Spicy
Well-known
dave lackey
Veteran
+1 on that!!!
Been looking for one but they are not only expensive but hard to find. The F2 is a completely different camera and beautiful IMO with the plain prism!!! That one change alone is all that I need to thoroughly enjoy an F2.:angel:
Charlie Lemay
Well-known
Hi Dave,
I have owned a number. of R lenses and bodies over the years. I currently have two R6s, my favorite, and an SL2. The lenses are superb. I prefer the Mandler era look, sharp enough with a volumetric quality, and of course, "the glow." I currently have the latest 19 (which I much prefer to the first version or the 21) , the latest 28 (stunning!), 35 f2 (the only Leica 35 M or R that impresses me, the 50 f1.4 E55 (wow!). the 60 Macro ( wow again!), the 80 f1.4 (i love the look), the 90 f2 (which I prefer to the 100 f 2.8 Apo), the 135 f2.8 (love the look), the 180 f3.4 Apo (this may be one of the best lenses ever and I prefer it to the f2.8 Apo although it does. not focus as close), and the Apo 2x. In my estimation this is my ideal SLR kit.
I have owned a number. of R lenses and bodies over the years. I currently have two R6s, my favorite, and an SL2. The lenses are superb. I prefer the Mandler era look, sharp enough with a volumetric quality, and of course, "the glow." I currently have the latest 19 (which I much prefer to the first version or the 21) , the latest 28 (stunning!), 35 f2 (the only Leica 35 M or R that impresses me, the 50 f1.4 E55 (wow!). the 60 Macro ( wow again!), the 80 f1.4 (i love the look), the 90 f2 (which I prefer to the 100 f 2.8 Apo), the 135 f2.8 (love the look), the 180 f3.4 Apo (this may be one of the best lenses ever and I prefer it to the f2.8 Apo although it does. not focus as close), and the Apo 2x. In my estimation this is my ideal SLR kit.
dave lackey
Veteran
Hi, Charlie!
Good to know you have such a background with the R system and I agree they are superb. We'll talk a lot later on!
Spud10
Member
I've been contemplating jumping into the R system. I've been checking out R6.2s when I chance by a shop and while that seems to be what I "want", I can't see a reason to pay the premium price over the R6 in which (as far as I can tell) the biggest difference seems to be the 1-stop faster shutter speed.
Clint Troy
Well-known
The resale value is also higher so it kinda becomes a non-issue.
And the R6.2 is a late R6 so one could think that the glitches have been ironed out.
I love my R6.2.
Spud10
Member
Hmm that's a good point. Does anyone know what points to check out when looking to buy a used R6 or 6.2?
From what I've noticed, the mirrorbox (don't even know the right name) is cracked on the inside of all that i've seen. Several have sticky DOF preview levers and a few seem to have abnormally long shutter release travel times (if that makes sense) among other things.
To be honest I've never played with a good condition R6.2 so I don't know what's normal and what's faulty in a used copy!
dof
Fiat Lux
The long shutter travel is endemic to all of them. It can be tuned by a repair person, but the R6's and R6.2's are not as quick to shoot for this reason as their M brethren. Or an FM2 for that matter.
I would look carefully at the DOF preview levers, as they can indicate that the aperture stop down mechanism is in need of repair. My R6 recently needed to have the linkage replaced and it was not inexpensive. I had to choose between buying another body (thinking an R7 or R4s as they're cheaper now than the mechanical Rs), or pay up for the repair. I decided that the repair was well worth it, as I think it's a fine little camera that shoots terrific lenses. I've been happy with it overall.
Clint Troy
Well-known
I got used to the shutter. My motivation was that if it was good enough for Salgado as his tool of choice for creating mind blowing photographs (see his Africa book) then it's perfectly suitable for me.
dave lackey
Veteran
That is certainly a very good point.
