Which Way to Go??

Hi

<p>

I would to get your opinons, advice and thoughts on this. I'm thinking seriously about selling all my 4x5 gear plus some photography odds and ends to do this. I owned and used Leica M's and R's in the past and loved them, but I never had a complete bag of Leica equipment. What

I'm thinking is buying a R8 with winder plus some zooms (28-70 and 80-200) or buying a old Leicaflex SL Mot or SL2 Mot plus some fixed lenses, 21,35,60,90 250. (FYI: I own and use daily for work Nikon gear, two Kodak/Nikon digital cameras plus a film body and four S zooms a couple of long fast lenses, all Nikon.) I would like to be able to use the Leica gear where I can for work and for myself. I don't mind the old SL gear and fixed lenses, It could be used for photographing in bad weather, bad situations and where batteries fail. The R8 and lenses could be used for portraits and such, that TTL with studio strobes would be nice. But no fixed lenses for the R8 just zooms. No rangefinders either, I like them but I like SLRs better. So

which camera for me? Thanks for your help.

<p>

John

The 28-70 zoom is not supposed to be all that good but the 35-70/4 is

well regarded, as is the 80-200/4. This is just hearsay, however,

since I've never tried any Leica zooms. But why don't you want the

best of both worlds: R8 with fixed lenses? Speed would then be on

your side.

John, before you sell your 4x5 gear: do you use it? What kind of

jobs do you use it for? Will 35mm be adequate for all those jobs, or

will you wind up buying the 4x5 stuff over again, just as you are

considering buying Leica gear over again. Do you need some of each

for all you do? There are, as you know, some things that can only be

done with large format . . .

John:

<p>

I guess it all depends on what you are trying to accomplish. I was

in a similar situation about a year ago. I found that I was not

missing many pictures but then again I wasn't having as much fun as I

used to. In my case I picked up an r6.2 and later a well used SL

along with a couple primes. they are different cameras each with

different feel and I wont try to repeat what has been widely

written. Now when I shoot for fun I use a basic camera, and a few

basic primes. I may not get as many hits, but I have more fun. the

leicas also work as a nice complement to my other gear and serves as

a friendly reminder of the equipment I grew up with. My

recommendation; a r8 with a winder and a couple of zooms is a fair

chunk of money. pick up an SL, skip the SL2 MOT or the SL MOT as

they come at a substantial premium and the motor if working is not

worth what you are used to. pick up some primes and enjoy yourself.

you can always pick up an r8 later. the r6.2 is smaller and lighter.

I pack my r6.2 with a couple of primes when I dont want to lug 20

pounds of camera gear around. I pack my SL when I want some thing

unobtrusive and I dont want to spend half my time watching my camera

gear. let's face it a nikon F5 with a big zoom screams steal me.

good luck!

I have greatly reduced my Nikon AF system as I've increased my R

system. I still use Nikon for wildlife, and things like

photographing at parties, children, etc. where for me AF works better

than manual or rangefinder. But my Hasselblad system won't get sold

as long as rollfilm is available. The difference between Nikon and

Leica is like the distance from New York to Philadelphia...medium-

format is NYC to Chicago, and 4x5 is NYC to LA.

If you go with Leica R, the choice of body or lens types is a

personal question. The 28-70 is a remounted Sigma lens, fine if

you're into R primes and want a backup, but not worth the price of

admission as your only lens in that range. The 35-70/4 is a

wonderful lens, as is the 80-200/4. Those two lenses can not be used

on the SL/SL2 nor can they be modified. The cost of those lenses is

peanuts compared to a set of equivalent R primes, and you suffer

nothing in performance; unlike most slower Nikon zooms you can shoot

these wide open with confidence. Add a 21/4 or 28/2.8 and either a

50/2 or 90/2 and you've got it pretty well covered. Only if you're

really into low-light photography then consider the primes. As to

bodies, you really need to handle them. There's a huge difference in

features and handling between the R8 and R7 and R6/6.2. You need to

consider them carefully and hold them and work them. And in any

case, I strongly suggest at least 2 bodies. Leica R's don't have the

cleanest reliability record and service is good but slow. With all

due respects to Doug (and I own and love my SL)I wouldn't recommend

it as a general-purpose body. The low-light sensitivity of the meter

is not up to today's standards, there's no TTL flash, no reasonable

way to motorize it and many very good lenses that can't be mounted on

it, inlcuding the 24mm and any lens with the 3rd-cam-only or ROM.

