Hi all,
From: ClassicVW@xxxxxxx
>What do people say over and over that the Leica's strong suits are...?
>Their small size, their lightness, the bright, clear viewfinders, the
superb
>glass.... we have all that in our OM system!
Well, I can see several advantages of rangefinders (not only Leica) over
SLRs (not only OM)... in fact, the "great" thing about the OM back in the
day was being a SLR (read versatile) system much closer to RF systems than
any other brand -- think Nikon F2, Canon FTb / F1, Minolta SR-T.
Size: no way to make a camera much smaller without compromising handling --
the Pentax MX, marginally smaller than a OM, doesn't fit well my hands.
Classic Leicas and modern Bessas are roughly the same size of the OM, except
for the mirror box. But then the Leica/Minolta CL/CLE are quite compact but
with _great_ ergonomics! YMMV.
Lightness: a Leica is heavier than any OM... but seems to be built like a
tank (never handled one, I admit). The most recent Bessas are just a bit
lighter than Oly.
Bright, Clear viewfinders: no point of comparison. Now that I'm investing on
RFs, I find the OM viewfinder so dark and dirty... Again, never seen thru a
Leica, the Bessas are fine; the CLE not as bright, but covers up to 28mm...
Superb glass: 35 years ago, maybe. Now, modern designs are greater. CV makes
_really_ fine lenses. Sure Leica is the best, but CV's are much better that
anything I tried on SLRs, at a fraction of Leica's tag. RF has a definite
advantage for wideangles, even standard lenses. OTOH, teles are slow and/or
relatively bulky.
Cheers,
--
Carlos J. Santisteban Salinas
IES Turaniana (Roquetas de Mar, Almeria)
<http://cjss.sytes.net/>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|