OK,

I realize the value of an eyepiece magnifier. But, why would anyone buy a poory designed one and pay $225 for it? Don't tell me it's to cover R&D; it couldn't have cost much to develop a simple magnifier.

What's with the leash?! I guess it matches the $50 Leica designed lens cap leash. Does it come with a leather never-ready case? All those leashes would obstruct at least one of the windows. When is Leica going to research & develop a filter leash for those critical photos of the sun, when we don't want to degrade the image? And one for the hood too, when we have to take off the hood to get to the filter. When were done shooting we can hang the M on the porch and let it do double duty as a wind chime.

I read once that leica designed the raised lens index dot (that falls off) so that one could change lenses in the dark, or to make it easier for the blind to use.

Whadaya mean poorly designed?

Why not a zoom eyepiece; ever seen one on telescopes? How 'bout 0.75 to 1.25, for example. Not push-pull, but rotating.

What are some other Leica oddities?

Double lens holder: another good idea gone wrong; I have one (in storage). It doesn't work with all of the lenses; the deep rear element ones. My 3rd ver. 28 rear element housing would contact the other lens unless focused close; don't even think of using a 21 SA. When removing a lens, the other lens' rear element is exposed to the stuff in ones' bag (when wqas the last time you washed your bag?). Better idea would be the two rear lens cap back-to-back. Glue fails for you DIY, so Leica could make one to accomodate all past and present lenses, with a off-set divider in the unit (one for the 21, it's the deepest, and one "normal").

Baseplate lens holder: Com'on, imagine the feeling when you drop your camera and damage $6000 worth of equipment. What camera bag accomodates this set-up? Given, one hand to hold the camera, can you hold and manipulate an APO (forget about the Noct., or 75 Summ.) and any other lens simultaneously?

Step-up ring for the polarizer. Again, is it so hard to mark on the filter ring the position relative to the sun determined from testing?

I have more, but it's lunch time in "pretty slow in Krasnodar, Russia".

-- Chris Chen (chrischen@msn.com), January 16, 2002

Answers

hi chris, sorry for the ignorance, where is Krasnodar, Russia?

-- stefan randlkofer (geesbert@yahoo.com), January 16, 2002.

Uuuuuh Russia?

Actually near Novorossisk............Black Sea coast

-- Chris Chen (chrischen@msn.com), January 16, 2002.

Here's a map of Russia showing the location of Krasnodar. I found the map by following the link from the homepage of a lady in Krasnodar who is looking for a friend. Hey Chris, maybe you won't be so bored out there after all. It's amazing what search engines can find.

-- Fred Sun (redsky3@yahoo.com), January 16, 2002.

Fred,

I know, I did a Google search on Krasnodar prior to my assignment for climate, population, etc., and I found dozens of mail-order brides. One doesn't have to find ***** (no, not obscene, but still) they find you.

BTW, it's slow at work. I guess it's time to be promoted to the next level of incompetence. 8+)

-- Chris Chen (chrischen@msn.com), January 16, 2002.

Can't speak to all of the accessories, but I've never liked the ergonomics of the M bayonet mount. To accomodate right-handed people, the vast majority of photographers, I think it would have made more sense to have the lens release on the opposite side of the camera (below the VF) like on the Zeiss Ikon Contax RFs (perhaps there was a patent infringement issue).

In defense of the baseplate lens holder--although it obviously doesn't work for everyone, I think the idea is that you have the camera on a *strap* of some kind. leaving both hands free to change lenses (but you still have to be able to hold 2 lenses in 1 hand @ some time during a switch).

P.S., what the heck are you doing in Russia?

-- Chris Chen (Washington, DC) (furcafe@cris.com), January 16, 2002.

Bro,

I'm working on an oil pipeline that runs from the oil fields and pump station at Tengiz, Kazakstan, then to another pump station at Atyrau, Kazakstan, then to a pump station at Komsomolskaya, Kalmykia, Russia, then to a pump station at Kroptkin, Krasnodar, Russia, then finally to a tank farm/marine terminal and tanker loading single point moors off-shore (Black Sea) near Novorossysk, Krasnodar, Russia.

I'm a commissioning and start-up engineer. I get paid to travel! I've been doing this since 1989. I joke that I'm homeless; my home is where I am.

