Switching from Leica M2 to Hexar RF
- Thread starter jnclde
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 53
- Views 6K
Yes. Thanks for linking Dante's blog post.
Also, Zeiss Ikon.
Also, Zeiss Ikon.
If I recall correctly, that particular hexar rf had a -2.0 diopter eyepiece. Which is great if that works for your eyesight. If not, good luck finding a spare eyepiece to replace it with. In Japan, I've heard of people purposely sending their hexar rf to kenko-tokina for servicing sans eyepiece so kenko-tokina would have to attach another one during the servicing. Why? Its the only way you can get new/spare eyepieces. The eyepiece is an integral part of the viewfinder optical system so kenko tokina has to install one to service the camera. They refuse to sell them as parts only and no one else has any stock.
This. I bought a Zeiss Ikon new in March 2009 and its still going strong. You can even use the common and easy to find Nikon FM series eyepieces/diopters on it.
aizan
Veteran
i have nothing but good things to say about the hexar rf, but if you want a lighter body, you should get a zeiss ikon or voigtlander bessa.
user237428934
User deletion pending
I have a very nice paperweight on my office desk here. Bought the Hexar RF some years ago for 500 EUR. Electronics ok but it produced only unsharp photos, no return possible. So I sent it for a repair for another 200 EUR but it still does not work. A 700 EUR paperweight.... who can beat that?
(rangefinder is properly aligned. When I focus on something 2m away, the lens says 2m but something from 10m to infinity is sharp)
(rangefinder is properly aligned. When I focus on something 2m away, the lens says 2m but something from 10m to infinity is sharp)
ulrich.von.lich
Well-known
How is that possible? If the lens says 2m, the picture should be sharp at 2m, unless there is something wrong with the lens' DOF chart or the LTM-M adapter. I mainly zone focus a 28mm lens on my Hexar RF like on my M6, after all, the camera is only a box.
ulrich.von.lich
Well-known
To OP, if you mainly care about the durability, I would say forget about the Hexar RF, Cosina Zeiss Ikon and Bessa's, the CLE etc. Even if you buy another body for parts, few shops are bothered to even touch them. It's a PITA to get them fixed, unless if you live in Japan perhaps.
Buy a Leica M6 or M7.
If you only care about photos, Hexar RF is a great camera. I use it for wide angle lenses and haven't yet any focus issue. The only trouble it caused me was to refuse to load some non mainstream films I bought in Bulgaria (Rollei branded, I think), probably because there was no DX code. I was stuck in a beautiful city of Veliko Tarnovo with only one roll of Neopan 1600, which turned out to contain many keepers.
Buy a Leica M6 or M7.
If you only care about photos, Hexar RF is a great camera. I use it for wide angle lenses and haven't yet any focus issue. The only trouble it caused me was to refuse to load some non mainstream films I bought in Bulgaria (Rollei branded, I think), probably because there was no DX code. I was stuck in a beautiful city of Veliko Tarnovo with only one roll of Neopan 1600, which turned out to contain many keepers.
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
Back to the opener:- "I recently purchased a Fujifilm Klasse S for a compact and I absolutely adore it. The reason for the purchase was that it has a 38mm FL, which is very close to my most used lens on the M2 - 40mm M-Rokkor f2.The handling and AF is great (coming from manual focusing) and the optics are what drew me in. It made me realize that there is so much more to cameras than the peak of 1950s camera design. (Leica M2/3)"
Why not a Leica CL body or Minolta CLE body for the 40mm?
Regards, David
Back to the opener:- "I recently purchased a Fujifilm Klasse S for a compact and I absolutely adore it. The reason for the purchase was that it has a 38mm FL, which is very close to my most used lens on the M2 - 40mm M-Rokkor f2.The handling and AF is great (coming from manual focusing) and the optics are what drew me in. It made me realize that there is so much more to cameras than the peak of 1950s camera design. (Leica M2/3)"
Why not a Leica CL body or Minolta CLE body for the 40mm?
Regards, David
agfa100
Well-known
When I shoot film it is with either my M-5 or my Hexar RF I have not had any problems with the Hexar and I bought it new the 2nd year they were out.
wbill
wbill
leicapixie
Well-known
Konica RF had a different focus distance, from the start.
See factory specs.
It may have been changed at some point..
Depth of field at small apertures, might work..
The answer is simple my M2 has the best viewfinder, the nicest frames.
I do use my M3 more.
Purely due to familiarity. 🙂
I would avoid Konica as it's obsolete, no factory back up.
If bought cheap enough, take a chance.
After doing photography, for a long time, pro, serious amateur,
now retired, but using my Leica weekly,
+either you own a Leica, or you don't".
There are no similar, no "like", no maybe!
I like cameras with meters but can work totally without.
I usually get better images without meters.. sigh.
See factory specs.
It may have been changed at some point..
Depth of field at small apertures, might work..
The answer is simple my M2 has the best viewfinder, the nicest frames.
I do use my M3 more.
Purely due to familiarity. 🙂
I would avoid Konica as it's obsolete, no factory back up.
If bought cheap enough, take a chance.
