I don't think (tho' I may well be wrong) that anyone has discussed the suitability of a contax n1 as an slr partner to the M. I love my m6's but have reservations about the R system - a recent borrowing of a friend's R8 didn't really inspire confidence as the winder self destructed in my care (slightly embarassing all around...). I have read Erwin Putt's review of the 24-85 for N but wondered if anyone combined the two systems and could comment on the colour characteristice etc. - whether the two systems have a similar "feel"? Any comments would be of value.

-- steve (stephenjjones@btopenworld.com), January 14, 2002

Answers

I recently sold my SLR (EOS 5/zoom lenses/flash system) but will probably buy another in the coming years - as we all know the M cannot do everything!

My thoughts are that instead of using a similar SLR to the M (ie manual focus/exposure/wind etc) I would rather have the latest all- singing all dancing multi-metering/4 fps/ultra-fast AF etc EOS 33/F100 type. This would give you all the advantages of a modern SLR and really balance the back to basics M.

With the combination of two such different cameras I cannot really think of a photographic situation that could not be covered.

I can't comment on the similarities/differences between each company's glass - that is a different thing alltogether.

-- Giles Poilu (giles@monpoilu.icom43.net), January 14, 2002.

I agree with Giles. Though I have an R3 (with one lens only) that I use mainly for copywork, if I was to seriously consider an SLR I would want it to be as versatile as possible. Though the Contax is nice it has no wheres near the lens or accessory range of Canon/Nikon. There is serious talk in the industry of Contax having built this camera too late. Most pros are committed to C/N heavily and few think that the Contax will sell in big enough numbers that Kyrocera (the maker of Contax) will develop it as fully as the others.

-- Bob Todrick (bobtodrick@yahoo.com), January 14, 2002.

I would be seriously concerned about the resale value of the Contax even more than Leica R. They're great second-hand buys, though. My criteria for buying into an SLR system at this point would have to include a serious look at the brand's commitment to digital bodies. So far Contax's is still only rumored, Leica's is not even that far along. Although I currently own a Nikon-mount Fuji S1 because its (extrapolation-aided) resolution edged out the D30 (and in fact the new 1D is lower-res than the Nikon D1X)eventually I will probably end up in the Canon camp because I can still use my R lenses with adaptors...plus get the benefits of Canon's other technological advances which seem to be pulling farther and farther ahead of Nikon. Looks like a 35-year relationship is coming to an end for me.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), January 14, 2002.

I have a motorized R8--which is a magnificent camera, IMO the finest 35mm SLR ever built--and an Elan 7 w/L zoom for my commercial work. I sold my M6 TTL after I found that I could not focus accurately with it close-up with a 90mm lens.

The R8 is the only R with the Leica feel; and there's no substitute on this planet for Leitz glass (specifically, the Summicrons)--though, to be honest, I have not tried the 85mm f/1.4 Zeiss lens for the Contax, and I do adore the Zeiss lenses for my Hassy.

-- Peter Hughes (ravenart@pacbell.net), January 14, 2002.

I'm with Jay and Giles on this one. I currently have an F5 and 80-400 VR for when I want to do what the SLR does best. Like Giles points out, the autoeverythingbellsandwhistles bodies are nice to have in some situations, and while I rarely miss them while shooting with my M, I still want them for certain subjects. However, as Jay points out, with the appropriate adapters you can use Leica R glass on a Canon. Hence, I am currently contemplating the cross over to Canon plus a few of their IS lenses, and a few R lenses with Canon adapters to replace my Nikon gear altogether.

~

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), January 14, 2002.

I see no reason why Leica will not ultimately produce (or license) an R digital body, you pessimists. It may take a few years but what is the hurry? It seems there is no pressing need unless you are pro and need results now to abandon the R line so you can get into digital faster. I am certainly not ready to buy a digital camera anyway due to the fact the techology is immature and expensive, whereas film is still unbeatable in quality, archivability and pretty cheap.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), January 14, 2002.

Robin, I'm not sure doubting the eventuality of a digital R body comes under the heading of pessimism as much as historical predication and known economic facts. Leica is sort of caught between a rock and a hard place: on one hand they can't afford to birth a new digital body every 18 months as the Japanese brands play megapixel leapfrog, without partnering-up with one of them; on the other hand, Leica has a customer base that renounces any Leica product that isn't a Solms design, and downrates even those if they're produced elsewhere. Two weeks ago I'd have said I'll be in line for the last roll of film on earth. My 1.3mp digital camera was fine for wallet-size snaps and e-mail images. But after a couple weeks with the Fuji S1 my opinion is changing.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), January 14, 2002.