John

<p>

Why either/or? My suggestion would be to get the R8 and primes and

forget the zooms. I am not a fan of zooms as they are so slow. I

always think that speed is very important, unless you are planning on

tripod only. I am 75% a slide shooter of 100ISO films or less, so this

might explain my thinking. The 35-70 and 80-200 are indeed reputed to

be good zooms, the 28-70, less so, but f4 is too slow for me. I

suggest an R8 with 21/4, 35/2, 60/2.8, 90/2 or 2.8 would be a good

combination. A s/h R8 is "only" about $700 more than an SL. I guess I

don't quite understand why you do not want to use fixed primes on the

R8?

Thanks for your many fine answers. Let me clear something up, if I need

primes for speed I'll get Nikon because it will work for work where

sometimes, I need the speed. If I buy a SL Mot or SL2 Mot, it's because

I want the motor, I like motors on cameras and I use my left eye to

focus, compose and using the film wind lever gets in my eye and I have

to drop the camera to do it. I want zooms for the R8 becuase it will

allow me to do the portraits without changing lenses and shooting with

strobes the speed's not important. Plus for personal stuff using the

Leica will be fun and it bring me back to why I got into photography.

Plus I'll have the Leica look on the film. Again thanks for the input.

Hi John, I like zooms as well though I haven't used one since I sold

my Nikon equipment 3 years ago. However, <a

href="http://www.imx.nl/photosite/leica/rseries/testr/r70-

180.html">this 70-180/2.8</a> seems to be the jewel of zoom lenses

for anyone who can afford it. I've never seen one, only read about

them.

John

<p>

So your point is that the 35-70 and the 80-200 do not fit the SL,

needing the R8? Whereas if you want slow primes you would rather put

them on an SL rather than an R8? Why? I still don't really understand.

The R8 has a very fine winder and motor - much superior to an SLMOT.

Why make a distinction between bodies -- unless you really much

prefer the SL over the R8? Is that it?

You asked for our opinions, so here are mine. In my experience,

buying new equipment in order to renew photographic passion is often

only a short term boost. Don't want to get too philosphical here,

but I have done this and after a short while you get over the

honeymoon of new camera/lens ownership, and then you just have

another bag of expensive hardware to deal with in your house. I am

certainly guilty of this myself. Anybody else notice this?

andrew: I too have done the same thing I have bought new equipment,

used it and felt renewed, and then when the feeling went away, I felt

guilty for spending so much money. I now get much more pleasure and

save money, by picking up a well used older camera and giving it a

second life. I believe that cameras are tools and great tools are

meant to be used not stored on a shelf. not only does this provide a

nice contrast to my more modern equipment, but it provides a nice

check of my basic skills. recent cameras that i have put to use again

include a contax IIIa, a black chrome SL and an olympus OM 2n. To me

using an old camera pays homage to the early designers.

I'll back up Andrew's opinion here. You are of course free to buy

and use anything you want, but think about your motivation. I have

over 30 cameras and over 75 lenses... all "the last one I would ever

need", or "the one that will allow me to capture my true vision."

<p>

So 30 plus years from my first frame of film exposed, I have 5 frame

per second motor driven cameras, lenses from 20mm to 500mm, medium

format cameras and 5 Leica M's. For the last three years, 90% of my

photography has been accomplished with a Leica M and a 35mm and / or

50mm lens, or a Nikon F-something (1,2 or 3) with a 35mm or 105mm

lens.

<p>

With all of the promise of results based on "potential", it always

(for me) comes back to simplicity and familiarity. I weaned myself

off of the new (or additional used) gear bandwagon, and spend all of

my money on film, travel and processing...life is good. I'm actually

doing photography rather than camera collecting, which is why I

picked up my first camera in the first place.

Why not get a smaller Nikon body such as an FM3A or an N80 with a

couple of smallish Nikon primes? A 24/2.8, a 50/1.8 or 1.4 and a

85/1.8? You likely have these already...