At 19:14 1/16/00 , Denton Taylor wrote:
>In reality there is not much of a comparison since Contax makes some quite
>inexpensive SLR bodies (and some reasonably priced Zeiss lenses to match)
>while Leica does not.
I assume you are talking about the current Leica and Contax SLR's for which
I agree. Contax SLR bodies are made by Kyocera (Yashica's parent) with
Carl Zeiss lenses under the agreement made between Yashica and the Zeiss
Foundation during the 1970's after Zeiss Ikon was dissolved. [Note: Zeiss
Ikon never made a "Contax" SLR. Zeiss Ikon's SLR's were the Contaflex,
Contarex and Icaflex.]
With the Leica M6 and Contax G2 the situation is similar with the concept
for each one. The Leica "M" series is a continued evolution of the M3
concepts. The Contax G2 continues the G1 which resurrected the name on a
rangefinder system in the 1990's, but they are a completely different
concept compared to Zeiss Ikon's Contax's. [Note: the (Kyocera) Contax T
resurrected the name on a rangefinder, but it has a fixed lens, and the T
series are AE P&S's.]
Whatever rivalry there is now between the M6 and G2 is a mild holdover from
the one that ended in 1961 and is based more on legend and mystique than on
a comparison of the two.
OM Content:
>From my perspective it is interesting that the OM system never got fully
embroiled in the SLR Holy Wars, in spite of its outstanding bodies and
lenses. Even in its 1980's heyday it was always on the sidelines quietly
plugging away. Maybe because its users would rather take photographs than
argue who's got the latest and greatest?
-- John
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|