SL2 vs. R

[Trius]

This thread got me to thinking and wondering ...

I don't know a lot about Leica SLRs, having been an OM-head for so long ... my first SLR was a non-MD OM-1.

However, the R series never appealed to me from an aesthetic POV, which I grant is hardly the best criterion for diving into an SLR system.

Obviously, Leica SLR glass is attractive, so ...


Given the big differences in type of camera, i.e. mechanical vs. electronically controlled, what are the significant advantages of the R over the SL2, and vice versa?

 

[Nando]

I'm not an SLR fan but I always had a thing for the R8 and R9 ever since I fondled an R8 in Ottawa a few years ago. They're ugly but its feels nice in my hands. I've also never seen a nicer and brighter finder on a 35mm SLR. From what I've heard, the SL2's finder is even better. I really want to take a look through an SL2 finder.

I really like the 80mm Summilux-R. I find the photos very similar to those taken with the 75mm Summilux-M.

If I thought that there was anybody who was 'set' with his gear, it would be you Earl (and Al K.).

 

[Trius]

Fernando: I am not ready to say I'm done. At least I admit it. 😀

While I doubt I would swap out my OM gear for Leica SLR, I am somewhat curious. I suppose it is largely due to the lure of Leica glass.

 

[BillBingham2]

Tirus,

The only thing I did not like about the OM system was that the aperture and focus did not move the same way as it did on my Leica M glass. It was a pain for me as I think about the picture and make adjustments as I bring a camera to my eye.

The SL2 is a wonderful camera and the R glass is like all the other stuff from our friends across the pond, wonderful. I traded my SLMOT and a 50 for a 21/2.8 M lens. The SL was no slouch either. The many of the Rs have lots of Minolta all over them, they are some good ones but my only experience is from what I read.

B2 (;->

 

[Frank Petronio]

The only shortcomings of the SL2 are that they're heavy; their finders tend to yellow and grow spots of fungus (DAG can still replace them but it is expensive); the shutter tends to freeze at the highest speeds; and the old mercury batteries... (The SL has a more reliable shutter.)

I've had the early Rs too, and I fear the R3 and R4 models blow... nice compact cameras but their electronics fail more often than not. I wouldn't kick a R6 or R6.2 away though.

 

[Seele]

The Leica reflex cameras always have lens compatibility issues: single-cam, two-cam, three-cam lenses are not always cross compatible.

 

[dof]

There is a similar thread active on the LUF at the moment. While the initial inquiry is not the same as yours, Trius, the discussion is pretty balanced with points for mechanical vs. electronic R cameras. There is some good SL2 info there as well. The Leicaflex certainly has its admirers.

R6.2 vs R8 thread

 

[Rhodes]

The Leica reflex cameras always have lens compatibility issues: single-cam, two-cam, three-cam lenses are not always cross compatible.

Yes, but I think that the three-cam lenses can be mount in all the leica reflex cameras, from the leicaflex to the r8, but I need to re-check this.
And I did, they can be use from leicaflex to the digital back!

http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/index-frameset.html?Lens-R.html~mainFrame

photo.net, in the section of the leica R, has a lot os posts of this kinds. From what I could read, a lot of people used the first models of the r system and are trying to get the sl models.
On ebay I let a go a sl2 with a 60mm elmarit (I think, I fail in the r-lenses names) for 361 euros. buahhhh

 

[rlouzan]

Hi Frank,

The Achilles Hell of Leicaflex bodies is decementing of the pentaprism:bang:.

Regards,
RLouzan

their finders tend to yellow and grow spots of fungus (DAG can still replace them but it is expensive)

 

[telenous]

Hi Earl,

The SL2 is a good choice. Great viewfinder, all-mechanical, very reliable. On the downside, it looks like an obscure part of a teutonic armour, it's heavy like one, and you have to find one without the viewfinder black spots (otherwise it will need a CLA). Prices in second-hand sellers are pretty steep, you 'll do better with a private buy I think.

The discerning Oly user 😉 will inevitably be attracted by the small size of the R4-R7s (the R3 is bigger and rumoured to suffer from electronic problems). The R4 and R5 are cheapest nowadays and give you basic electronic control, R6/6.2 go back to all-mechanical, the R7 is the one from the bunch with the most specs. The more recent R8/9 are modern SLRs (and priced like ones), as much as they can be without AF, that is. I don't know for all (too many minute differences), I 'll just compare for you very roughly the SL2 and R6.2 which I have. The R6.2 gives multiple exposure, mirror pre-release, S/T and more advanced flash options than the (very basic) SL2. The R6.2 is supposed to be a little less reliable (quite a few more horror stories), mine has worked fine though with the exception of the electronic S/T which fires à volonté. It does have grainier viewfinder than the SL2, however most SLRs will come second to the SL2 in that regard. If the SL2 had a mirror pre-release I 'd opt for it, since it doesn't, I prefer the R6.2.

The mount intricacies (1, 2 , 3 cams and ROM) are less arcane than it first may sound. Karen Nakamura has a succinct, informative write-up in her site, here: http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/index-frameset.html?Lens-R.html~mainFrame

Most Rs are still pricey, with the exception of the R3/4/5s, which are somewhat reasonable. In my opinion all Rs are quirky, sometimes in function, sometimes in handling, sometimes in both. They 're the price of admission to lenses ranging from the very interesting to astounding. Perhaps now the R line is discontinued the prices will come down. Or go up, you never know with Leicas. 🙄

 

[Trius]

Thanks, everyone, lots of good information here. It seems the choice would be an SL/SL2 or an R6.2. The lack of mirror pre-release is a minor concern, electronic reliability and repair costs are major. I have never had an issue with an OM1/2, though the R6.2 may be more sophisticated than the OM2.

And yes, Alkis, size and weight are concerns for someone who has shot OMs for over 30 years! I am not unhappy with Zuiko glass, but there is always that siren call of Summicrons, Elmars, etc.

 

[ChrisN]

I owned a Leicaflex (1) for a few months. I bought it from a local dealer in second-hand goods, with 50 Summicron lens, for a very modest price. When I offered it for sale here at the same low price, it was snapped up very quickly by Brian Sweeney. I often wonder if Brian got some good use out of it? Brian?

 

[shadowfox]

Earl, I get to try out 50/2 Summicron R that came with a dinky Canon EOS Rebel 2 using an EOS to R adapter. Later on I lucked out on a cheap EOS 1N.

This route is less expensive than getting an SL2 or R cameras (not to mention CLA cost). Same results in the end, because we're talking about the same lenses.

Same feel? I don't know that, because I'm too cheap to spring for those Leica bodies 😛 😀