Not quite 'M', Leica R advice wanted.

[dave lackey]

Firstly I'd like to say that I know this in an 'M' thread but I couldn't think of anywhere else for in-depth Leica knowledge.
I' m considering the purchase of an R8 or R9 to go alongside my M6TTL.
Leica SLR's are whole new field to me, so any advice or pointers would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,

Steve.

Steve, in direct answer to your OP, here are a few reviews for you to see and hopefully give you some information about the R8/9.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aym7IvAJYNg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9OdJWKbdBxo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Y4K4_v4PUw

And then there is Doug Herr:

http://wildlightphoto.com/birds/ardeidae/caegre05.html

 

[Dez]

I must agree with the person who recommended the old Leicaflex SL, It is beautifully made and extremely robust. The SL2 is a little more capable camera, and still just as bulletproof, but its status as a collector's item raises the price by far more than the real difference from the SL would justify.

I have never owned one of the later R's (I once had an R4 and it was unreliable), so I may not really be qualified to comment, but I see nothing about them that justifies their astronomical price. The SL would seem to be the best value for the money.

Cheers,
Dez

 

[ssmc]

I had the chance to "break in" a brand-new R9 just weeks before they were discontinued. Here are a few observations:

- it's large - large enough that I kept expecting it to wind the film on for me

- it's not particularly heavy and the bulk makes it seem even lighter than it is


- it feels extremely well-made, but somehow very different from an M (and I mean this quite apart from the shape - maybe the materials/finish used?)

- the viewfinder has a distinct bluish cast visible in low light conditions, not really noticeable in daylight

- the VF is smaller and of lower magnification than you might expect for a non-AF camera (especially given it's size) - 0.75x and only 93% coverage, similar to a FF DSLR only with less coverage (they are usually running about 95-100%); compare the Oly OM-1 at 0.92x and 97% or even the Minolta X-700 at 0.90x and 95%. Bottom line on this: more magnification = easier focusing, especially with wides

- the focusing screen is pretty good but not the best I've ever seen

- the eyepiece shutter is a nice touch

- the DOF preview action is strangely sluggish (overly damped) but I am told this is normal

- there is a noticeable delay between changing apertures on the lens and the display in the VF updating; this goes for both directions and is probably related to the slow DOF preview mechanism. I have never seen anything like this on any other SLR nor the M6 TTL I had. It's definitely something in the camera body; when operating the stop-down lever on the lens manually, the diaphragm snaps in and out with no resistance. Maybe it's something that will loosen up with more use

- the shutter/mirror is pretty quiet, but exceptionally smooth and well-damped

- did I mention it's pretty big for what it is/does? 😉

In summary it was a nice enough camera to use but outrageously overpriced (new) for what it offered. If someone gave me one I would probably use it but it didn't grab me the way the M6 TTL did, or even the IIIf for that matter. YMMV, of course, and if you can get a good used one for a reasonable price I can't see any reason not to - just try to handle one first. Since M/R lenses are not interchangeable, if you want an SLR for things that the M is not really suited for, you may be better off looking elsewhere at a more compact body and get a better viewfinder to boot.

HTH,
Scott

 

[Eric T]

I bought an R8 last spring. It was like new and at $600, I had to try it. It is a terrific camera. Silky smooth film advance. Extremely well built. Controls are simple and purposeful. Easy to focus and R lenses are great. My favorite is the 21mm f/4 Angulon.
I have had absolutely no problems with mine.

 

[kkdanamatt]

There is very little risk in buying a decent used Leica R camera.
The prices are very reasonable and probably won't decrease much more than they already have.
Since they are not popular, there are many from which to choose.
Just buy one and try it out.
If it doesn't suit you, then sell it.
You can't lose much, and you might decide to keep it.
It's really a no-brainer.

 

[giellaleafapmu]

My own opinion based on the few I handled when I also had the idea of buying one.
They are large as a fast camera but they are slow! They have unreliable electronics which is sometimes hard (and expensive) to repair if it really get broken. Lenses were the real reason to buy that camera but if you really have a Leitz glass R you want maybe you can just as well use a cheaper older body or convert it to F mount or Canon EOS mount (and use it both on film and digital). I had the idea of buying the camera because I believed I could get also the Telyt modular system which I think is one of the optically nicest long telephoto lens ever made but after handling the beast (and looking at the price) I reached the conclusion that that was NOT the way to go.
All this is written thinking you get the camera at normal market price, if you have a bargain at hands and you like the camera just go for it!

GLF

 

[Mark C]

I switched from Nikons to an R system for a while about 20 years ago because of the lenses. The Nikon bodies were definitely nicer to my mind, but even the R4 proved adequate. I eventually got rid of the R stuff when the work I did with it dried up; I still miss the 90 Summicron though.

I see people mentioning adapting the lenses to other bodies, but I thought this always resulted in the loss of auto diaphragm operation. I imagine that works out okay with some digi cameras, but can't imagine finding that acceptable with a film camera. Are there adapters that retain the auto diaphragm operation? For what bodies?

 

[sc_rufctr]

I like heavy...the M3 (same as the wonderful R4). I like the M3 size, same as the R4. Do I need another SLR? Yes, if it is a Leica. No, if anything else. I have had just about every Nikon ever made and I am sick and tired of them. YMMV.

I want the R8/R9. Life is too short, it is later than you think so it is time reconfigure what I want, not what others want.

As Thorsten says, get the camera you LOVE and use it. Doesn't matter what anyone else thinks....so, having said that, why would you believe anybody? Just get one, try it, sell it or keep it. Certainly not going to lose any money on a resell.🙂

This... (in bold)

I have the R9 and absolutely love it.I don't care what people think.

I've had Nikon, Cannon, Pentax etc.... and they're all gone.

 

[leicapixie]

A SLR is so different in use from a Rangefinder. The Leica-M with all the improvements, more frames, built in meter are in many ways a poor copy of a M3 and later M2. The feel of great craftsmanship is there! They were not perfect. Not in assembly or use. Simply the nicest to hold, frame and release.
The Leica SLR was a badly designed camera from day one! A SLR without a ground glass, an outside meter. It was old before it was sold..in a time when new camera models were measured in years not weeks. The lack of sales almost cost Leica the business. The use of Minolta bodies, when they were not building a stellar model only added to the minus column. The lenses are indeed spectacular. The heavyweights of the world. The R8 and R9 were called the "Hunchback of Solms".
I have used most cameras, often from agencies or news bureaus. Photographers doing daily work needed reliability, no fuss,hard working systems. The Nikon-F series and some Canon EOS did that, still do.
Buying a dead system like Minolta should be really at bottom prices..I doubt Leica will service them anymore! Please correct me if I am wrong. The HIGH prices for such services may well be the way to rid themselves of the problem.
Personally there are so many fine SLR out there, with easy service and tons of lenses. Get a Nikon-F, F2 or F3. The Nikkor lenses were made for hard use. My Nikons weigh way less than a Leica SLR and i find them now, being older, way too heavy!
If you find R8/R9 real cheap, maybe try it out..

 

[sircarl]

I've used an R7 as my main 35mm camera for about five years now, and couldn't be more pleased. I require AE, so most of the earlier R models weren't suitable, and I just couldn't see an R8 or R9 for street photography, which is what I shoot. The R7 feels great in the hand, has numerous exposure modes plus spot metering, and is very responsive (puzzled that some here found objectionable shutter lag). I use the 35 and 50 Summicrons, which I think are superb. See this gallery of street photos in Philadelphia, most of which were shot with these two lenses (plus a 24mm Elmarit-R):

http://sircarl.smugmug.com/Photography/Philly-Nilly/15096889_LMD5cs

 

[nobbylon]

Because they are not popular they are harder to sell. Try not to over pay because the seller is trying to recoup some cash. Good R4's are 100 euro, R8 no more than 350-400. Sl's 100-150. R9 and R6 seem expensive and IMHO way over priced.
Lenses are a different story, all getting expensive now especially 35 summicron and will probably increase more with the new M arrival.

 

[Paul Jenkin]

Never owned an R8 or R9 but I did have an R3 Mot + 28, 50 and 90mm lenses. Optically beautiful kit (IMO as good as my M6TTL) but a bit of a lump. I'd only consider R8/R9 if it gives you something you can't get elsewhere as the bodies seem to depreciate at a hell of a rate. A contact in a local Leica dealer (in London) recommends the R6.2 as probably the best all-rounder and it holds its value reasonably well.

 

[giellaleafapmu]

This... (in bold)

I have the R9 and absolutely love it.I don't care what people think.

I've had Nikon, Cannon, Pentax etc.... and they're all gone.

That's another way to look at the question and probably the wisest one. I still imagine that if he is asking possibly he is not sure of whether he really like ti and that's why he wants to hear from others...

GLF

 

[rover]

My R7 is the best manual focus SLR that I have, hands down. I would love to try an R6.2 and really want an R35mm lens, but my R7 with 50 Summicron is as good as it gets for an SLR in my stable.

 

[dave lackey]

My R7 is the best manual focus SLR that I have, hands down. I would love to try an R6.2 and really want an R35mm lens, but my R7 with 50 Summicron is as good as it gets for an SLR in my stable.

Hey, I have been meaning to ask how the R7 worked out for you but I reckon I knew all along you liked it!🙂

Sometimes I just pick up the FE2 or the F2 or something else just to get reacquainted and notice that they just don't match up to what I was thinking in terms of feel, quality, etc....then I always pick up the R4 with the Cron and know immediately what was missing. Can't wait to get my hands on an R8/9.

 

[dave lackey]

Like I said, buy the camera you LOVE, whatever it is, and USE it! I am happy you are talking film cameras at this point.

Which camera? There is no absolute...Any question/poll will result in a distribution curve, more or less bell-shaped so you will get as many opinions as there are anatomical sphincters. 😛 It is up to you to decide.🙂

 

[asiafish]

R3 is dirt cheap and has fantastic shutter feel and smooth mirror. R6 is every bit as good as R6.2 except for missing 1/2000th speed, but sells for less than half the price.

I own both with 35 and 90 Elmarits and 50 Summicron. Absolutely delightful to use and the results are fantastic, especially with the 90.

 

[redisburning]

The Nikkor lenses were made for hard use.

lol there are no lenses whose build quality is as overblown as AI and AI-s Nikkors.

plus even if they weren't you would be stuck with a bunch of nikkors when you could have had Leica lenses. IMO the best solution is to buy Leitax mounts for your Leica R lenses and use them on F cameras.

Nikon didnt win because of the lenses, they won because of the bodies and the pro service. Those of us shooting manual focus 35mm cameras are very rarely doing so for money, so such things are largely irrelevant.

 

[dshfoto]

I have used an R8, with film, a Digital Module R back (DMR), and R lenses on a Canon digital. The R8 + a DMR is about as heavy as a Leica S. (But not as expensive). The quality of either the film (I have scanned it with a Hasselblad Flextight Scanner.) A leica R6 is all mechanical, except for the meter, so you never have to worry about not being able to shoot. The glass is amazing.
I originally got into the R line, because Leica at one time said that they could never make a digital M. And a Hasselbald Digital back in 2006 was too expensive.
A medium format negative, from a Hasselblad will have more detail than an R negative,
I have used the R8+DMR in the studio, and gotten great shots, but is it is a bit heavy for the street. (at least for me.)
I have used the R8+DMR set up with an enlarging lens and bellows to copy negatives as well.
Summary of my concludions:
The R8+DMR is better than an M8 for studio work.
I can copy negatives with either the R8+DMR or the M8 with about equal results (of course you need the right bellows, Focoslide, etc.)
I use the M3 or M8 for travel and on the street because of the size, and fact that I am not getting that close to my subjects.
I use medium format when I want prints over 18 inches on the largest side.
Use an R for close up work and long telephoto work, not the M.
R glass is great and cheaper than M glass.
Its fun to use as many different types of cameras as you can.

 

[Ronald M]

R 8 & 9 were too big. Not worth it today unless you really want to invest in the latest and greatest Leica R APO lenses.