I want a Leica R4 -- what's wrong with me??

G

giganova

Well-known
Local time
1:57 PM
Joined
May 18, 2015
Messages
1,620
I bought my first Leica R4 and a couple of R lenses in 1983 ... but stupid as I am, I sold them when I switched to digital. Now I'm back into b&w film photography and want my Leica back!

Have been using a Nikon FE2 with AI-S glass over the past year, but I can't emotionally connect with the Nikon and wish for my old R4. I remember the shutter being much softer than the Nikon, the viewfinder brighter, I loved the spot meter, and the R lenses were wonderful!

Do you think I'd be crazy if I sold all my Nikon gear and bought an R4 with Leica glass? :confused:
 
If you can afford to make the switch, I see no reason why you shouldn't get the camera that you really want.

- Murray
 
The glass is in another league, particularly if you shoot B&W and are picky about bokeh. However, personally the R4 drives me to nuts with it's slow shutter, and also 1/1000th is a limitation when you want to shoot wide open. So I am switching my R lenses one by one into Nikon mount through the Leitax "preset" adapter. BTW, I do not find the VF less bright, especially if you use an F3 HP +DK17M.
 
Why not go with the SL2/R8? Both are "proper" leica made. Whilst the other were made in cooperation with minolta. The screen of the SL2 is supposed to be very bright and lighmeter very senstive (maybe for that age but not compared to later cameras? I dont know). It is also illuminated but I only think its the leds and not the screen itself. I'm also considering it but havent heard much from people who have used it.

E: SL2 also has a 1/2000 compared to some of the R's
 
Hi,

You are not alone, I wish I had my old R5 back and the lenses to go with it. Trouble is, I can't justify spending that much and then sending them to Leica to be checked and so on...

But, I do know how you feel and offer my sympathy.

Regards, David
 
No leitz R glass I'm afraid for me but my R4s has a wonderful solid feel. Mine is used with an adapted nikkor PC 28/4.
 
I have one and the magnets and replaced other electronics in 2003. Like the OP, this was my "it" camera of the 1980's, although I didn't get mine until much later. I haven't used it in a couple of years and was thinking of "deacquisitioning" it along with a Nikon FG20 and some other gear. I just love the way the shutter feels in the R4 and the viewscreen is as good as anything else in my cabinet.
 
giganova said:
I bought my first Leica R4 and a couple of R lenses in 1983 ...

Do you think I'd be crazy if I sold all my Nikon gear and bought an R4 with Leica glass? :confused:
Click to expand...

No, but you'd be crazy embarking on that journey with an R4 without at least trying an SL2 or SL for a while:)
A nice SL2 costs a lot more these days than a nice R4 and there's a good reason for that, and it's not nostalgia. The R3 wasn't so much an "advance" over the SL2 as it was a cost cutting measure.
As someone else noted, if wanting to get back to R glass, SL2/R8 might be the optimum way to go. Biggest (only?) disadvantage of the SL2 is the battery situation, but meter can be re calibrated to be accurate with currently available emasculated batteries, so even that isn't a real hurdle.
FWIW.
Best of luck to you, wonderful cameras, go for it.
 
R4 is a junk compare to Nikon FE2. It is psychological not reality. I used both, the R4 shutter response like 81 year old and FE2? 18
 
The draw to Leica R gear is fantastic, the lenses are wonderful. I have enjoyed using an R8 and Leicaflex SL with a bunch of excellent R lenses.

But the pull for me was the other way - back to Nikon. The Nikon F Photomic FTn was my first SLR, I always liked Nikon lenses, and once I picked up an F6 body I fell in love with Nikon all over again. I just added a D750 body to the kit, still learning it. And delighted.

Both systems make excellent photographs, are well designed bodies, and have a great selection of remarkable lenses. Pick whichever feels satisfying to you and enjoy using it!

G
 
Platinum RF said:
R4 is a junk compare to Nikon FE2. It is psychological not reality. I used both, the R4 shutter response like 81 year old and FE2? 18
Click to expand...

Not going to argue with you, but the shutter sound and noise of my FE2 make me cringe every time I press the shutter. People literally turn around when I make a picture with my FE2 because it is so loud. Not so on an R4, it's super soft and like butter, people can barely hear it.

So here's what I'm gonna do:

I'll get an R4 with a 24mm/2.8 lens but will keep my FE2 and lens collection. Then after a few months, I'll decide what I will keep.

What are the weak points of an R4 and what should I be watching out for?
 
Nothing is wrong with you. The R4 is essentially a Minolta XD-11, which is the best camera made in the 1970-80s. (Flame me, who cares!) It just a shame Leica didn't rely on Minolta's more reliable metering. That's what I think anyway. :)
 
If you happen to wear glasses, you may want to consider the R5. It also has a higher top shutter speed of 1/2000.
I am content with mine, although I sometimes struggle with focussing the 35 Summicron. The longer lenses are fine. Not sure how the 24 Elmarit would work.
 
them bad R4 are by now all dead, uh Oh!

them bad R4 are by now all dead, uh Oh!

Bisakok said:
Nothing is wrong with you. The R4 is essentially a Minolta XD-11, which is the best camera made in the 1970-80s. (Flame me, who cares!) It just a shame Leica didn't rely on Minolta's more reliable metering. That's what I think anyway. :)
Click to expand...

I rescued 2 Minolta SLR from Goodwill.
One is a XD-!! which is smooth, quite and lovely to handle.
The lenses for the Minolta cost almost nothing!
I have 50mm, 45mm,35mm Minolta and a 28mm lens.
Similar lenses by Leica are expensive.
The newer Leica bodies need additional cams,further expense.
I used Leica R4 and some earlier SL models.
I prefer the Minolta set.
Sadly the "bad" Leica R4 models are not dead.
They are out there waiting..
 
I have been lusting for a R camera (R6 or R7) and came very close to justifying the cost of the body but with the cost of the lenses I really could not spend that much on a camera that I would not be using that much (I really am a rangefinder guy) so instead I purchased a Minolta XD (the Japanese market version of the XD-11) I had bought a new XD-11 in the late 80's and had lent it to my daughter about 10 years ago. She ended up losing it so I guess this is a replacement for that one. I still had a 50mm 1.7 lens, a flash, auto winder and a few other things from my Minolta days so for very little money I was able to scratch that itch with a really great camera.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom