I never had a Leica - but I had an Argus C-3 once. It also seemed to
be made out of one slab of metal. It was also very handy - when you
weren't using it as a camera, it could double as a hammer or as a
defensive weapon. No apparent damage when used in those
capacities (and a lot cheaper than a Leica!). Very reliable.
Benson
My subjective (!) observations: My old Leicas (IIIf and IIIg) and the
older M-series cameras I've handled remind me of camera bodies
carved out of a lump of metal. The 'touch' of them feels like holding a
solid object. The knobs and buttons move and turn, but there is no
flex, no wiggle in the motions. OM's, while expertly crafted, do not
have this same 'perceived solidness' to them... neither do the
Nikons, Canons, Minoltas, Pentax's, Fujica's, etc that I've handled.
Most of the older Japanese designs (mentionedabove) still feel much
more robust than newer plastic wunderbricks I've handled (cheaper
Canon EOS system, Minolta Maxxum, etc.) although the
high-end wunderbricks (EOS 1v, Maxxum 9, Nikon F5) feel the
same as the older SLR's - -- that might be due to having metal frame
construction instead of polycarbonate guts.
The Leica R8 I handled felt more solid than the metal wunderbricks,
but not as solid as the older Leicas... and I don't think the M6's that
I've handled felt as solid as the M2's, M3's, and M4's. I would buy a
Leica just for the craftsmanship and construction quality, but to me
the pinnacle was the M4... after that they weren't 'built' any more so
much as 'assembled'. - --
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|