After doing photography, for a long time, pro, serious amateur,
now retired, but using my Leica weekly,
+either you own a Leica, or you don't".
There are no similar, no "like", no maybe!
I like cameras with meters but can work totally without.
I usually get better images without meters.. sigh.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
I've always loved the results from the Hexanon-M 50. I would buy it over a Summicron, but that's just me.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
So, OP wants good 50mm prime on Hexar RF (560g), because M2 (580g) and OK 50mm prime is so heavy?
Something is fishy here :
OP also concerned about reliability while Hexar RF is obsolete with some electronics in it and here is next to nothing to break in M2.
Buying second camera suggestion to have spare parts is obvious obsolete as well. What if broken camera has exactly the same as broken in purchased as broken? And WHO is going to do actual repair.
One still working obsolete plus one broken obsolete might be next to fine working and serviceable M6.
I'm looking at the two pictures OP provided and not getting where is the rush for exposure metering. Plus, I would prefer to use not reflected, but incident metering for second picture.
Sorry, I'm not warm and fuzzy. It is Leica M Film Camera sub-forum after all 🙂
Something is fishy here :
OP also concerned about reliability while Hexar RF is obsolete with some electronics in it and here is next to nothing to break in M2.
Buying second camera suggestion to have spare parts is obvious obsolete as well. What if broken camera has exactly the same as broken in purchased as broken? And WHO is going to do actual repair.
One still working obsolete plus one broken obsolete might be next to fine working and serviceable M6.
I'm looking at the two pictures OP provided and not getting where is the rush for exposure metering. Plus, I would prefer to use not reflected, but incident metering for second picture.
Sorry, I'm not warm and fuzzy. It is Leica M Film Camera sub-forum after all 🙂
jnclde
Established
You probably misunderstood/I didn't fully elaborate what I meant by weight.
Regarding weight I meant to carry a camera with that lens combo all day for me isn't convenient or ideal. I am a street photographer and I switch from different light situations all day long, so if I'm going to carry something with weight it better have features that will benefit my work flow rather than slow it down. I have a grasp at understanding exposure after using the M2 for over a year as my main, but I don't want to approximate exposure any longer. Most of the time I am accurate, but some frames I do slip. I would rather maximize my films potential per frame and focus on my composition and selected settings than worry about a tricky light situation when moments are fleeting.
Also the price! The M2 I currently have is probably worth ~3 Hexar RF bodies
jnclde
Established
I haven't looked into the weight of the Hexanon-M 50, but I know the V3/4 Summicrons are around mid ~200g and that's pretty awesome. Also the ergonomics are being taken under consideration as well.
jnclde
Established
There are multiple reasons. Primarily defeating the purpose of owning the Klasse S, since they're both relatively small.
Cons:
Short EBL (I think the shortest if I'm right(?) correct me if I'm keeping guys)- I want to primarily use a 50mm since the Klasse S has me covered.
Awkward and long film advance; can't double stroke it
Old light meter that will probably break sooner than a Hexar RF
No AE or aperture priority
Etc
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
255 grams I think
Huss
Veteran
The CLE that David mentioned is a great option. Especially seeing you like the 40mm lenses. It comes with a 40mm frame, has AE exposure and is very small and lightweight.
Uses the Leica M mount lenses.
You can get a perfect/mint condition one for $400. Or two perfect mint condition ones, with matching Zhou half cases for $750.
Uses the Leica M mount lenses.
You can get a perfect/mint condition one for $400. Or two perfect mint condition ones, with matching Zhou half cases for $750.
Huss
Veteran
13Promet
Well-known
I have both the M2 and the RF.
In my case, in-body metering is not a huge advantage because I mostly shoot in daytime, make an initial incident light exposure assessment, overexpose by 1/2 stop, then just work by differences (-2 stops for shadow).
This way, I have no troubles working without an in-body meter and I actually get better exposures becuase I'm forced to think at light, which for some reason I'm not doing as much when I'm using a metered camera, unless I completely ignore its readings.
The metered bodies (M6 and RF) only come handy in very variable light, usualy not during daytime.
To me the real main gaps between the two, however, are the Hex being much loulder (this could be unimportant for your shooting) and the dramatic difference in VF quality and RF patch size for accurate focussing and pleasure of use, making the M2 a much better body for my likings.
I'd suggest you to try an RF before you buy it in order to find out whether the latter difference matters to you or not.
In my case, in-body metering is not a huge advantage because I mostly shoot in daytime, make an initial incident light exposure assessment, overexpose by 1/2 stop, then just work by differences (-2 stops for shadow).
This way, I have no troubles working without an in-body meter and I actually get better exposures becuase I'm forced to think at light, which for some reason I'm not doing as much when I'm using a metered camera, unless I completely ignore its readings.
The metered bodies (M6 and RF) only come handy in very variable light, usualy not during daytime.
To me the real main gaps between the two, however, are the Hex being much loulder (this could be unimportant for your shooting) and the dramatic difference in VF quality and RF patch size for accurate focussing and pleasure of use, making the M2 a much better body for my likings.
I'd suggest you to try an RF before you buy it in order to find out whether the latter difference matters to you or not.
