Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
When you think about it an original 5D with a couple of adapted R lenses would set you back less than a third of the price of an M9 body ... and it would have the IQ to match!
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
I gave up trying to get a working R4 after buying numerous (five or six of them) bodies and none of them worked properly. These were excellent condition cameras which all had different problems. I do have an SL that works well, and could probably have found an R6 or later that worked, but by that time I had really lost interest in the search. I'm not convinced that the R lenses are really worth the additional cost.
ferider
Veteran
Hmm. Today you can buy 4000 (!) rolls of Neopan 400 (35mm x 36) at Freestyle for the price of an M9 ....
Now, using an 80mm Summilux on my Nikon F would be a different story
Now, using an 80mm Summilux on my Nikon F would be a different story
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Hmm. Today you can buy 4000 (!) rolls of Neopan 400 (35mm x 36) at Freestyle for the price of an M9 ....
Now, using an 80mm Summilux on my Nikon F would be a different story
And that represents 144,000 shutter accuations ... could an M9 do that I wonder!
dave lackey
Veteran
Then, you did not look at over 300 images by the 80 Lux...here:
http://www.flickriver.com/groups/summiluxr80/pool/interesting/
But then again, maybe this is not the look you need.
The 35 Lux is just as delicious as are the other R lenses. A little research will show how nice these lenses are at very reasonable prices...for now.
Last edited:
taskoni
Well-known
Here is a shot with the Lux 80 wide open - sadly OF a bit
Regards,
b.
Regards,
b.
gavinlg
Veteran
That summilux 80mm f1.4 would be a really nice lens.....
If the canon 85mm f1.2L II didn't exist
edit: just checked ebay pricing on that summilux - Sheesh!
If the canon 85mm f1.2L II didn't exist
edit: just checked ebay pricing on that summilux - Sheesh!
Last edited:
Freakscene
Obscure member
R5, RE, R6.2, R8 (2 of each at a time). 1998-2000, during which time I worked as a photographer.
The R5s had problems with the mechanical linkages to the electronic switches. One was better and malfunctioned only 3 times in 9 months, the other spent more time being fixed than in my bag. One also had problems with being able to hold the exposure values in memory when using the spot meter.
The REs both broke the tow line between the controls and the viewfinder indicator, making it hard to meter while looking through the viewfinder. One had the screw holding the strap lug in place come loose and then it snapped, and the camera skated across a concrete floor. End of the REs.
The 6.2s were the least troublesome, but the meter in one ate batteries - a battery usually lasted about 10 days - Leica said they fixed it a couple of times but it was never resolved in the 6 months I used them. The other one had a problem with the prism cradle - and no I never tried to remove the focusing screen myself.
The R8s were a disaster. They never worked properly with the winder, and mainly kept firing after I had taken my finger off the shutter button. The cameras usually locked up after a few exposures and the back had to be opened to reset the camera, although sometimes it locked up completely. I had them for 4 months but never took them into the field.
I love the R lenses and I still have an R body that I use for personal work, but these cameras weren't reliable enough for my professional use.
The Nikons I switched to weren't perfect, but apart from the F100s snapping their rewind forks nothing went wrong that I thought wasn't my fault.
Comparing Nikon dSLRs to Leica Rs is apples and oranges. In professional use where reliability really matters, these days you need a digital camera - the time delay and higher cost of using film leaves you uncompetitive most of the time and in most situations now. If comparing Nikon and Leica film cameras, I'd still back the Nikon for reliability under hard use. And if you're just taking photos for yourself, buy a pile of Rs and just shrug when you have a problem - you're not losing much.
But those R lenses are sublime.
Marty
dave lackey
Veteran
Well, either you have had incredible luck (bad), or Leica should have gone down the tubes. I think the truth is somewhere in between. Doesn't matter that my 50-year old M3 and 30 year old R4 are doing just fine in my professional work. Even if every single body left is crap (and they are far from it), as before, they can be replaced by another cheap light box for far less than a D700, Canon, whatever digital. I have lost my @ss on "professional" digital cameras depreciating over the last 10 years. The R bodies, I like them. They work for me. They don't for you. Fair enough.
