"Leica M or R" to live with ???

Hi friends

 

As have been doing much research about leica M6 which I plan to

 

buy. I found many pros and cons about it. Some led me glancing

 

back to R8 which I had considered previously.

 

 

Has anyone tried to compare M and R, I mean in the sense of

 

lens quality.

 

 

Do they have differences in the quality of the lens comparing

 

between M and R.

 

 

Photography yours !

I mean, the M & R series are alike only in that they expose film to light and have a red dot on the front.

The M lens lineup contains more newer designs than the R line...whether you consider that important or not would place you in one of the three main Leica-user camps: the Newer-Is-Always-Better camp (otherwise known as the Erwin camp); Older-Has-More-Of-The-Leica-Glow camp (sometimes known as the LHSA camp); and the I-Shoot-Pictures-Not-Resolution-Charts camp (otherwise known as most of us).

 

If you're in the latter camp, then other issues will be of more interest, such as the rangefinder/SLR paradigm, and if the latter appeals more to you, then the next issue is whether you're likely to see (or be able to wring out)enough better from Leica R lenses to outweigh the many downsides of the R bodies.

 

The M line also has (up until now at least) enjoyed higher resale values and a strong collector market, so as the market for film cameras swirls the drain the M may be one of the last to go down and IMO the R may be one of the first, especially since Leica has a history of shunning or staying a decade behind current technology with the R bodies and has not announced plans for a digital R body to guarantee the value of R lenses into the future.

If you are a collector the point of resale is very big. Look at the big auction site. M7's used are running 1600+ (list 2500) (with the few we've seen) and M6 TTL's (list 2000) running 1200 while there is at least one R8 (list 2500) that you could buy for 980.00. This is partially because the R9 has comeout at the same list (about) as the R8. Maybe the M6 owners should be very happy the M7 came out $500.00 more. Just a thought if you are likely to be reselling soon. If you are gonna keep it and use it too take picture none of what I said should really matter.

If you need a reflex--as for long telephoto shots, or extreme close-ups, or for a shift lens--then you need an R (or an SL).

 

If you prefer a rangefinder for the shots you are making, you'll chose an M (or, if you are a retro type, a screw mount). Great for everything in the ultra-short to 90mm range, except macro.

 

Fine lenses are available for all. As for me, I use both M and R depending on what I am photographing.

If you are patient, Leicaflex SL's with 50mm Summicrons in perfect working condition can be had for $400. This is about equal or less than the going price of a second hand 50mm lens for a Leica M.

 

If you seek to buy a camera with Leitz optics for shooting pictures rather than some other purpose (desirability in a collection, cachet, need for a RF) the SL is the bargain currently. The same repair technicians who support M-Leicas apparently also support the SL and SL2 but may not be interested in working on one of the electronic marvels.

I have both the M7 and R8. They are two totally different tools for

different purposes as alluded to above. Think of what your needs

and goals afed and that will dictate your choice or choices.

I agree with most of the above. I own both R and M (actually a IIIg with current glass) and use them for different shooting scenarios. The whole concept of rangefinder shooting, simplicity, direct viewing, etc appeals to me greatly and I really like the sense of being at one with the camera, so to speak that the rangefinder gives me. But....if I could only have one system it would definitly be the R. The rangefinder does a couple of things better than any camera system in the world, but for all out versatility a 35mm SLR system wins hands down.

Just to get back to your question: in the sense of lens quality, M and R are basically identical. It's the whole idea of M and R body building which make M and R (bodies and lenses) basically different.

 

If you don't know what to buy, forget about the lenses. Think about the concepts.

Totally dependent on the functionality of each respective camera for your needs - try them out. Debating the merits of the optics line considering its only 35mm is pointless - each are outstanding.

Alez, if you prefer wide angle -lenses take M, otherwise R. Peter

Yup... there's a good ol' saying: "A Leica M is a wide-angle camera anyhow".

i own 2 R's and three M's. in my opinion when combining lens quality with ease of usage, the M's have a decided advantage at 35mm and wider, and the R's have a decided advantage at 90mm and longer. at 50mm it is a tossup. among the things to consider are:

 

1. rangefinders are not for every one.

 

2. M's are more expensive and hold there value better. used glass is more expensive.

 

3. the best value (all leicas): a leicaflex SL

 

4. best value M's: a well used M3 with a 50mm lens.

 

5. one camera, one lens: my M6ttl with the 35mm f1.4 asph

 

6. last camerra i would part with: R6.2

 

7. my favorite sleeper lens: R180 f4 i use this as a portrait lens.

 

good luck on your choice. a lot comes down to your style of shooting a choice of subjects. i put both slr's and rangefinders to good use.

Comments on Greg Mason's interesting points: <br><br>

 

"1. Rangefinders are not for every one." Very true. Some people, who are used to the precise, WYSISWYG framing of an SLR viewfinder, hate the imprecision of RF framing. <br><br>

 

"2. M's are more expensive and hold their value better. Used glass is more expensive." True, and that has both benefits and disadvantages. If you buy new R cameras and lenses, they will lose a great deal of their value if you try to sell/trade them in the future, whereas M will still command a respectable price. However, it's relatively inexpensive to build up a good R system by buying used gear and the price you pay will not fall much if you sell it.<br><br>

 

"3. The best value (all leicas): a leicaflex SL." Can't argue with that. <br><br>

 

 

"4. Best value M's: a well-used M3 with a 50mm lens." A well-used M2 with 35mm or 50mm lens can be good value too. <br><br>

 

 

"5. One camera, one lens: my M6ttl with the 35mm f1.4 asph." For me, it would be the same camera with either that lens (which I con't have) or a 50 'lux (which I do). At one time I would have said a Tri-Elmar but I find myself using the 50 'lux more than any other lens these days. <br><br>

 

"6. Last camera I would part with: R6.2." For me, M6TTL .72<br><br>

 

 

"7. My favorite sleeper lens: R180 f/4. I use this as a portrait lens." Absolutely true. When I had Leica R cameras, I got some marvelous portraits with this little lens - best ones I ever got, in fact!