or aperture set on time. This includes those
> pics that would have been award winners if they hadn't been two
> stops over or under.
>
> Now imagine being able to use those incredible fast focusing M lenses in
aperture
> preferred mode..... With manual override if you need the excersize.
>
> I know that some purists might still disagree.
> I would invite them to fly across the Pacific without radar.
>
> Best Regards
> Javier
>
>
>