cost of R2

[FrankS]

I realize that the R2 was made in small numbers and is now discontinued so that the price of the remaining bodies (new and used) may go up in cost. My question is however, aside from the collectability of the R2, is the cost (twice that of an R) justified? The shutter, chasis and viewfinder are the same, the only difference is the M mount, and the metal in the top, bottom and back, right?

Compared to other cameras (not the R) the R2 IS a lot of value, but compared to the R?

 

[RML]

The R does exactly what I want and need it to do and is sturdy enough to take on my travels. The only thing is that an M-mount would have been nice. I think it is worth the difference to some but for me it isn't. And since I now have both a CL and an M2 I don't feel any need to spend another $400-$500 for a used R2 or $600 for a new R2a/R3a. I rather spend that money on a new lens or as a down payment on a RD-1. 🙂

 

[rover]

The R2 has a some way modified viewfinder, ratchet film advance gearing, same meter and shutter, the metal construction you discussed, and the M mount.

The mount is the biggest difference to me. That is mostly what drove me to purchase the R2. I determined that made it a better user for me. Though there are times I wish I still had an R. It wouldn't get a lot of use, but it is a nice camera.

 

[Huck Finn]

Frank, given that both of these cameras are discontinued, no one has to justify costs. The price simply floats based on supply & demand. The fact that the R2 has retained its value IMHO is simply due to the fact that 50 years worth of M-mount lenses creates a greater demand for it. The price for the R was much higher when it was first issued 5 years ago, but its price has declined because the LTM market is much more limited.

BTW, Stephen Gandy has a comprehensive list of upgrades from the R to the R2 on his Cameraquest website.

 

[spetsnaz]

For me, if I could afford M lens in the future, I will use them on my R2 body. I have plan to save up my funds for M lens instead of M body so the M mount of R2 is my needed.

Regards,
PoP

 

[RML]

PoP, probably the best value-for-money M-lens is the Minolta Rokkor 40/2 that came standard on the Leitz Minolta CL. Its twin sister, the Summicron 40/2, came with the Leica CL but has a difficult-to-find filter thread. The lenses are identical in all other respects. The Rokkor is usually a little cheaper than the Summi; you can get them from about $250-$350.

 

[back alley]

i'd rather put any price difference between ltm & m mount bodies into other ltm bodies and not change lenses while out shooting but grab another body for the lens that is already attached.

i now have 3 ltm bodies which means in theory i could have 3 different lenses at the ready, quicker than changing lenses on one body.
in reality i normally carry one body w/ lens attached and a second lens in the bag.
but if it was an important 'shoot' i would always have 2 bodies with 2 lenses and one or two more in the bag.

i just woke up from my saturday afternoon (it's not a nap) sleep in the comfy chair, so i hope this makes sense.

joe

 

[spetsnaz]

RML, thank you very much for your suggestion. I try to find the Rokkor here in Bangkok also but only found one nice Summicron-C 40/2 ( cost $420.00 ). Like you said, pretty hard to find the right filter for this lens around here.

Regards,
PoP

 

[RML]

PoP, you might want to check eBay, or Dr. Joseph Yao in Hong Kong (joseph@yao.com). It seems Dr. Yao can supply Leica and Voigtlander gear at reasonable prices.