[rollei_list] Re: OT / prove it !

I recently bought, at an estate sale, two each of Leica M3 & IIIf, with 8 
lenses. All the Leica lenses (made from early to late 1950s) were full of 
haze and full of cleaning scratches on the front element , and they were 
stiff to the point of unusability. The bodies were all off on focusing and 
shutter speed, though they looked pristine. I have spent some money cleaning 
the lenses, and now have to spend a small fortune in getting the bodies upto 
scratch.

At the same sale I also bought an early Nikon F (1961) with 6 non AI lenses. 
The camera is also pristine, but everything works flawlessly, including the 
Photomic meter. The lenses are absolutely clear, and have had to go for no 
cleaning or maintenance.

All the cameras mentioned above have had only one owner, who bought them new 
and then kept using them till he died. He really looked after his equipment 
to the extent he could, living here in India.

My view is that it is arrant nonsense that Leicas are manufactured to a 
higher standard than Rollei or Nikon, because I think that Rolleis and 
Nikons have aged far more gracefully than Leicas. Its a lovely camera, and 
rangefinders are nice to use, but advertising and word of mouth have given 
it a mystique, and a astronomical price when new, that it probably does not 
deserve (after all its owned by a luxury house, Hermes). Its fast becoming a 
bit of jewelry that rich men wear....
Cheers
Jayanand Govindaraj
Chennai, India

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Marc James Small" <msmall@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 4:50 AM
Subject: [rollei_list] Re: OT / prove it !


> At 12:51 AM 3/31/05 +0200, Fred Fichter wrote:
>
>>Here is my question : why all this fuss regarding leicas ? Because it=20
>>produces better pictures ? Then please, show me examples of pictures=20
>>that one cannot make with any SLR and a good fast lens...
>
> That really is not the proper question, Fred.  More properly, the question
> should be about the immense utility of a rangefinder camera over the
> weak-sister abilities of an SLR, the wide-ranging capacity of the Leica
> system (my M6, for instance, can use Leitz accessories made in 1937 
> without
> a problem), and the capability of the camera:  the Leica camera is 
> reliable
> to a point which Nikon deliberately chose not to match and its lack of
> shutter noise allows great pictures to be shot in really low-light=
> conditions.

Other related posts: