Leica R system and how it got there?

Ken Ford

Ken Ford

Refuses to suffer fools
Local time
2:40 PM
Joined
Feb 18, 2006
Messages
3,023
I occasionally run across Leica R lenses for what seem like very low prices. I've always held off on buying any because I know squat about the R system and the whole number of cams / ROM issue.

If I decided to put myself in a position to pick up a few of these fantastic lenses if and when deals came along, what should I be looking for in a body? Looking at KEH it appears the R4 bodies are affordable - is there a reason I wouldn't want one?

What versions of the lenses work on which bodies? Are the bodies and/or lenses backward or forward compatible?

This is all idle curiosity at the moment - I'm not about to rush out and buy an R kit. I'd just like to know more so the next time I'm offered a R mount 35 Summicron for $150 I know whether or not to take it! (Yes, it happened last year.)
 
Early R4 bodies had electronics problems. I had one offerred to me cheap but the body would randomly lock up and refuse to shoot till I re-installed the batteries. Very frustrating. The 50 summicron on it was a magnificent lens.
 
Ken Ford said:
Any idea of how to identify a "safe" R4?
Click to expand...

Buy an R4 Mod P (or Mod 2 in some markets). This later model has more modern electronics supposedly from the R5 generation and is the safer bet. Or you can just go ahead and buy an R5. R prices are not terribly high these days.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto said:
Early R4 bodies had electronics problems. I had one offerred to me cheap but the body would randomly lock up and refuse to shoot till I re-installed the batteries. Very frustrating. The 50 summicron on it was a magnificent lens.
Click to expand...

This is EXACTLY the problem I have with the Contax 167MT my brother gave me. It helps to use very fresh batteries. I bought rechargable AAA battieries and recharge them every 4 rolls to keep the fresh. That seems to help a little bit.
 
Original Leicaflex takes 1-cam, 2-cam, and 3-cam (with a few exceptions).
Leicaflex SL and SL2 take 2-cam and 3-cam (with few exceptions).
R3 through R9 take 3-cam, R-cam, and ROM, all interchangeable.
There are a few if's, and's, or but's, but that's the fundamental compatibility.

The safest R4 is called an R5. :D
It depends somewhat on what you intend to shoot of course, but after trying them all, and if the slightly larger size doesn't bother you, my overall preference is the R8 or R9. The capabilities and ergonomics are hard to beat.
 
Last edited:
The 90/2.8 is a great lens too, and I think all the 50s and the 28 are good. When you go wider the rangefinder designs are going to be better. Longer, all the glass is great.

If you like the M5 you'll love the SL-SL2 series, they are beautifully made and designed. The main caution is the prism tends to yellow and grow spots with age, but they can be replaced with $. The upside is that the 2-cam lens are cheaper than the 3-cam ones with no loss of performance. They also have the brightest viewfinder of ANY slr to date.

The R6.2-R7 bodies are the height of the classic R design, they just got better and better. Research and test any R8 you get, they have been spotty, but the R9 is very good.

For my money I'd hold out and get a nice SL and budget for a CLA.
 
Last edited:
I really like the feel of the SL2 in my hands. You can find some great bargains on the glass from time to time.

B2 (;->
 
serial numbers 1,600,000 and above are supposed to be better for the R4's... I've been shooting one from KEH for the last two years without problems. My 3-cam Summicron is superb and a real bargain IMO (also from KEH). I accidentally "won" a Elmarit-R 135 on a low bid and find this lens perfetctly lovely. For classic Leica portrait lens the pre-apo Summicron 90 looks gorgious and is also a bargain. I really like the look of the R4-R7 bodies... the R6.2 is the one I really want, but will continue with my R4 until it dies... prices continue to drop (especially since there is no digital for the lenses... can't compete with Canon and Nikon I guess)... so I'll just wait on my R6.2 :)

The Leicaflexs are nice too, but they are very heavy cameras...
 
i could never get along with the leicaflexes. the viewfinder's nice, but the ergonomics and design bring to mind the clunkiest of russian slrs.

i wouldn't hesitate to get an r5 or later, though.
 
I've had the same curiosity at times... Now... there must be something wrong with me: some time ago at Central Camera in Chicago, during one of their Photo-Fair days, I handled an R9 body with an R-cron. The focusing ring was as dampened as a Leica lens will be, and felt nice and heavy... but the viewfinder was terribly dim for my taste, and I didn't find it easy to focus in low light. Being, as it was, the latest and best in their lineup, I was a bit disappointed. But man, that MP demo they had on the counter was a dream... :)
 
Hehe...not an uncommon sentiment.
My journey started with one old body and one old lens, just out of curiosity. But I couldn't stop there. Oh no...
It's a pervasive, evil sickness. :bang:
 
Last edited:
I have one of the dreaded R4s's. Body by Minolta, soul by Leitz. When I was in college (university for you non-US RFF'ers), the local camera store had one of these. Man, I wanted that camera. The owner was a fellow named Brett, who no doubt had an eye for those with the weakness. It was a college town and I guess he figured that some rich kid would purchase the camera -- or maybe he just liked Leicas. Anyway, although the solid "thunk" of the shutter and the awesome feel of the camera were burned into my mind, I never could afford that camera. Years later, I could and bought one with a 50 Summicron lens. It was never my primary camera, but it worked well for years and then suddenly started acting strangely. The shutter would stay open for long periods of time, even with fresh batteries in the camera. I sent the R4s in to Sherry Krauter and she diagnosed it was having bad "switches and magnets" -- essentially a circuit board and other electronic pieces which were the problem with this run of camera (up through s/n 16 million as stated above). Once the fix was made, the camera functioned perfectly and every time I use it, I have the pleasure of having satisfied that early college-age GAS. These cameras are so cheap now, compared to their price when new, that I would encourage anyone who is interested to at least give the system a try.

BTW, the R lenses can be used on Canon EOS bodies (including digital) in stop-down metering mode with an adapter.

Ben Marks
 
I have a black SL MOT that complements my M6.

I use it with the wonderful 60mm 2.8 for macro and some insane Telyts for getting arrested. These are lengths that the M is not so good at (I have retired from the Viso thing).

The camera is big and heavy but not unconfortable. Viewfinder is bright and great. All very reassuring and Leica like.

These things are cheap and beautifully made. Always worth a try, I'm sure you could sell on for little loss or perhaps a little gain if you don't like 'em.

Michael
 
SolaresLarrave said:
but the viewfinder was terribly dim for my taste, and I didn't find it easy to focus in low light. Being, as it was, the latest and best in their lineup, I was a bit disappointed.
Click to expand...
This really surprises me. From what I've seen the R9 has the best viewfinder of any SLR I've ever tried. Low light focusing is second only to a rangefinder!
Maybe you tried it with a slow lens? :confused:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom