Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/01/22
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Gents, et al., Never have I heard such moaning... My consulting contact at Solms will confirm Seth's assertion at the earliest opportunity. Until then... IF .72 MP's are only available via "a la carte", THEN the MSRP would be $3,500. I presume the MAP might be $3,000 and THAT would imply to me that the camera could be had for $2,800 with a USA Passport Warranty, etc., etc. from a "friendly dealer". Considering what has happened to the USD in the past year, what is so harsh about a $200 increase? Chrome and Black Paint versions are at no charge, and likewise .58 or .85 viewfinders attract no additional charge. Black Chrome is a mere $50 more, and that WOULD have been an attraction to me. The M7 type film rewind crank costs an additional $240 which does not seem all that unreasonable if you consider that a different top plate must be fitted. I'd not personally be bothered since the MP knob has enough friction to prevent the film from unwinding if your fingers slip. My M7's rewind crank is not so wonderful anyway compared to the REAL rewind crank on my M5. Of course, if you have no self control at this point and want to order all types of fancy script and coverings, the thing COULD easily cost well north of $4,000. That would be YOUR happy problem. :-) Reality check, please... William At 08:39 AM 01/21/2005 -0800, you wrote: >The .72 did sell well, so why do that one in? > >Personally if the MP had a proper rewind knob, I would have been interested. >But as a archaic technology rewind camera, I was not interested. A $1500 >uplift ( or whatever they charge) for a proper period 1960's rewind knob is >not something I am going to spend. > >Maybe the MP with a proper rewind knob is the new camera for 2005? They >could call it a MPa. > >Frank Filippone ><mailto:red735i@earthlink.net>red735i@earthlink.net >You may have missed the part of the thread that stated that the two >off-sizes of rf's did not sell very well.