Vickko
Veteran
Yep, me too. My R9 is my favourite now.
Had a DMR but it was darned heavy, so I sold it quickly.
But love my R9 and bought a rack of lenses, cheaper than M equivalents. But there are a couple lenses very unique to the R - like the 15mm R and 28mm shift lens.
Vick
Had a DMR but it was darned heavy, so I sold it quickly.
But love my R9 and bought a rack of lenses, cheaper than M equivalents. But there are a couple lenses very unique to the R - like the 15mm R and 28mm shift lens.
Vick
dave lackey
Veteran
Yeah, about like my F5... were you pleased with the images? Thorsten Overgaard has used the DMR extensively but defaults to the M9 due to size (and somewhat better images according to him).
Either way, I am hoping for an 80 Lux one day.:angel:
dave lackey
Veteran
Hey, Dino....it's been awhile, have you gotten the R8/R9 yet? KEH has a very nice R8 for $500+ right now.
taskoni
Well-known
I still use the R7 (I have two of them) and I am pretty happy. I rather invest in a lens than body... I might buy 6.2 if I have a chance...
R7, Cron 50mm f/2 @ 1/60 sec. Delta Pro 400..
Regards,
R7, Cron 50mm f/2 @ 1/60 sec. Delta Pro 400..
Regards,
rbelyell
Well-known
the leicas are beautiful and of course the lenses are high quality. but they are limited. to echo several others, if you want a cool looking, large, incredibly well made and VERSATILE slr i strongly urge a look at the contax AX. this is a focla planr AF, or mf, camera, probably one of the best most ingeniously engineered ever. it is sturdy professional heft and quality. it gives access to many more lenses of at least equal quality in the zeiss/contax arena. in addition i used mine with an m42>c/y adapter giving me access to a plethora of great quality m42 glass. the AF operates perfectly in turning legacy MF glass into modern day AF tools. constantly amazes me...
dave lackey
Veteran
dave lackey
Veteran
BTW, Boris, I loved the 80 Lux pictures you posted some time ago. Feel free to post some more when you get a moment or two!
taskoni
Well-known
Hi Dave.
Very nice pictures!
I was so busy shooting that movie I didn't have time to take pictures (or almost).
I will post some 80mm Lux photos soon as I am getting back slowly in to the real world...
I never even processed the test roll I shot with my new old DR Summicron on my M2 yet.
BTW, have you used the motor winder yet?
Best regards,
Very nice pictures!
I was so busy shooting that movie I didn't have time to take pictures (or almost).
I will post some 80mm Lux photos soon as I am getting back slowly in to the real world...
I never even processed the test roll I shot with my new old DR Summicron on my M2 yet.
BTW, have you used the motor winder yet?
Best regards,
dave lackey
Veteran
Yes, I have and it is working great! The grandsons (ages 4 and 6) are coming over today for a couple of days and guess which camera I choose to keep up with those rascals?
Love that winder and I was shocked to see it was the 1-4 fps winder too!
Got a grip spotted at KEH for $16 that I will order tomorrow and then I will find some sports event around here for shooting a roll or two! I really am enjoying the winder as it will allow me to do some action shots that I just haven't been into lately.
Love that winder and I was shocked to see it was the 1-4 fps winder too!
Got a grip spotted at KEH for $16 that I will order tomorrow and then I will find some sports event around here for shooting a roll or two! I really am enjoying the winder as it will allow me to do some action shots that I just haven't been into lately.
Vickko
Veteran
In a way, using the DMR was like an M8 with respect to the crop factor, but much more convenient because I didn't need to deal with the UV/IR filters.
Tina Manley and Doug Herr swear by their DMR's and they know what they are talking about.
I was satisfied with my DMR photos but don't have anywhere near the skills to stress their limits.
I didn't sell it for performance; I sold it for the back and shoulder pain they caused.
Vick
Tina Manley and Doug Herr swear by their DMR's and they know what they are talking about.
I was satisfied with my DMR photos but don't have anywhere near the skills to stress their limits.
I didn't sell it for performance; I sold it for the back and shoulder pain they caused.
Vick
dave lackey
Veteran
Ha, ha! Same reason I left the F5 behind! But, now, a few years later, I find that my arm/hand strength has diminished so it is time to go back to working out with heavier equipment.
Back to the OP...the R8/R9 bodies are still cutting edge design as far as SLR's is concerned. Remind me a lot of BMW body styles (both motorcycle and cars) as opposed to the melted blob of other manufacturers.
CK Dexter Haven
Well-known
I had an R8 for a while. An R7 a few years after that.
It's a nice body. I originally thought they were hideous. Until i held one.
But, as pointed out above, it's too large and heavy for what it offers. Ergonomically, it's sound, but there's really no reason for a body that size to not have a motor built in. I had the add-on motor winder. That, also, was fine, but still - the size/weight were just unwarranted.
I disagree that the lenses are all that special. I had the 80 Summilux, 50 Summicron, 35 Summicron. And, later, when i had the R7, the 28 Elmarit (latest version).
Only the 28mm was 'better' than the Canon lenses i also had.
The Canon 85L was better than the Summilux. The Canon 50/1.4 was better than the Summicron (equally sharp at f2, and with better bokeh PLUS AF). The 35 Summicron was equal to the 35/2 Canon, but the Canon had AF. I did like the 35 Summicron's bokeh, though. But, i also had the Canon 35L, which was better than the Leica and the Canon 35/2. The 28 Elmarit was excellent.
I think if you're looking for the absolutely best lenses, you'd have to get the E60 ROM 50mm Summilux and the 28 Elmarit. Maybe the 60 Macro is great, i dunno. Salgado seems to like it.
In any case, i found equal or better performance with the Canon lenses i listed, and also with Contax SLR lenses i used subsequent to the Leica R8. Contax has the fantastic 50/1.4 Planar, a great 28/2.8, the 85/1.4, etc., etc..... And the Contax bodies are better designed, have greater functionality, and equal/better viewfinders. Even the Aria is a great body, but you can go up to the RX and IT is amazing. By far the smoothest mirror/shutter/winder operation i've ever felt.
The suggestion was just made to "try" the R8/9 for a day or so. I don't think that will leave you with a full and well-reasoned conclusion. I had my R8 for over a year before deciding it wasn't worth keeping. A nice camera, for sure, but there are better options.
It's a nice body. I originally thought they were hideous. Until i held one.
But, as pointed out above, it's too large and heavy for what it offers. Ergonomically, it's sound, but there's really no reason for a body that size to not have a motor built in. I had the add-on motor winder. That, also, was fine, but still - the size/weight were just unwarranted.
I disagree that the lenses are all that special. I had the 80 Summilux, 50 Summicron, 35 Summicron. And, later, when i had the R7, the 28 Elmarit (latest version).
Only the 28mm was 'better' than the Canon lenses i also had.
The Canon 85L was better than the Summilux. The Canon 50/1.4 was better than the Summicron (equally sharp at f2, and with better bokeh PLUS AF). The 35 Summicron was equal to the 35/2 Canon, but the Canon had AF. I did like the 35 Summicron's bokeh, though. But, i also had the Canon 35L, which was better than the Leica and the Canon 35/2. The 28 Elmarit was excellent.
I think if you're looking for the absolutely best lenses, you'd have to get the E60 ROM 50mm Summilux and the 28 Elmarit. Maybe the 60 Macro is great, i dunno. Salgado seems to like it.
In any case, i found equal or better performance with the Canon lenses i listed, and also with Contax SLR lenses i used subsequent to the Leica R8. Contax has the fantastic 50/1.4 Planar, a great 28/2.8, the 85/1.4, etc., etc..... And the Contax bodies are better designed, have greater functionality, and equal/better viewfinders. Even the Aria is a great body, but you can go up to the RX and IT is amazing. By far the smoothest mirror/shutter/winder operation i've ever felt.
The suggestion was just made to "try" the R8/9 for a day or so. I don't think that will leave you with a full and well-reasoned conclusion. I had my R8 for over a year before deciding it wasn't worth keeping. A nice camera, for sure, but there are better options.
dave lackey
Veteran
To each his own. I am a happy man with my Leica R4 and Cron 50. Just finished a documentary with it. An R8/R9 is tops for me as I have used all the others and it is what I want...nuff said.
In regard to the 80 Lux...THIS is the next lens I will purchase:
http://www.flickriver.com/groups/summiluxr80/pool/interesting/
taskoni
Well-known
Sorry Dexter but I disagree on everything you said above...
It is amusing the way you compare the cheaply build Canon 50mm 1.4 to the Summicron 50mm f/2 which is far better lens, not talking about Summilux R 50mm 1.4... The Lux 80mm is better than Canon 85L for sure, at least mine is
I have a Canon 5D Mark II and shooting it very rarely with my R lenses w/adapter. Before I use to have most of the L lenses (at least those I am talking about) so I am not making things up. The only 50mm better than Summicron R and equal to Summilux R for Canon was the Zeiss 50mm 1.4 (MF)... Everyone has his own taste of course Regards,
Boris
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
Every time I see an R8 or R9, it reminds me of this. I don't really know why.
DISCLAIMER: Linked from http://shanmugamlakshmanan.blogspot.com/2009/12/fifth-element.html
CK Dexter Haven
Well-known
To each his own. I am a happy man with my Leica R4 and Cron 50. Just finished a documentary with it. An R8/R9 is tops for me as I have used all the others and it is what I want...nuff said.
In regard to the 80 Lux...THIS is the next lens I will purchase:
http://www.flickriver.com/groups/summiluxr80/pool/interesting/
Hey, i didn't suggest one couldn't be "a happy man" with any of these tools. I enjoyed them while i had them. At some point, though, i just couldn't justify keeping them when i also had the Canon gear.
CK Dexter Haven
Well-known
Sorry Dexter but I disagree on everything you said above...
It is amusing the way you compare the cheaply build Canon 50mm 1.4 to the Summicron 50mm f/2 which is far better lens, not talking about Summilux R 50mm 1.4... The Lux 80mm is better than Canon 85L for sure, at least mine is
Regards,
Boris
Well, i have/had the film scans of direct comparisons to inform my decisions.
I definitely did NOT compare the 'build quality.' I would certainly prefer the Leica if that were a factor. But, since people like James Nachtwey can take 'cheaply' built Canon gear into wars, i feel comfortable with how well the Canon stuff is made.
My tests did not show the 50 Summicron-R to be better than MY canon 50/1.4. If you read the interwebs, there are lots of reports of sample variation with the Canon 50. My copy performs as it should. The other issue is that people often talk about how a lens performs "wide open." So, if you compare the 50/2 Summicron at f2 versus the Canon at f1.4, i say YES, the Summicron is better wide open. My test, though, showed the Canon, at f2, was equal to the Summicron. So, at the relevant apertures, it was "as good" as the Summicron, but with the benefit of a 'bonus' 1.4 and 1.7. The other, very critical issue for me- that AF gave me more accurate, consistent, quicker focus than manual focus. So, even IF the Leica were 5% sharper at a given aperture, the Canon's AF would still give me sharper results. Your milage may vary.
On no planet is the 80 Lux 'better' than the 85L when all are working properly. In fact, even people who claim to love the 80 Summilux say that they 'embrace' its soft/"atmospheric" nature/character wide open. The 85L is already excellent at 1.2. At smaller apertures, everything equalizes. If you're buying an 80 or 85, my assumption is you want it for the bokeh. Maybe i'm assuming too much. Whatever. The 85L is THE kit for that, unless you wanna go longer. In that case, it's the 135L. Don't get me wrong. the 80 Summilux does nice work. I have a framed print by Walter Chin on my wall. Shot with the 80 on Kodachrome. Gorgeous image. But, it was shot at f11 or some such, and lit with strobes, in a studio. Under those circumstances, ANY lens is equally capable.
The Zeiss 50/1.4.... Okay, we're going to agree to disagree. The ZE/ZF Zeiss may be quite sharp. I won't dispute that. But, the bokeh is horrid, making it unusable for my purposes. And i'm a 'zeiss lover.' I love the C/Y version for the Contax system. I even had the Contax-N AF version. I've had Contax G2s on 4 or 5 different occasions. But, the new Zeiss 50/1.4? I would never buy one unless i were always going to use it at f4 or smaller. The 50/2 Makro Planar, though, does intrigue me, but i'm tired of manual focus lenses on AF-purposed focusing screens. I had a 5D2, as well, and just got tired of adapting lenses and getting no real benefit and a significant impingement on productivity and efficiency.
To go back to "build quality" — it's such an overemphasized topic among photo forum folk. Fact is, 98% of REAL professional work is done with Canon and Nikon. Same goes for all the fashion work shot on '35mm' — 90% is shot on Canons. Leica doesn't factor into it at all, despite the HUGE budgets. You'd have to acknowledge that the working photographers who are somehow managing to create this work know something about the gear they're using. Build quality seems to matter more for people determined to separate themselves more by the gear than by the actual imagery. Again, don't get me wrong- i'm a 'sensualist.' I completely believe in using stuff that feels good. I get rid of stuff that doesn't feel good to use. But, after going through more gear than anyone has a right to in the past ten years, i've reached certain conclusions and given up on certain 'trivial pursuits.'
dave lackey
Veteran
Every time I see an R8 or R9, it reminds me of this. I don't really know why.
