You assessment is spot on. Owners of expensive camera gear don't like hearing that a camera that can be had for $50 is a better (yes, "better") photographic tool than their expensive prestige brand, so they become defensive. The Yash is better for - like Rockwell or not, exactly what he states in essence, which is similar to what I said in a tread from a few months agos...
... its design is such that (according to Rockwell) "nothing gets in the way." I said it's the fastest in operation which affords the most creative control required - the aperture. Ergo, it's "the best camera for RF-style photography" and best able to capture that "decisive moment".
This attribute of the Yashica, in conjunction with its overall value proposition, trumps the truly marginal differences in lens quality between a Yashica Electro and a Leica. The Electro gave you what you needed to take a photograph well (or at least improved your odds). Yash gave you useful meaningful innovation (at least in its era) in fast aperture priority, a kick-arse lense, combined for an outstanding value proposition. Leica gave you "a buttery smooth focusing ring" (rolls eyes) that you paid beyond a premium for. If this was a movie, the Yashica would be that low budget sleeper where every dollar was on the screen and was entertaining (if, perhaps, mixed reviews, critically). The Leica would be that big budget, big name pseudo art-house "independent" flick...
Leica was/is always about the "4 Ps"..
- Product
- Price
- Placement
- Promotion
... the 4 Ps of "marketing", that is....
Yashica was about the 1 "P"...
... photography
|
Nick,
I hardly can believe you are serious, and I assume you are not. Nevertheless, just in case you want to follow the game, let's start from the begining, the ABC.
While the Electros were fixed lens cameras, enabling the manufacturer to enjoy the many advantages of this situation, Leicas were and are system cameras, enabling lens exchange plus a numerous high quality devices, up to the simple diopter, lacking in the Yashicas.
By this sole factor, the Electros stand below not only Leicas but FSU Kievs, Feds and every other system cameras. And here the main issues of the discussion end, to my humble opinion. Of course that in case you overskip this fact, you start jocking and I welcome your sense of humour.
There are and have been top photographers working with fixed lens cameras, but this doesn't contradict the fact that a fixed lens camera is an amateur one.
On behalf of the Electros and against the Leicas you can say that the former were highly innovative while the latter highly conservative with almost no limit here, but Leicas offered a package of the most basic operations at a much higher built quality.
In contrast, the Electros, clearly are not cameras to stand high levels of banging or shutter firings.
Now I could detail furthermore why the Electrros are amateur purposed cameras while Leicas are pro, but the list is long and I am not sure you are serious.
The problem is as well that you mix correct criticisms about Leica users, manufaturers etx, and hide much of the Yashica weaknesses, even if we were to accept that a fixed lens camera can be compared to a system one.
Cheers,
Ruben