> > Anybody else read > http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photograph > er/2009/05/a-leica-year.html > Mike Johnston's little ode to simplicity and the Leica as a teacher. > > I'm seriously thinking about giving the basic concept a try. Not with > a Leica though, but rather with either a Yashica FX-3 or Nikon FM2n > and a fast normal. I don't feel like paying the Leica tax and my FX-3 > in particular cost less than the eBay/Paypal transaction fees on even > a cheap M. >
The follow-up piece is quite interesting too: http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2009/05/why -it-has-to-be-a-leica.html The Leica 'tax' is a myth, as he points out. I have recently sold my M4-2 which I had for about 8-10 years for about the same money I paid for it. Admittedly I spent £150- on it a few years ago for a service, but for a 1968 camera it did pretty well. My E-1, on the other hand, is worth nothing now. The older photographers among us had little choice but to learn the way Mike suggests. My early photography was with an MX which I bought by not smoking for a year. I generally shot black & white and rarely had anything enlarged because I couldn't afford it - just the contact prints. I still have all the negs and contacts and there are probably hundreds of photos I should scan and enlarge. But I can't be arsed. Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