i went the Canon route.I had very old Pentax Spotmatics and wonderful Takumar lenses,K-1000 and a basic 4 lens unit and a Nikon System built around 2 Nikon-F bodies,quite a few lenses.Rather than getting peanuts for these systems in a trade,I kept them.I needed an slr that was reasonable fast,flash built in-so that I would have a modern point and shoot.I chose the Canon Rebel 2000 and a 28~85mm lens.This is mainly for weddings and family celebrations.Professional jobs.I figured if the Rebel lasted 2 years with the right amount of jobs every few weeks,the cost factor would be roughly per wedding,the cost of a pro roll of film!The camera is fast....but slow enough to drive me crazy compared to my Leicas.I use these with the Canon.Nikon and Canon is probably the worst way to go because of the different lens mounting directions.Also i figgered the Canon lenses had individual motors built in.So if lens failed,the body could continue if I had other lenses.I found the eye tracking a disadvantage,as sometimes I wear glasses and sometimes I dont.It affects its tracking.The EOS-1 and 3 are awesome in size.NOt much smaller than the Pentax 6x7 that I traded for the M6.Also no built in flash.For simple family parties of my own I have flash camera.I need now to add flash to my Leica. Conclusion; I am glad of my choice.Sure the Canon is never going to last as long as a Leica,but photography is changing dramatically. My next camera will be digital for the internet. Howevere for documentary and personal projects I way prefer a M and maybe as much as an additional lens.I use 50 almost 90% of the time.

-- jason gold (leeu72@hotmail.com), January 14, 2002.

Jay

My point is that if Leica does go under then I suspect someone will buy them and they are very likely to continue to produce the items they bought the company for - namely Ms and the lenses. Therefore if they were bought I think it likely that the R lenses would appear, say working for Canon or Nikon or such like. If the company completely disappears then there will be no Leica anyway and all of us will have to rethink. I suppose I do believe that Leica will make the transition to digital in one way or another whether as Leica or owned by someone else, that is all I am saying. If Leica do weather the storm then, almost by definition, they will (must) have a digital body.

Re the S1: Jay, you are already sucked in and your S1 is soon to be obsolete. Is film obsolete -- not yet?

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), January 14, 2002.

personaly i don't think you can go wrong with any of the big camera manufacturers. i also have a af camera to match when i need af (sports) or just feel lazy. i know this must be heresy but i did not find enough difference between c/n/m to base the decesion on quality off the cameras. if you need some exotic long glass the choices are smaller, and if you need quality wide angle lenses you will stay with your m. i ended up with the minolta maxxum 9 mainly because it had a pop up flash and because i felt that it had the best vertical control grip of any of the big three, which makes turning the camera more comfortable.

-- greg mason (gmason1661@aol.com), January 14, 2002.

Re: the S1. I bought it used (but un-used) for less than half the new price, and it was my only upgrade since 1.3 megapixels. I had a specific need for it: macro shots with a ringlight, to be used in brochures and for magazine illustration. I don't mind if it's obsolete, I wouldn't put more money into digital until things get really serious in terms of resolution. I'm not abandoning film or Leicas just yet ;>) Anyway, since I have a few Nikon lenses I couldn't resist hooking the S1 up with my 300/2.8 (becomes a 450/2.8 on the S1) and seeing what it does on some bird photography. I admit, whatever Fuji did to artificially boost the resolution, it works. So that's what got me interested in wanting to eventually hook my R lenses up to a digital body.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), January 14, 2002.

Any item is only obsolete if it no longer does what you need it to. My S1 is a great camera and produces the same high quality images for magazines that it did a year ago. And so it will next year (even if I choose not to own it).

As for the orignal question. I would say go with a 100% sooper-dooper SLR of some sort. Canon or Nikon. The F5 is an amazing camera, one of my very favorites. Although it is a bit big. A F100 might be better.

-- Josh Root (rootj@att.net), January 14, 2002.

The best suitable partner for a Leica M system is a wonderful and understanding spouse. Those of us who are amateurs spend a good deal of money on our equipment and then a good deal more on film and processing. We should count ourselves blessed, not only be allowed to spend vast sums of money, but also even to be encouraged as well. Damn lucky and happy too!

-- John Collier (jbcollier@powersurfr.com), January 15, 2002.

I totally agree with John Collier. The understanding spouse is essential.

If you are Leica user, your world view probably tends toward manual focus and possibly manual metering. Do the understanding spouse a favor and don't buy a new expensive SLR. Pick up a used Nikon F2 or F3 and some used Nikon lenses. Canon F-1, T-90 and even AE-1 and A-1 are also great cameras. The prices are right because no one wants though darlings. Once I picked up a used Tamaron 60-300 SP zoom for 10,000 yen, or about $80.00. It's a great lens--as its specs (1985) show.

-- Alex Shishin (shishin@pp.iij4u.or.jp), January 20, 2002.