I Spend 3-6-11 (six is typical) months living and working within another peoples/cultures (I do get US assignments sometimes. To me Baytown, Texas is third world). I get apartments (typcally city center), go to work (typcally in the field/plant), and toil along side the natives. After all, how much does one learn about a people when all one experiences is two weeks among tour guides, hustlers, hotel/bar/restaurant/market staff, taxi drivers, etc. But y'all keep travelling; two weeks is better than none.

I have boxes and boxes (in storage) of street photography from all over the world. I will post some of the ones I travel with (office decorations), the others after retirement. It will take that long just to organize them. I don't throw ANY away (LP's either). They represent context of a time in my life, even the "pressed by mistake ones of the ceiling", and Saturday Night Fever album. I don't play it, but I remember when I did.

This is a phased project (current four pump station phase is $2.6B) that will, by 2014 have 15 pump stations (one every 100 km). Think long straw; if you suck on a very long vertical straw (30 feet), without the help of gravity (tilt), even if you pulled a perfect vacuum, you wouldn't get any water. As pump stations (booster stages) are added more oil can be pumped.

Baca

-- Chris Chen (chrischen@msn.com), January 16, 2002.

Hi Chris,

I am sorry to hear you are so disappointed with your Leica M. I love mine but everyone has different tastes. I would suggest you find a camera that you do enjoy rather than trying to change the one that I enjoy.

Leica makes a variety of accessories. Some people use certain ones and not others. I like my eyepiece magnifier and do not regret the money spent on it. I have not tried the baseplate lens holder as I prefer a body for each lens. I do know people that do have it and find it useful; again tastes differ.

The accessory rear cap which holds two lenses together was designed when all M lenses except two were able to use it. Now it is less useful but I imagine they are using up old stocks. There are some very good glues out there now which, if used properly, do not fail.

Finally, Leica will also cheerfully send you spare lens mounting dots if yours are missing.

-- John Collier (jbcollier@powersurfr.com), January 16, 2002.

It's OK John, Chris is on a "how many people can I p*ss off today" type of thing.

-- Giles Poilu (giles@monpoilu.icom43.net), January 16, 2002.

John (one of my M-heros),

I said that I understood "...the value of an eyepiece magnifier." Wouldn't a 0.75-1.25 be cool? You know Leica doesn't get "everything" right; we're all human after all. Is it imposible for anyone other than Leica to have a better (this one, maybe) idea? I have a German Emoscope that is far more complicated and less expensive.

Where did you get the impression that I don't like M's? Actually, you're right, I LOVE 'em. Got an M2/4/6. I won't get an M7 from what Andy posted; maybe an M8 is in my destiny, just to keep the pattern going.

I agree: one body/one lens. Mine 21/3.4, M4 (no meter anyway), 35/2.0, M6, 38/4.5, SWC. I travel w/90, 2.8 TE and carry it sometimes. I've got a good case solution if anyone is interested.

Sorry I hurt your, or anyone elses, feelings.

-- Chris Chen (chrischen@msn.com), January 16, 2002.

Eyepiece magnifier: I like what it does, and at $230 it was cheaper than trading up to an 0.85 body and I still have my nice 0.72 Classic. Since I carry 2 bodies, I removed the chain leash and stored it in the ER case in the original box, where it will someday be a valuable collectible. :>) If I used only one body, I would gripe about the design, as I have stated before, Leica could have made it so it flipped up like many eyepiece maginifers for SLR's.

Baseplate lens mounting plate: I always saw that as a way to save time and effort in breaking your entire M outfit all at once, while transforming the svelte M into a heavy and grotesque monstrosity. But to each his own.

Back-to-back lens couplers: I like the R ones better (solid baffle between lenses) but I can find all of my lenses save the 21/3.4 S/A a "partner" where there won't be a collision. And there is never a problem with the remaining lens being exposed: the body cap goes in place when the first lens comes off the coupler.

Polarizer: Marking the postion relative to the sun on a polarizer is akin to marking the spot where the fish are biting, by drawing an "X" on the side of the boat. With the M you either need a handheld viewing polarizer calibrated to the one on the lens; or view first and then attach the filter; or use the swing-out type; or use a step- up adaptor with windows cut in the flange. The first two methods are cumbersome and time-consuming; the last two are Leica's solutions.

