Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2013/06/27
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]The problem is when we bought our fist Leicas in my case twenty years ago 4/21/1993 film had been out for awhile. And the M6 which I bought did not have a certain film locked into it with developing and you were not able to use any other film developer dilution combinations. You could use any just out films and just out developers. In my case the just out Delta Tab grain films and then the Neopan. And more importantly the huge thing being Xtol 1:3 brought to my work. I got far better than D76 1:1 with Neopan 1600 at 1600 with Xtol 1:3. And those were two very big stops to have the use of. My M6 and Leica glass added to my work in the 90's but so did these other key elements. Film and processing. And if I was by some impossible fluke not able to shoot Neopan 1600 with Xtol 1:3 at iso 1600 with my M6 - I'd have used my FM2 or 8008 Nikons instead. As my M6 would have in effect then have become as Rockwell used to phrase it "OBSOLETE". Digital cameras come with the film and processing more or less build into it. And this technology was invented the day before yesterday. I think its logical to expect that when investing in a burgeoning technology obsolescence looms high in the sky; in neon lights. With your name on it with your bank balance. On 6/26/13 7:19 PM, "Tina Manley" <images at comporium.net> wrote: > I also bought a Leica 40 years ago because I knew it would stand up under > all kinds of conditions that other cameras would not. I still feel that is > true with my digital Leicas. I don't know what the reason is, but I've > never had a problem with my digital cameras that wasn't fixed immediately > by Leica. I dunked two M8s in a river, dried them by a fire, and they kept > working. Maybe I'm just lucky when it comes to cameras but I still believe > in Leica. I don't think I could have dunked my Canon 1DMII or 5D in a > river and still had them work. I love the simplicity of the Leica menus, > buttons and knobs that I can use in the dark by feel. I love rangefinder > focusing. I love my old Leica lenses. I would put up with a lot of quirks > to be able to use my old lenses full frame but I don't have to. I'm a > happy camper. > > Tina > > > On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 7:06 PM, Jim Nichols <jhnichols at > lighttube.net>wrote: > >> Hi George, >> >> You see things much the way that I do. I bought my first Leica body and >> lens in 1952, probably much earlier than most on this list. Though the >> IIIa was made in 1935, it had been serviced and had a new shutter when I >> got it. Though it definitely needs a CLA, it will make images, reliably, >> to >> this day. That is what started my appreciation of Leica products. >> >> Their digital products seem to be built for a limited lifetime. The two >> lines are entirely different, as I see them. I have a difficult time >> "buying into" their current approach to digital camera bodies. >> >> Jim Nichols >> Tullahoma, TN USA >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "George Lottermoser" <imagist3 at >> mac.com> >> To: "Leica Users Group" <lug at leica-users.org> >> Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 5:55 PM >> Subject: Re: [Leica] Buying Leica..... >> >> >> >> >>> On Jun 26, 2013, at 5:25 PM, John McMaster wrote: >>> >>> With hindsight I would still go Leica, nothing to touch the lenses for >>>> different looks and I prefer the simpler operation, but if I had not >>>> used >>>> them what would make me spend 'rather a lot' more on Leica than Fuji? >>>> Does >>>> 'full frame' or the build quality make enough of a difference for the >>>> price >>>> jump to most people? >>>> >>> >>> The piece of this "to Leica or not to Leica" quandary that throws me >>> is the relatively recent "lack of reliability and maintenance." >>> For over 30 years I KNEW that my Leicas would stand up to daily use; >>> be able to be CLA'd and maintained for the duration of my life. >>> >>> When the digital R path ended abruptly - doubt set in. >>> >>> Recent stories of lack of parts or repair paths for 5 year old cameras >>> seems totally unacceptable for "any" camera company; >>> let alone a high end, premium camera company. >>> >>> I expected that, what ever its flaws may be, that I could keep my M8 >>> making photographs for as long as I chose to hang on to it; >>> just like every other Leica camera that came before it. >>> >>> The idea that $7K camera bodies are simply disposable hardware >>> with a useable life of a two year warranty - feels totally unacceptable >>> to me. >>> If not unacceptable - certainly unaffordable - to me. >>> >>> I'm coming from that place where the 50 year old Linhof Tech IV >>> I just sold works every bit as well the day I handed it to Forrest >>> as the day it left the factory. >>> >>> This whole new device, whether computer, camera body, phone >>> whatever - simply feels quite "wrong." >>> >>> I welcome technological advances and their concomitant costs; >>> while also expecting that if I choose to remain a couple generations >>> back; >>> that high priced hardware continue to perform somewhere close to specs; >>> and be designed for adjustment back to original specs. >>> >>> Regards, >>> George Lottermoser >>> george at imagist.com >>> http://www.imagist.com >>> http://www.imagist.com/blog >>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/**imagist <http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ______________________________**_________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See >>> http://leica-users.org/**mailman/listinfo/lug<http://leica-users.org/mailman >>> /listinfo/lug>for more information >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> ______________________________**_________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See >> http://leica-users.org/**mailman/listinfo/lug<http://leica-users.org/mailman/ >> listinfo/lug>for more information >> >> > -- Mark William Rabiner Photography http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/