If one wants to shoot with most any Leica rangefinder (and I say most any because, off the top of my head, I don't recall if the M7 has a higher top shutter speed, and if it does it's probably only a stop), the shutter speed is limited to 1/1000 sec. There is no alternative. So now what you're saying is that one should sell off a system they like and in which a lot of time and money has been invested in order to shoot an "arguably" better, faster film.
And why should I have to sell my early K mount cameras that I like so well, or retire my MX or LX at a significant loss, in order to buy one of these new cameras (that you yourself excoriate) in order to get faster shutter speeds. And let's talk about the common top shutter speed on many medium format cameras that are limited to only 1/500 second. I guess those systems would be obsolete as well. Adding a ND filter is a PITA, and they do not add anything to the shooting style of many photographers. It's just another item to put on / take off that can be lost or damaged. Plus, they don't always work when one wants to use a color filter. Many B&W shooters use a yellow filter, so one may have to resort to filter stacking, which may preclude the use of a lens hood ... and so on. No, faster is not always better even if the films gave identical results. As with everything, there's a tradeoff, and for some, the tradeoff to use faster films is, if not unacceptable, certainly unappreciated. Shel > [Original Message] > From: J. C. O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 10/24/2004 1:05:28 PM > Subject: RE: B&W developers and Tri-x ?? > > My contention was simply that a faster (but otherwise equal) speed film > is overall better for the advantages > it has for MOST photography and you can always get ND filters > or a better spec shutter/camera if you want to use very fast apertures > in bright light.