The nice thing about Leica's accessories is that no one forces you to buy them. With the Japanese in a continuous contest to see who can jam the most improbably-useful bells-and-whistles into a camera, that's refreshing.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), January 16, 2002.

Hi Chris,

Of course you did not hurt my, nor any one else's feelings. I just wanted to point out that what you or I might perceived as a fault, also has an admirer. I am glad you are enjoying your M cameras.

Cheers,

-- John Collier (jbcollier@powersurfr.com), January 16, 2002.

Hey Chris,

Are you working up to writing a sequel to "J'accuse Leica" ? :-)

IMHO, Leica has produced some weird contraptions, to name a few: the baseplate lens holder (clumsy), Visoflex (monstrosity), lenses with goggles (outlandish) and the M5 pop-up photocell-on-a-stick (too vulnerable). This is just my point of view and I realize that YMMV.

I also agree that the viewfinder magnifier should be of zoom design but I would like to see it as a permanent fixture in future M cameras, such as the alleged M7. If it had a magnification range of 1.0x - 2.0x, the .58 body could become universal for all lenses (provided that it was equipped with the 135mm frameline) and there would be no need to buy a .72 or .85 body. You could also choose the magnification most suited to composing with whatever lens you were using at the time.

-- Ray Moth (ray_moth@yahoo.com), January 16, 2002.

Ray (and Chris, too, actually),

Having joined the "Leica family" rather recently, I'd have to agree with certain elements of your observations. Many of accessories you mention for older Leicas and lenses are a bit curious. They do, however, form part of the Leica mystique, I think. Particularly now, in retrospect, many of these things are inventions that only a German engineer could love (or, a person of similar bent, but of a different nationality).

Personally, I rather like the "goggles," as you call them, on the used Summicron DR I recently acquired. I suspect the funny looks I've been getting when using the lens are based on based on people clicking on their mental images of the similarities between people and their dogs. In fact, I've been thinking about getting a pair of those trendy small rectangular eyeglasses, just so I'll look more like my DR. (lol)

-- Ralph Barker (rbarker@pacbell.net), January 16, 2002.

Chris & Ray: You don't have to buy it, but it is nice to unload sometimes. I enjoy the Viso. I was accused of shooting with a flash in a Spanish museum with a point and shoot. The museum guard pointed to the brightline window and said it was the flash. He didn't believe me until I took a picture and "flash" didn't go off.

Love em or leave em.

-- M.A. Johnson (logical1@catholic.org), January 16, 2002.

$230 IS cheaper than a second body, true. But would you spend $600 on the eyepiece; it's still cheaper than a second body.

Chris was just trying to justify Leica pricing policy. If we refuse to pay Leica (OK, the retailer) inflated prices for equipment, they'll have to wise up and charge fair prices - no more than $50 for the eyepiece - for their goods.

I'll bet pounds for dollars that Leica does NOT even make the thing.

I'm in the wrong business. Maybe I'll start making better designed accessories and charge fair prices; are you listening Lutz? What do you think Leica would charge for your well thought out accessories?

-- more money than brains (bitter crotch@arswhole.com), January 18, 2002.

Re high priced eyepiece magnifier.. how about a DIY solution? Intrigued by this thread, I experimented with various lenses and it appears that a +1 close up lens held against the back eyepiece on my M2 did look slightly magnified. Perhaps someone out there who has a +3 close up lens or a video camera close up lens would like to try. If this does indeed work, the next thing would be to find a filter small enough or have a friendly optometrist and their lab grind a small piece to fit. Alternatively, does Nikon,Canon, Mamiya, Bronica etc have slip on eyepiece magnifiers? If these things exist in other camera manufacturers accessory line up, it'd most likely be a lot less expensive too.

-- Fred Sun (redsky3@yahoo.com), January 18, 2002.

Baseplate lens holder: (...) Given, one hand to hold the camera, can you hold and manipulate an APO (forget about the Noct., or 75 Summ.) and any other lens simultaneously?

http://www.konermann.net/sling.html

Well, I *am* listening...;o) Could you mail me a list of your headscratchers? Cheers!

-- Lutz Konermann (lutz@konermann.net), January 18, 2002.