Re: [Leica] Re: To M7 or not to M7, c'est la question - LONG

[Ted Grant <tedgrant@shaw.ca>]

Allan Wafkowski wrote:

>>> The Leica myth.
>
> Anyone here could, for $240, buy a Minolta Maxxum 5 or Canon Rebel 2000
> and have a more capable camera than the $2500 M7. Both run circles
> around the M7's antiquated exposure system. Gone too is the lame excuse,
> "I must have a fully mechanical camera for those times when I go brain
> dead and forget the batteries."<<<

Allan mon ami and others,
One thing that never came to mind nor am I, nor have I ever been impressed
by the Leica myth, doesn't mean a thing and we're talking 40 plus years of
leica equipment use.

It has nothing to do with whether for x number of dollars I could purchase
some other manufactures gear and have better whiz o things, as it's of no
relevance, as I work with the camera and lenses that give me satisfaction
for the results published and or screened.

Nor do I ever want anyone else's. Although I'm well experienced in the use
of Canon, Nikon , Hassleblad and Speed Graphic, the type of work I've always
done has lent itself to Leica M cameras. Or in sports, the R gear.

I don't have any interest in how you and many others are relating with anti
comments about the M7, certainly when experience has shown Tina and myself,
along with other LUG members that the M7 does a rather excellent job at
exposure selection. And by our experience we've learned it works more
efficiently than the M6. In our opinion.

The AE function has been around for sometime, so big deal, who really cares.
Now that it's in the Leica M7 is all that matters!. And that's the camera of
choice and the results are more than surprising and much to my / our liking.

You and many others are ripping it apart and most of you haven't even had
one in your hands, let alone pumped a dozen or two rolls of film through
one. So to all the nay sayers and bit players how about cooling your
comments until you've at least tried one with at least one roll of film.
Seems like a reasonable request, don't you think?

Then come back and tell the two of us we're idiots for buying and should've
stayed with the M6. And until many of you shoot a roll and see the results
it would be wonderful if all the comparisons to other "wanna be" cameras
could be put on hold until you've all tried the M7. And I don't mean playing
with one in a store, work one and find out for yourself, you and the others
maybe very surprised at the results.

I see many of the same comments offered as when the R8 came out, and by
people who'd only seen the R8 in picture form, so it's amazing how a group
of some what intelligent photographers can get their asses in a great big
tizzy over something they've only read about, never handled, nor exposed a
roll of film with.

It seems some of you would dearly love to see Leica crash and burn, only to
prove something about the myth and infallibility or whatever.

I cannot speak for Tina, however I see no reason for Tina nor myself to
offer any further words of experience to the LUG regarding the M7, as our
offerings appear being totally wasted time, certainly when both of us as
professionals have far better things to do than try to assist our fellow
photographers with information derived from our experience.

This isn't my style, nor is it Tina's to cut things in this manner, but I
think many of you are yapping on over things you have no control over and
actually are wasting your time when you could all be out shooting with
whatever model Leica you own. And unless you have a reason to buy an M7 and
would like some assistance with a question, then why not go take pictures.

If someone wishes to ask me private fine, but on the big screen it's wasted
time. Too bad.
thank you.
ted



- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html