Back in the 60s I owned a small collection of Leica rangefinder cameras and lenses. I had a IIF, IIIF, IIIG initially, then went to the bayonet lens mount models M2, M2-4, M3, M4 - though I didn't have more than 2 of these at the same time - being a college student, money was scarce. I had a few screw mount lenses for the older cameras, but sold everything when I got my first M camera. Which coincided with getting a job at their Rockleigh, NJ warehouse. I had every F2 lens they made, and a 21mm Super Angulon with the accessory viewfinder, to their 180mm F2.8 Tele Elmarit, which I used with my Visoflex III. So Leica rangefinders needed mirrors to accomplish certain types of photography. Obviously, your contradiction - "never had a mirror, who needs it" and your subsequent statements, "If I want to shoot telephoto images" and use it for "magnificent macro images" clearly indicates that to expand your photographic horizons a Visoflex was necessary. Besides, an elegant camera like any of the old Leica rangefinders became a lot less elegant when you bolted the Visoflex on it. And Visoflex adapters were not all that popular, in part, because of the focusing errors and general "clunkiness" when using one.

No Leica rangefinder that I know of had a "split image" focusing system. The older ones were zone-focused, the later ones used a rangefinder and rangefinder coupled lenses. Split image, in typical usage, referred to a groundglass with a center split prism, which showed a misalignment when out of focus. Two entirely different systems.

Early Leicas did not have flash sync - making it's use limited to just available light shooting. I think the first Leica that offered flash sync was the IIIF. Early Leicas did not have framing aids or parallax correction until the IIIG. It was hard to use the older cameras with different focal lengths.

I would have to disagree with you that improvements were "minimal." Even little things like having a fast film advance that required just one stroke of the film advance knob, or later, the lever-based film advance, bigger brighter viewfinders, parallax corrected rangefinder/viewfinder - these were all extremely functional and much anticipated improvements.

The metering systems introduced on the cameras were so-so at best. I carried around a LunaPro in the beginning, and later a Pentax spot meter if I wanted accuracy. But the quality of the metering system is only as good as the photographer's ability to interpret the reading.

I won't argue that you haven't taken some pretty spectacular images with your Leicas. But without any real examples of your work it's not possible to comprehend just how amazing your cameras and your photography is. You've got a few images in some threads, but these are small, low res images. Many are over-saturated, but that is not your fault - posting images to UHH will often cause color and tonal shifts, and increases in contrast.

I will argue that you can get better images, with greater variety of subject matter with current tech.

Leicas were beautifully engineered and built, but by no means a general purpose camera. Nor is it perfection. Alpa - another phenomenal camera, totally underrated, was my choice for a few years - I had a pair of 10Ds for a while and in my hands, the Alpha felt just as good as any Leica I ever had.

My idea of camera perfection for film has to be my old Sinar P2. Coupled with great lenses, you could not ask for more when it came to image quality and camera controls. Sadly, the images I took with it in the 80s got lost in a move.

I have been away from the camera updates going on around me for a couple of years. Bigger cameras, smaller cameras, full frame and now mirrorless. Seems like a race to nowhere. I've been using Leicas for over 40 years the only improvements, minimal. They offer the best of what a camera should be. A precision camera, practically indestructable with spot on metering, manual focus and with the best split image finder possible. Never had a mirror, who needs it and lenses that are among the finest in the world, barr none. They provide the means to produce any kind of image your looking too create. They are expensive but a once in a lifetime purchase makes it a small investment. I know many of you will disagree but I can go out out a 50 yr old lenses on my camera and produce outstanding images. If I want to shoot telephoto images I can use Visoflex and use it also for some of the most magnificent macro images you ever saw. If I where to live another 20 years I would still be using it and people would still wonder what camera I use to give me those wonderful images. Ok have fun, test me apart, but you all no it's true.

I have been away from the camera updates going on around me for a couple of years. Bigger cameras, smaller cameras, full frame and now mirrorless. Seems like a race to nowhere. I've been using Leicas for over 40 years the only improvements, minimal. They offer the best of what a camera should be. A precision camera, practically indestructable with spot on metering, manual focus and with the best split image finder possible. Never had a mirror, who needs it and lenses that are among the finest in the world, barr none. They provide the means to produce any kind of image your looking too create. They are expensive but a once in a lifetime purchase makes it a small investment. I know many of you will disagree but I can go out out a 50 yr old lenses on my camera and produce outstanding images. If I want to shoot telephoto images I can use Visoflex and use it also for some of the most magnificent macro images you ever saw. If I where to live another 20 years I would still be using it and people would still wonder what camera I use to give me those wonderful images. Ok have fun, test me apart, but you all no it's true.

I have been away from the camera updates going on around me for a couple of years. Bigger cameras, smaller cameras, full frame and now mirrorless. Seems like a race to nowhere. I've been using Leicas for over 40 years the only improvements, minimal. They offer the best of what a camera should be. A precision camera, practically indestructable with spot on metering, manual focus and with the best split image finder possible. Never had a mirror, who needs it and lenses that are among the finest in the world, barr none. They provide the means to produce any kind of image your looking too create. They are expensive but a once in a lifetime purchase makes it a small investment. I know many of you will disagree but I can go out out a 50 yr old lenses on my camera and produce outstanding images. If I want to shoot telephoto images I can use Visoflex and use it also for some of the most magnificent macro images you ever saw. If I where to live another 20 years I would still be using it and people would still wonder what camera I use to give me those wonderful images. Ok have fun, test me apart, but you all no it's true.

I have been away from the camera updates going on around me for a couple of years. Bigger cameras, smaller cameras, full frame and now mirrorless. Seems like a race to nowhere. I've been using Leicas for over 40 years the only improvements, minimal. They offer the best of what a camera should be. A precision camera, practically indestructable with spot on metering, manual focus and with the best split image finder possible. Never had a mirror, who needs it and lenses that are among the finest in the world, barr none. They provide the means to produce any kind of image your looking too create. They are expensive but a once in a lifetime purchase makes it a small investment. I know many of you will disagree but I can go out out a 50 yr old lenses on my camera and produce outstanding images. If I want to shoot telephoto images I can use Visoflex and use it also for some of the most magnificent macro images you ever saw. If I where to live another 20 years I would still be using it and people would still wonder what camera I use to give me those wonderful images. Ok have fun, test me apart, but you all no it's true.