To each his own. I use digital for professional work. I use both of my film Leicas for professional work and both have been extremely good and reliable. After all they have been around for awhile. Almost as long as this old, analog, unreliable photographer.
Last edited:
dave lackey
Veteran
Now, back to the merits of the original post.:angel:
Freakscene
Obscure member
My Ms have been a lot more reliable - I've had a lot of problems with an M7 but the others have been great. I figured when they stopped making the R series that everyone had trouble with them, including Leica.
RE, 80/1.4, Neopan 400, Xtol 1+3, Rachel.
Marty
dave lackey
Veteran
My Ms have been a lot more reliable - I've had a lot of problems with an M7 but the others have been great. I figured when they stopped making the R series that everyone had trouble with them, including Leica.
RE, 80/1.4, Neopan 400, Xtol 1+3, Rachel.
Marty
Nice portrait!
Cool...the thing about the R system is the lenses. As tools, I cannot find anything that works better for me. In fact, the 80 Lux photographs are the ones that caught my eye because that is where I am headed. The inexpensive R bodies just happen to work for me within a non-existent budget. Nice surprise.
The bodies also happen to complement the M3 and I can work pretty much seamlessly with both bodies. Tried it with the Nikons and my brain doesn't switch back and forth well while working. So, on the latest projects, I have the M3 loaded with TriX for portraits and indoor photographs. The R4 loaded with ISO 100 film and primarily for outdoor photographs and close-ups.
So, if I win the lottery soon, that 80 will be a major tool for me.
A shame that it represents something that I cannot afford at the moment.
dave lackey
Veteran
The only problem for me is, with about half of my projects, digital just doesn't work! For those that projects that do work with digital, I would prefer a Nikon body.
Uwe_Nds
Chief Assistant Driver
...
So, if I win the lottery soon, that 80 will be a major tool for me.
For me too!
But until then, the Summicron-R 90 isn't too bad either.
Cheers,
Uwe
Freakscene
Obscure member
Don't get me wrong, I had a nightmare with those cameras, but the lenses are sublime.
Marty
Marty
dave lackey
Veteran
Understood, and I would have given up on the second go around. The old saying here in the South is "don't let the same dog bite you twice!".
But when one's work is film-based and the R lenses are the lenses of choice, what alternative is there to an R-body? One that works with the M-body and avoid left brain right brain conflicts? So far, I can't find a single problem with the R4 that I have and I appreciate it's compactness and quality build.
Hopefully there will be R bodies and R lenses around for quite awhile as my current project is at least a 5-10 year long effort. After that, I will be happy to just be around, let alone use film.
Freakscene
Obscure member
Understood, and I would have given up on the second go around. The old saying here in the South is "don't let the same dog bite you twice!".
I am determined to the point of stupidity. Sometimes it works, sometimes . . .
There is no alternative; auto diaphragm and decent focusing screens are absent in all the other possibilities.
But if you have a camera that works well and reliably, don't worry about it. My current R5 might be the one I was looking for back then, but I'll probably never know.
Hopefully there will be R bodies and R lenses around for quite awhile as my current project is at least a 5-10 year long effort. After that, I will be happy to just be around, let alone use film.
The lenses should last a very long time. As long as someone is working on them, you'll be able to keep the bodies working, and there's always an SL or SL2; they are practically indestructible.
Marty
rpilottx
Established
R6.2 on the Way
R6.2 on the Way
I have a R6.2 and 50 Summicron on the way from Collectible Cameras in Phoenix. I thought about the M9 for awhile but honestly I just prefer film.
The 6.2 will join an M2, Nikon F (probably for sale) and blad. What are the killer R lenses between 24 and 200mm? I prefer primes.
R6.2 on the Way
I have a R6.2 and 50 Summicron on the way from Collectible Cameras in Phoenix. I thought about the M9 for awhile but honestly I just prefer film.
The 6.2 will join an M2, Nikon F (probably for sale) and blad. What are the killer R lenses between 24 and 200mm? I prefer primes.
dave lackey
Veteran
Ah...the 6.2! Chrome or black? Would love to have one of those.
Killer lenses have to be any of the Summilux lenses! But, then, I haven't found a prime that isn't superb. I would like to try the 35-70 zoom lens as it has great reviews too.
http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/Lens-R.html
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/895186