It's not wrong, but is it wise? 🙄
OK, kidding aside, here's my take on the R3A, having owned one for over a year (and also owning an M2):
Pros: bright vf, and the AE and metering are excellent. I used my R3A to shoot a wedding last October, relying heavily on the AE, and the camera performed like a champ. The exposure lock is also nice. It has a solid feel to it, and is pretty compact. I think of the R3A as an updated version of the Minolta CLE (although obviously missing the 28 framelines). Quieter shutter than a Bessa R, although not as quiet as a Leica M. A great value as a camera body.
Cons: some R3*s have rangefinder alignment problems, meaning that the rf patch can easily go out of vertical alignment (mine is one of them, although I think the problem may be fixed now). I'm not sure why this should be, and owners of R4s and R2s have not reported this problem to anything like the same extent. The other "issue" is that the framelines for 40mm are hard to see if you wear glasses (I do). Still, that hasn't stopped me from using a 40 on the R3A, but I think where the camera really sings is w/ a 50 (maybe a 75 too). Finally, some users have complained about the placement of the strap lugs, such that the camera doesn't hang straight; it's true that it doesn't, but that doesn't bother me much.
I haven't decided yet whether to keep my R3A for the long haul. Now that the rf alignment problem is fixed (at least for now), I'm enjoying shooting w/ it, and it's nice to have a camera body w/ AE even though I shoot in manual mode most of the time.