What's the deal with leica slrs?

[Dirk]

I have a SL2 and a R7. Love them both, especially the SL2, which is a little large and heavy, but is beautifully built. It has a unique look that gets attention. The lenses are better than the MF Nikkors, Super-Takumars and Hexanons I have used. I have the second version Elmarit 28mm 2.8 and Summicron 50mm. The way the Leica R lenses draw is truly special, especially in color.

 

[Hilm3]

The R7 is the only one I've used and I like it a lot. I've had it since new and never had a problem. The 60 macro R lens is superb. I mostly use the 35-70 zoom.

 

[sc_rufctr]

If I was looking for an SLR it would be the R9.

There is just something about it.. Looks like the bomb and screams expensive German Camera.
All Black with no electric winder...
I'm more than happy with my Ms but that R9 has always been on my dream list.
Maybe one day.

You can find them mint or near mint for reasonable money. (Less than $2,000)
People must have lost their shirt on this camera.

Does anybody know what they were new? I'm guessing around the 10 grand mark but I don't know.

On EBay

Demo R9... 350402259424 ~ $1,801 USD
Summilux-R 1,4/50mm... 370421641686 ~ $1,129 Euro

(R9 Digital back... 110595982598 ~ $4,680 USD)

 

[Cron]

R6.2 - if you want an all mechanical camera;
R7 - if you want a small reliable SLR with electronics;
R9 - if you want "state of the art" Leica SLR;
there were electronic problems with R3-R5 as I heard;
many very recommandable lenses, also Vario-lenses included

 

[surfer dude]

I had an R8 until recently. With the incredible lenses, it delivered the best 35mm SLR quality I've experienced.

Only drawback is the weight. I guess an R9 which is basically the same but 100g lighter would go a long way to rectifying that. However the lenses are also very heavy. I had a wonderful 35mm Summilux but it weighed a LOT and in the end I opted for a slightly expanded M system and, for the occasions I would like to use an SLR and for lightness and for old times' sake, a Canon A1 and some FD lenses. Plus I have some Nikon F90x gear for AF.

 

[scottgee1]

If I was looking for an SLR it would be the R9.

There is just something about it.. Looks like the bomb and screams expensive German Camera.
All Black with no electric winder...
I'm more than happy with my Ms but that R9 has always been on my dream list.
Maybe one day.

You can find them mint or near mint for reasonable money. (Less than $2,000)
People must have lost their shirt on this camera.

KEH has R9 rated "LN-" for US$1,299.00 so people may have lost their shirt AND pants. R8 in the same condition go for $819.00.

IMO, the early Minolta built bodies are clunky, loud and vibration prone. As already noted, the SL/SL2 are fine tools if in proper working order. The R8 had a lot of problems when released that were supposedly remedied by the R9. I stopped paying attention by that point.

Yes prices for 'R' series lenses increased substantially since Canonites with large sensor digibodies realized that Canon wide angle lenses are subpar. Interestingly, resale prices for used Contax/Zeiss and Olympus OM lenses jumped as well -- a testament to their quality. So, while you might get a deal on a Leica R body, look carefully at the lenses you want to acquire to rationalize your budget. BTW, Heather, what do you consider "remarkably affordable"? That would add context to the conversation.

Keep in mind that manufacturer support is nonexistent and service/parts for 'vintage' SLRs gets more difficult with each passing year. To keep the cost reasonable, you might want to consider a kit with an OMx or Contax RTSII (even a 139Q!) with carefully selected lenses if you've a hankering for the SLR experience.

my two lux worth/ScottGee1

 

[Rui Morais de Sousa]

I got a R5 a short time ago, and I really enjoy the camera.
I don't understand how some people can say that they are big and heavy. I find it maybe a little too small (I am a small person!). My Eos 1n is much bigger... I am even considering the Motor Drive to better balance the camera with the heavy lenses that I use.
The finder is excellent and I think that the dual metering is great too.
Originally I wanted a Leicaflex (I always did!), but then I thought that they were some decades old... I decided on some "confort", as my youngest M is 32 yers old (all of them meterless cameras)...
I will later on think about getting a R6 too, as I generally prefer mechanical cameras.
By the way, I only use the R (at least in the moment) with long focal distances: 3 Visoflex lenses via 14167 Leitz adapter (135mm, 200 & 280mm) and the Telyt 6.8/400mm.
I will surely later on buy a 35 or 50 Summicron for "walking around".
It is a pity that Leica stoped R production. I prefer this kind of cameras than the Canon or Nikon models full of features and games that I don't need at all. Besides that, the lenses are, well, Leica! And that says a lot!
Greetings,
Rui
AL-MOST-LY PHOTOGRAPHY

 

[varjag]

I abandoned SL in favour of the Visoflex system.

 

[Freakscene]

I don't understand how some people can say that they are big and heavy.

I think people are referring to the Leicaflexes, the R8 and R9 when they say 'big' or 'heavy'. The R4 or RE cameras are quite light.

Marty

 

[BillBingham2]

+X for the SL2 or SL. I wonder about the R6.2 but never found one to play with. The glass rocks, like all their glass. Handling is second to none and focus and aperture moves the same direction as the M Glass, which is one of the major reasons I moved from Leica M to Nikon S. I have what I think is a nice set of world class Nikkors F glass that is I don't want to replace along with a lot of history (read first camera and all) and two bodies.

Leica SLRs did not follow Nikon, Canon, Minolta, and others through the feature wars along with marketing fights. IMHO they really paid attention to handling as every Leica SLR to the R7 fit into my hands naturally.

The glass is at a great price these days, if I had the cash I would go for it.

B2 (;->

 

[Nokton48]

I also toyed with the idea of migrating to the SL, but ended up investing in a complete Visoflex system. I still have that "knee-jerk" reaction when I see an SL advertised. The 180mm F2.8 Elmarit was particularly sweet, I passed on a nice one for $250 a while back.

I abandoned SL in favour of the Visoflex system.

 

[dshfoto]

I purchased most of my R cameras and lenses before 2008, but here is a list and prices back then:

I have a Leica R8, and 2 Leica R6's. I sold my R3.
The R3 had a problem with the batter discharging if left in.

Here's my list of lenses:

28mm F2.8 Elmarit-R
35mm F1.4 Summilux-R
35mm F2.0 Summicron-R
50mm F2 Summicron R
50mm F1.4 Summilux-R
60mm F2.8 Macro-Elmarit-R
90mm F2.0 Sumicron-R
135mm F 2.8 Elmarit-R

You can also easily mount Hasselblad lenses on them.

I mostly prefer to shoot rangefinders, but have found the R's to be great in the studio. I also have the digital back that fits the R8 and R9. The quality is super, and as these decline in price, a reason to consider an R8 or R9.

The reason most people don't talk about them is that they are not for the "trigger happy". You actually have to think about what you are doing.

Almost all of the shots here:
http://www.tangobsas.com/phpAlbum/main.php?cmd=album&var1=Recoleta/
were taken with the R8 and DMR back

The following were taken with the R3 and Flim.
http://www.tangobsas.com/phpAlbum/main.php?cmd=imageview&var1=BsAs_Streets%2FBsAs_Streets_l1011078.jpg
http://www.tangobsas.com/phpAlbum/main.php?cmd=imageview&var1=BsAs_Streets/BsAs_Streets_l1011076.jpg

Almost all of this link was shot with the R and digital back.
http://www.tangobsas.com/phpAlbum/main.php?cmd=album&var1=Roxana/

Also this set was shot with an R and the digital back.
http://www.tangobsas.com/phpAlbum/main.php?cmd=album&var1=Folk_Dancers/

The R6 and R6.2 bodies seem to hold their value better, and I have a preference for more mechanical bodies.

I got involved with the R line when I thought that Leica was never going to make a digital M. If they never had, I might still be shooting only with the R.

Get one body, put as much money in one lens as possible (50mm Summilux is my preference) and spend a couple of months shooting with just that camera and lens.) For a variation, get an adapter, and shoot with a Hasselblad 80mm for some portrait shots.
I feel that the film shots I have taken with the R's closely resemble the type of look I get with the M's.

 

[Rui Morais de Sousa]

Funny how some people went from R to Visoflex. I am just doing the opposite, I start using my Visoflex lenses (that I own for a long time now) on a R. So I get the convenience of metering, auto exposure if I want to, maybe a better focusing screen (at least exchangeable if I wish to), for sure better handling.
I always liked my Viso lenses. Now I can use them with more confort...
Cheers and have fun both ways,
Rui

 

[steveyork]

Part of the problem is the goofy lens mounts. Leicaflex = 1 cam; SL and SL2 = 2 or 3 cam; R3-R6 = 3 cam or R only; R7-R9 = ROM (or something like that).

I've used an SL and SL2 in the past and the viewfinder is as great as advertised -- "big, bold and beautiful." But you're limited to optics from the 1970's. Some are good (e.g., 180mm f/3.4 APO and 50mm Summicron), but most are dated.

I took a circa. 70's outfit on two trips in the last two years; one of them to shoot polar bears in Churchill, Canada. Other than the aforementioned lenses, I was fairly disappointed with the results (28-50-90-180-400 focal lengths).

The microprism screen of the SL is great for macro and telephoto work.