DISCLAIMER: Linked from http://shanmugamlakshmanan.blogspot.com/2009/12/fifth-element.html
Well, that is ONE way to discourage film users, isn't it?
Have you ever held one in your hand, or at least seen one in person?
dave lackey
Veteran
Okay, so you have your own opinion. Great. I have mine and I am a happy man. Carry on.
ssmc
Well-known
I know someone with an R9 - does that count?
He bought it new just a few weeks before Leica killed off the R system. Things were quite "entertaining" around the office for a while after that
I actually got to put the first (and as far as I know, only) two rolls of film through that camera. Both were to test second-hand lenses; the first 50/2 Summicron (made in Canada) went back. It was optically fine but it felt very clanky and "mechanical" and the owner was not happy with its cosmetics (it was considerably rougher than the seller indicated, and was a bit of a wart on the brand-spankers R9 which practically glowed with quality by comparsion). I just wandered around campus for a while shooting stuff at various distances and apertures on (I think) Fuji Superia 200; not a great film but when the negs were scanned it was more than good enough to show there was nothing amiss with the lens (optically).
The second roll was a controlled indoor test using Delta 100 and a second (much nicer, German) Summicron, which the owner kept. One thing I did notice using the camera was that it seemed huge for a 35mm manual-focus SLR that didn't even have a built-in power winder. It felt extremely solid, though not especially heavy. With both lenses there was a noticable delay between operating the aperture ring and seeing the display change in the VF (I am informed this is normal, and is related somehow to the equally sluggish DOF-preview actuation).
The viewfinder was quite bright and nice to use but it had a noticeable bluish tint which I have never seen on an SLR before; it was very obvious during the test roll shooting, where I had a D300 for metering and a recently CLA'd OM-1 on hand for comparison, but I confess I wasn't aware of it in the much brighter light outdoors.
FWIW the 50/2 Summicron-R tested pretty nicely but it sure did not "blow away" other 50mm SLR lenses on the same test setup the way I'd been led to expect it might.
It's kind of sad that the R series is defunct - there was a lot to like about those cameras but in a world where virtually every other 35mm SLR had AF they were a bit of an anachronism, especially as they didn't offer anything really different in terms of shooting experience (unlike an M) and were not compact despite being non-motorized. I have to say that the R9 - especially a brand-new one - really felt special in the hands, but for me, there's nothing like an M!
He bought it new just a few weeks before Leica killed off the R system. Things were quite "entertaining" around the office for a while after that
I actually got to put the first (and as far as I know, only) two rolls of film through that camera. Both were to test second-hand lenses; the first 50/2 Summicron (made in Canada) went back. It was optically fine but it felt very clanky and "mechanical" and the owner was not happy with its cosmetics (it was considerably rougher than the seller indicated, and was a bit of a wart on the brand-spankers R9 which practically glowed with quality by comparsion). I just wandered around campus for a while shooting stuff at various distances and apertures on (I think) Fuji Superia 200; not a great film but when the negs were scanned it was more than good enough to show there was nothing amiss with the lens (optically).
The second roll was a controlled indoor test using Delta 100 and a second (much nicer, German) Summicron, which the owner kept. One thing I did notice using the camera was that it seemed huge for a 35mm manual-focus SLR that didn't even have a built-in power winder. It felt extremely solid, though not especially heavy. With both lenses there was a noticable delay between operating the aperture ring and seeing the display change in the VF (I am informed this is normal, and is related somehow to the equally sluggish DOF-preview actuation).
The viewfinder was quite bright and nice to use but it had a noticeable bluish tint which I have never seen on an SLR before; it was very obvious during the test roll shooting, where I had a D300 for metering and a recently CLA'd OM-1 on hand for comparison, but I confess I wasn't aware of it in the much brighter light outdoors.
FWIW the 50/2 Summicron-R tested pretty nicely but it sure did not "blow away" other 50mm SLR lenses on the same test setup the way I'd been led to expect it might.
It's kind of sad that the R series is defunct - there was a lot to like about those cameras but in a world where virtually every other 35mm SLR had AF they were a bit of an anachronism, especially as they didn't offer anything really different in terms of shooting experience (unlike an M) and were not compact despite being non-motorized. I have to say that the R9 - especially a brand-new one - really felt special in the hands, but for me, there's nothing like an M!
Last edited: