Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/12/19

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Why is the IIIg so much more expensive?
From: Adam Bridge <abridge@mac.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 12:01:25 -0800

The IIIg question came up because I was looking for a small, entirely manual
camera for a "youngster" who was interested in learning black and white
photography and has some dollars to spend toward that end but not enough for an
M. (I didn't feel like loaning one of mine.)

A IIIf was in the right price range with a reasonable piece of glass and a light
meter.

An automatic camera doesn't seem like a good learning tool because it's too darn
easy to just flick it into auto mode and be done with it and then you haven't
had to do the thinking required. After you have learned that THEN you can fall
back and use automatic features.

That's sorta how I think about it anyhow.

A low-end used SLR would work too, of course, but I think there's something to
be said for using a range finder and learning to work within the boundaries of a
single lens (and a single kind of film too for that matter.)

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

Replies: Reply from John Collier <jbcollier@shaw.ca> (Re: [Leica] Why is the IIIg so much more expensive?)