 

[Frank Petronio]

You can use a 3-cam on the SL-SL2 cameras, just not the ROM lenses. If you can afford the latest-last R lenses then just get an R9 and be done with it....

What is nice about the SL series is that for $1000 to $2000 you can put together a great classic outfit with the older lenses that were good and have Leica quality and looks, 28-50-90. Probably not the long glass though.

 

[heatherselkie]

Hello, what I meant by affordable was that I was seeing leica slr's on ebay, keh.com and elsewhere for much much less than M cameras of comparable age. My thinking was that I might not be able to afford an M anytime soon, but I might be able to afford an R. I have a bessa t right now which is okay and hope to upgrade to another bessa or luckily an M someday. An slr is better for macro and for when the bear wanders into the yard. I had to run really fast last week after taking a shot of mamma bear and family.
However, I was at a camera store in the city yesterday and they are charging a fortune for their leicaflexes and R cameras and lenses. Either I was being dslexic or last time I looked they had lower prices on them. I saw an R8 at another camera store which was over $2000 and it looks massive.
While the SL or SL2 are tempting, I do worry about the viewfinder and other bits that might break. I didn't even think about the mercury batteries. But they are on ebay for less than $200! I am more interested in a mechanical camera like the R6 or R6.2-if I can find one.
Thanks.

 

[Frank Petronio]

Well... for the value, it is hard to beat a mechanical Nikon F-series, even the F3 which relies on (very reliable) batteries... everything about the Nikon SLRs (and the better pro-level Olympus, Canon, Pentax, etc.) is going be more robust and easier to find that a Leica. In other words, you have to really want to get a Leica to put up with finding a good one... where there are thousands of pro Nikons for less than $250 looking for a home.

Put it this way, a lot of great photo-journalists and pro photographers used Leica rangefinders and Canon/Nikon SLRs... the Leica SLR line struggled for a reason, in spite of having some brilliant options.

And while other lines of lenses were never as consistently good across the board like the Leica line-up, there are models of Nikon, Pentax, Olympus lenses that are stellar. Ask around....

Used cameras in retail camera stores can be outrageously priced, most of the people here trade amongst themselves via this forum and a few others, plus eBay when you can't find it from someone you virtually know. They are usually better described and more reasonably priced that what you will find in a retail shop.

 

[Vince Lupo]

Frank brings up a lot of great points, and he's right that it's hard to beat a good old Nikon F series camera for reliability, ruggedness, and quality. I'd also add Pentax Spotmatics/SV's to the list too. Look at old photos from the 1960's of professional photographers, and what are the SLR's that are frequently hanging around their necks? Nikon F's and Pentax Spotmatics/SV's.

I wouldn't worry too much about the battery situation -- many of the cameras back then used PX625 batteries to power their meters, and Wein Cell batteries are not only the proper voltage, but they are mercury-free http://www.weincell.com , and they've been around for years.

 

[splitimageview]

Hello, what I meant by affordable was that I was seeing leica slr's on ebay, keh.com and elsewhere for much much less than M cameras of comparable age.

It depends on which model of R. The R3s and R4s are cheap for a reason.

However, I was at a camera store in the city yesterday and they are charging a fortune for their leicaflexes and R cameras and lenses. Either I was being dslexic or last time I looked they had lower prices on them. I saw an R8 at another camera store which was over $2000 and it looks massive.

Find another store. 🙂 The R6, R6.2, and R7 are great machines, look up completed auctions on ebay for an idea of what they are going for.

 

[heatherselkie]

Thanks digitalintrigue, I did look up some completed auctions and several R6's and 6.2's sold for $350!! Currently there are a few for less than $500. Phew, considering the camera shop had R4's for over $1000, that makes me feel better.
Yes Frank, the retail stores are grossly overpriced. I asked one shop if they had warrantees for their cameras. Only 30 days...and they had lectured me about the dangers of buying cameras on ebay! If I relied on the camera boutique prices as standard, I would have given up long ago. I still can't really afford anything but it's nice to know I could get gear here, on craigslist or ebay.
Yes I am still looking at nikons as they are plentiful, affordable and bombproof, but I just can't help myself...
One thing I just realized is that while I was in university and art school I would have qualified for the mysterious student discount that I never knew about. I swear I had more money back then so I could have afforded something good. I could have had an M6 or 7 AND an R6.2? I keep things forever so I could have built up a nice collection of lenses by now. Problem with that fantasy is that my house was broken into in 2003 and all my cameras were stolen. Horror! After giving up and using a digital nikon 5700 for the past 7 years I want to get back into film and am just considering slrs again. Rangefinder photography has been great so far, but I want an slr too.