Leica R4s vs Leicaflex SL

I'm trying to decide between a R4s and an SL. I'm really a manual

kind of guy and am drawn to the SL but I'm concerned about the

availabliy of lenses. Is there a complete spectrum of lenses

available for the SL? Also, I've seen a lot of concerns about the

reliabiliy of the R4 series. Any advice would be apreciated.

SL

I've owned both. The SL is a real Leica. The R4s soon had bubbling under the paint, shortly after the warantee was up, and looked like crap. The Leicaflex SL was easier to focus as well. It was in the shop several times before I dumped it. When I got out of reflexes the SL body was probably 25 years old and still working to perfection. There are still plenty of lenses around that'll fit an SL.

did the bubbling up under the paint affect the lens quality at all? Or is it only

M's that are allowed to look scruffy?

Paul, the older M bodies wear down to brass. The bubbling on the R4s was caused by corrosion of the cast zinc body. For what that camera body cost one would think that they'd put on a decent enough paint job that you wouldn't get corrosion underneath the paint where there were no dings, chips or scratches! Where the bubbles "broke" you could see a mess of white crumbly corrosion in stark contrast to the black paint. Clean off the white crud and you saw pitted zinc. Hardly the vision of a well used and cared for Leica.

SL's are great; SL2's are great. There are "millions" of 2-and-3 cam lenses out there at incredible prices for 1st class Leica glass -- I just bought a beautiful 28mm Elmarit 2-cam for$260, and a gorgeous 50mm Summicron 2-cam for $175, and a super 180mm Elmar 3-cam for $290. All the best Leica repair pros still fix the Leicaflexes whereas most of them won't touch the Rs.

SL is like a tank, i bought for 190 euro a chrome one with a 50 summicron on ebay, I think it's the cheapest way to enter in leica world , you'll find all lenses you want .I changed 2 r4 for little electronics problem ,with old cameras no electronic is better.

Alessandro

Hi Daivd, Ever since I acquired a M3 a few years back, my two excellent condition SLs seemed to live in my Pelican case and never saw much light. I'm willing to part one so to put that marvelous machine for better use. Please contact me off the list if you're interested. I can be reached at geraldhsu@yahoo.com.

Al, of course you're right about the R4's. The same zinc pitting happened on

my original M6. Seems like they would at least acknowledge the fact that their

choice of materials was poor. I've owned a bunch of R cameras and could

never stick with them for very long. I think the lenses are very, very good.

Perhaps rivalling M lenses in optical quality. The bodies, though, just never

made it. One of the things I hated was the dual mirror system and the related

'lag time' of the shutter.

Leicaflexes are fun to look at but not a camera that I'm going to run out and

buy. By the way, if you ever get any corrosion in the battery compartment of a

Leicaflex be extremely careful in trying to clean it. the contact is extremely

brittle and will break off.

You can get both very reasonably right now. The SL is the best buy for sure (a tank) and will likely outlast any of us. You will have to shop around a little for the three cam lenses (which will work on either), but there are plenty of them out there to be found at good prices.

The R4 seems to get a bad press all the time. All I can say is that it has been a great

camera for me, and I've had none of the problems that I've read about. I'm sure most

people haven't. I've since acquired an M6 but the R4 still gets regular use, and the

results are just as good. The lenses are superb - as good as M lenses in my opinion,

and usually at a much more affordable price. If you like Leicas and SLRs, then the R4

is a great, relatively cheap, camera.

 

My flatmate has a Leicaflex and, from my (admittedly limited) experience of it, I would

choose the R4 anytime. The Leicaflex seems that bit more antiquated and unwieldy to

me.

"One of the things I hated was the dual mirror system and the related 'lag time' of the

shutter. "

 

Never heard ANYONE complain about these parts of the SL design. The 'dual mirror'

system on the SL was a main mirror with a transparency of 20% [if I remember right] that

let enough light through for the meter. Even with that 'missing' light the SL was and is one

of the brightest finders ever in a 35mm Reflex camera.

 

As for 'lag time', the SL again was the top of the class with no connection to the 'dual-

mirror' function. Can't remember the exact figure, but it was only slightly behind the M-

series, and the fastest of any classic manual 35mm Reflex Camera. I used one for sports

and where the Nikon people were never sure their camera reacted fast enough and if they

missed the moment, the SL was far and away the better reacting camera. There is also a

'gearing' to the mirror and it comes to a much gentler rest in its upward movement - no

vibration. The meter is a useful 'spot meter' that is well defined in the finder view, not the

most sensitive (good enough for any handheld work), but accuate, great finder all-around

- great camera.

 

Over-all the SL is the best Leica bargain out there; well built, great to handle ( a bit heavy

compared to the R, but great for a steady camera), great lenses, it feels like a quality

'Leica' built camera. But you should count on a full CLA to get it going without worry

(Sherry Krauter at Golden Touch is the best). One problem to look for in this 30+ year old

camera is finder 'brown spots', unless really bad they don't effect the photo of course, and

usually are not a focus problem either.

 

I used the R-series for more than a few years. Its more a 'systems camera'; motor drives,

focus screens, and a few newer lenses the SL can not use. A good camera, but not a great

Leica camera. If you are just shooting for fun and enjoy well built tools go for the SL.

There are some lenses that cannot be used on the SL, and there

are also some that were not made originally to fit the SL but can

be modified to fit. The biggest limitations are with the

wide-angle lenses where you're limited to 19mm at the widest

and no 24mm unless you go with a third-party lens, and no

35mm f/1.4.

<P>

I've used both the SL and the R4s for many years; I didn't have

the bubbling/corrosion problems Al had but then I don't live near

salt water. If the R4s gets a CLA every ten years or so and you

don't use it hard there shouldn't be any reliability problems. All of

the reliability problems with the R4-series bodies were with early

production. By the time the R4s was produced the problems

were long gone.

<P>

If you're going to use the camera hard the SL is a better bet. If

you want a camera that gives you real Leica sensory feedback,

you want the SL. If your eyes are showing signs of age, you want

the SL. If you want minimum shutter lag, minimum vibration and

at least the option of tricking the mirror into pre-releasing the SL

is the better choice. If you want to see in the viewfinder what

shutter speed you've set in manual mode the R4s is not what

you want.

As a long term Canon fan, accustomed to the bright viewfinders of the F-1's, and having used their very brightest screens, carefully chosen to be in the very best of condition, I can tell you that my SL gives the best Canon viewfinders close competition. Mine, even in its yellowed state, handles shadows as well as, or possibly a bit better than, a J screen in a Canon F-1n (the best and brightest). I wonder if the yellowed finder doesn't act as a yellow filter, boosting contrast a bit. I recommend the SL without hesitation.

I hesitate to break in and say "Thanks Y'all" because I don't want the posts to stop. THANKS! but keep'um comin'...ya hear!

As stated on other postings... I found a reference to the Leica Factory museum in Solms;

 

"Thought by some to be the toughest 35 mm SLR ever built. The Leica Solms museum has on display an SL2 MOT with Motor and 35 mm Summicron which survived a 25,000 foot fall from a Phantom II fighter jet: battered but in one piece, and deemed repairable by Leica."

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leica#R_.28SLR.29_series

 

Need we say anymore ??? - Gus