Ok, I just read the article.
I'm glad Pete's enjoying his choices in equipment. Otherwise, I find
his thesis to be total malarkey: pompous preening and condescension.
He talks of being 'one with the beauty in front of him' and then
drones on and on about Leica equipment like a lovesick
whojimawhatsis, mouthing almost the very words from Leica's
advertising brochures.
Feh.
I owned Leica gear for many years and it is generally very good
equipment. The Summicron-M 35/2 ASPH is a very good lens, but it has
some OOF rendering problems that the last pre-ASPH 35/2 didn't. I
liked my Ms, the right one does disappear in your hands once you know
its foibles and issues well enough. Frankly, though, my old Nikon FM
disappeared faster, and the Pentax *ist DS disappears even faster
than that. The Leica gear requires more service than it ought to for
equipment that costs that much money too.
Yeah, enough already ... for sure.
Pete, go take your thousand exposures and make your 16 prints per
year. Enjoy what you do. But don't put down what other people's
experience shows them to be the right solution to fulfill their
vision. I don't buy your sales pitch.
Godfrey
