Alan Gales
Member
In the 80s my uncle (notorious snob and owner of an Hasselblad COMPLETE system that used only twice, all the gear is still stored in boxes) kept on repeating that Leica was making the best cameras and lenses ever and Contax and Zeiss lenses for 35mm were still made in W.Germany and superior to the Zeiss East Germany. He also wanted my father to spend the money for a Contax when I was 13 but my old man thought he was crazy, with some good reasons.
Talking about Leica lore, in the same years the Red Dot was forced to ask Minolta to make SLRs for them as the first and second Leicaflex proved they couldn't understand how to make proper SLRs but they refused for years to admit that, or they kept it "confidential".
When I was 22 I bought my Contax 139. It was on sale and I had to borrow some of the money from a friend to buy it. I was also still living at home with my parents. I can completely understand why a family man like your father didn't want to spend that much on a camera. For most people back then a Canon Sureshot was great for family snapshots but still not inexpensive for their budgets.
Why is the Hasselblad still stored? Someone needs to have it CLA'd and shoot it.
I don't know much about Leica SLR's. A very good friend of mine bought a used one a few years ago. I handled it and if felt good in my hands. Almost as good as a Contax which I have always felt was the most ergonomic of 35mm cameras.
I'm not sure what you are talking about with the Minolta-Leica SLR connection. Did Minolta make Leica SLR's? I have always been fond of the Minolta X700 for their reasonably priced cameras and very good lenses back in the day. The Canon AE-1 Programs outsold them but I never cared for shutter priority.