Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/12/03

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Reflex vs. RF
From: "Jeffrey Fass" <happy.eyeball@verizon.net>
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 15:14:39 -0500
References: <Springmail.0994.1038943652.0.15719800@webmail.pas.earthlink.net>

Yes, so I've heard.

I wanted an inexpensive body to carry the lenses is all. I can tell that, in
working the deal with Minolta, Leica made a body with the soul of a consumer
Japanese model, at least that's how it feels. What's going on inside is a
different story I'm sure.

I think if I wanted to go full-SLR again, I'd get a R9.

Cheers, Jeffrey

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Douglas Herr" <telyt@earthlink.net>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 2:27 PM
Subject: Re: [Leica] Reflex vs. RF


> On Tue, 3 Dec 2002 14:17:45 -0500 Jeffrey Fass <happy.eyeball@verizon.net>
> wrote:
>
> > After having used the M for only several months
> > I was struck how different
> > and strange the R felt.  The viewfinder is
> > darker, the 90 makes everything
> > *big* in the viewfinder (I've become used to
> > the M 90 frameline). Most
> > significant is the *slonk* of the
> > mirror/shutter. It's got quite a kick to
> > it. The M is so stealthy by comparison.
> >
> > Mind, in general I think, at least comparing
> > the R4, Nikon has the reflex
> > thing down. Quieter, smoother, faster. The
> > lenses are a whole 'nuther story,
> > though.
> >
>
> If you want a real Leica reflex, try a Leicaflex SL.  Much brighter
> viewfinder, smoother mirror/shutter action, less shutter lag, and it feels
> solid the way a Leica ought to.  The SL even smells like a real Leica.
>
>
> Doug Herr<BR>Birdman of Sacramento<BR>http://www.wildlightphoto.com
> --
> To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

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