The truth is, I can be happy with any of the R cameras and lenses. Some models, a little happier. Either way, they are by far my favorite SLR cameras and lenses.Spud10
Member
Any prime lenses that are to die for? I'm looking more into the earlier lenses to avoid a heavy contrast and to keep the price low, too.
dave lackey
Veteran
That is easy...the 50mm Cron is superb and very reasonably priced. If interested, send me a PM and I can help you out further with resources, reviews and available lenses.
matt_mcg2
Established
My experience with an R4 and 50mm Summicron almost exactly echo Rob-F's in comment 18 above. Too heavy and badly balanced with the Summicron; the camera always felt nose heavy. Didn't like the shutter release feel, or the mirror action, and I didn't feel I got enough extra from the lens to stick with it. It was a very nice lens, and when I look back at the negatives I shot with that combination, they are good. But it wasn't/isn't any better than the Super Multi-Coated Takumar, and Carl Zeiss Planar that I also have/had in the same focal length and both of those felt much more in tune with the bodies I was/am using them on.
redisburning
Well-known
60mm macro elmarit.
dof
Fiat Lux
Well, the 80mm Summilux is to die for and of lower contrast. However, the price is not quite low on that one!
I'll second the nod to the 50mm Summicron. And I wouldn't overlook the 35mm Elmarit. It's got great micro-contrast and is among the R lenses that can be found at quite reasonable cost.
raytoei@gmail.com
Veteran
The Leicaflex SL2 feels alot like the M5
in terms of finish and built quality, though
it weighs much more. So another way
to think about the SL2 is that it is a
"real" Leica at a fraction of a M body.
My SL2 has a 50 Cron stuck to it, while
my R4 has a Tamron Adaptall-2 35-80
f2.8-3.8. While the R4 is unbalanced
with this compact zoom, I use it only
for studio shots.
raytoei
in terms of finish and built quality, though
it weighs much more. So another way
to think about the SL2 is that it is a
"real" Leica at a fraction of a M body.
My SL2 has a 50 Cron stuck to it, while
my R4 has a Tamron Adaptall-2 35-80
f2.8-3.8. While the R4 is unbalanced
with this compact zoom, I use it only
for studio shots.
raytoei
steveyork
Well-known
Bingo!
SL2 = M5
SL can be equated with the M4
Original Leicaflex has the feel of an M3/2.
Great cameras. For the last couple of years I've used these cameras almost exclusively. Should be more popular, but they're big and ugly. People want 'cute' cameras.
I've come close to selling off the last of my rangefinder stuff, because I like the Leicaflex et al so much (and they're so affordable in Leica language). I now only use rangefinders for a change of pace.
SL2 = M5
SL can be equated with the M4
Original Leicaflex has the feel of an M3/2.
Great cameras. For the last couple of years I've used these cameras almost exclusively. Should be more popular, but they're big and ugly. People want 'cute' cameras.
I've come close to selling off the last of my rangefinder stuff, because I like the Leicaflex et al so much (and they're so affordable in Leica language). I now only use rangefinders for a change of pace.
Clint Troy
Well-known
Well, my R6.2 is so close to my MP in so many aspects that when I bring it up to my eye always hit the corner of the camera. I then remember that it's a SLR and I have to put my eye in the center of the camera.
This never happens with my other SLRs.
Just goes to show how close the R6 + R6.2 are to their RF brothers.
This never happens with my other SLRs.
Just goes to show how close the R6 + R6.2 are to their RF brothers.
Clint Troy
Well-known
Can you please tell me what is micro-contrast? I'm getting lost with all these terms that seem to mean nothing more then, in this particular case... contrast?
Lately I've read some newly created words by some internet reviewers. I guess they need to be on top of their (unpaid) game. It was somehting like "spaciality". What's next?
I agree, the 35 elmarit is fine. But then again, even the cheap SLR lenses are all very, very good. The SLR Konica lenses, as an example, can be found for peanuts and they all could be mistaken for Leicas. Yashicas, Minoltas...
Platinum RF
Well-known
Any Nikon MF camera will beat up Leica R.
SL/SL2 clumsy, SL2's 1/2000 is not reliable, Nikon FM/FM2 are far better in term reliability and handle
Lecia R3/4/5/6/7 are jokes, the shutter response time more or less like the 60's camera
FE2 is way better.
I hope some day a SONY full frame body with EVF and adapter will revive all my R, Contax and Pentax lenses.
SL/SL2 clumsy, SL2's 1/2000 is not reliable, Nikon FM/FM2 are far better in term reliability and handle
Lecia R3/4/5/6/7 are jokes, the shutter response time more or less like the 60's camera
FE2 is way better.
I hope some day a SONY full frame body with EVF and adapter will revive all my R, Contax and Pentax lenses.