Leica R System to complement M...(digital future!)

I use Leica M system (not realy system because i use MP with only one lens to be with me all

the time) and I want to be able to expand my material so i'm able to pay the rent with

photography... That's where Leica R comes in to play... i still shot slide and i think i will for

some time but when time comes i want to be able to shot both...again R system! what i'm

looking for is a CHEAP R BODY to start with 35-70 f:4 zoom, so i can later add an R9 other

zooms and a digital back... ; )

So to resume what the best low buget R body to start an R system with the 35-70 f:4...?

thank you.

That's simple -- the R3. It has spot and average metering, auto and manual exposure, and is soldily built with a history of reliablility. And it is cheap.

Can you still send them for repair at Leica?

the most uselful bit of info has been omitted. what kind of photography do you intend to do to pay the rent? i'm just wondering why you want to invest into a hugely expensive hybrid system that supported on an unrelaible and obsolete slr?

Eric, we'd be happy to hear about your own experience with the R9 and why you think it is unreliable.

"Francisco Nascimento , nov 16, 2005; 03:33 p.m.

Can you still send them for repair at Leica?"

 

Consider what Robert wrote in his reply. It is CHEAP and RELIABLE. You should be able to afford a second body as well, as a back up. R3 cameras can be had at lower prices than the Nikon FM2s.

 

The spot metering is really handy.

 

However, what Eric said about the R9 and the digital back is a reality.

 

If you are considering a digital system, you may want to look elsewhere. This is considering the cost factor alone.

 

If I were you, I would keep the M 'system' and look for a digital system in Canon or Nikon in smaller formats. For larger formats, you have more options and the cost factor is enormous.

 

Depends on your needs and economics.

Elliot man, sorry, it'll have to wait. I'm not interested in hijacking Francisco's thread.

I have a number of Leica-R reviews on my website. They're password-protected so if you're interested in reading them please send a private e-mail to me at doug at wildlightphoto dot com with a preferred user name and password (or, I'll assign a user name and password to you). It's free.

Eric, Francisco obviously likes the Leica lenses and has already expressed his desire for a future R9. Why redirect him toward confusion for the sake of cash? He'll work that out, get what his heart desires and for whatever reason he'll probably be happy.

 

In the mean time I agree; The R3 or a well preserved SL. Both are cheap, excellent, & can be serviced by DAG (R3 & SL) or Sherry (SL) for very reasonable.

I would go for the SL in your case. Very well built, cheap, simple and with a superb viewfinder.

I agree about the SL, but I don't think you can mount the 35-70 4.0 on the SL series. Doug will know for sure.

Gary is correct about the SL and the 35-70 f/4. Without modifications (bye-bye cheap) it's a no-go combination. Don Goldberg may have retrofitted the lens to 3-cam configuration; check with him to be sure. This modified lens would fit the SL2 (and any R body) with no problems. The SL's mirror can be shortened to accommodate the 3-cam modified 35-70 f/4, but then this is more $$$. The SL is my personal favorite but to use the 35-70 f/4 the R3 seems like a good inexpensive choice.

Obviously the problem with Leica SLRs is that they just don't have nearly enough buttons. This makes them archaic and obsolete.

What self respecting SLR does not come with gazillions of menu options.

 

In order to successfully execute E=IxT one simply needs as many buttons as possible. Not that I?ve ever used it but Leicas single dial Progamme mode dial selector is just too simple for words. Totally ridiculous.

 

When I pay up big for a camera I damn well expect a user manual the size of NYCs telephone book for chise-sake.

 

BTW I got accused of toting a professional camera today and as such was threatened with ?I?ll have to get security?. Apparently an R9 with medium range vario counts as a serious work tool for test cricket coverage.

Dear Francisco,

Sorry to tell you that getting a R to complement your MP will be a wrong, and costly experience. all R cameras are unreliable. I've had ALL models from R3 to R8, with the exception of the R4s and RE. and ALL had problems: crazy metering on the R8, battery tester unreliable, mirror misalignment on R5, twice broken diaphragm spring on R6 after two dozen films! Only R6 and R8 were properly repaired and still in use. I own a SL and a SL2, but meters are old and not really reliable (from time to time I have to recalibrate them using a Pentax digital spotmeter, Sekonic AND Gossen meters and sometimes the error in highlights or shadows is a whole stop). They're great for negative film though, and the optics I own are excellent. BUT new optics are not compatible with the SLs unless adapted, and the price of optics are simply prohibitive. The raison d'être of a SLR is going beyond 90 and 28... A Leica M cannot be replaced by anything else. Keep it! Buy a 50, a 35 and pehaps a 28. And get a second-hand Canon or Nikon for super-wides, zooms and teles!

Why shoot a 35mm SLR if you hope to pay the rent with your photos? Why not medium format? The larger negative, coupled with a very good lens, will blow any Leica SLR out of the water. Besides, a MF digital back will probably be cheaper than a Leica digital back.

 

Robert

I'm not convinced that Leica R is inherently unreliable as compared against other systems. A lot has been said about the R series problems over the years and some horror stories have been recalled. However, Nikon, Canon and Hasselblad-Imacon arent exactly immune from QC issues either. So the jury is still out for me on the reputed unreliability of Leica SLRs.

"MF digital back will probably be cheaper than a Leica digital back."

 

who's price list are you looking at?

"One gets what one pays for - simple. Your personal mesures of marginal utility are going to be your personal measure - but the absolute benchmark - is Leica."

 

Pete ole friend, what's next? You're one step from saying that it also has the Leica Style.

 

 

You've said a few times that these opinions come from people that don't own them.

 

Do you need to own a Norton Commando to know that they leak oil and that they are unreliable against, oh should I say it, it's Japanese competition, a CB 750?

 

But heck, for validity reasons, I've used two R bodies and a Contax that were owned by three photographers that I assisted for when starting out years back in the mid 90's. Two of these three became good friends and have shared all their pain and pleasure from ownership of these bodies and lenses and was trusted to use them on my own, both shooting along side them and on indefinite loans for personal use.

 

Leica has always been about the glass, not the bodies.

 

Getting back to Francisco's quest, I'm wondering what genre of shooting he intends to do to pay the rent? Or if he's simply another romantic wealthy middle aged hobbyist that can afford to make purchases from the heart that is circumventing common sense?

 

I try not to cloud my judgment and choices with camera gear. There are two kinds for me, gear that pays the bills and gear that I have fun with. If Francisco stated he wanted to have fun, great, I wouldn't have said anything as I've never cared what floats another's boat. But paying the bills and making an income? Again, I'm simply curious why the choice of using a system that wont provide the most benefits and creative control over a current and advanced system at half the cost when money, I infer, is tight? Heck, I probably know at least 150 working photographers here in my city and if this slr system is so great, I wonder why none of us it anymore?

 

It's a simple question, yes? Reactions from others are becoming humorous and even a surprise from some.

<I>creative control</I>

<P>

A sidebar comment on popular terminology - creativity involves doing something that hasn't been done before. If a camera has a fucntion that provides this control it's probably been done before and is more of a 'cookbook control' than a 'creative control'.

call it whatever you wish Doug. Modern slr's can do everything, and then some, that an old R body can, but not the other way around, right?

I have 3 Leica 6.2's that I've used since 91-when I got them I had them checked over-1 needed the shutter adjusted,another the meter,the 3rd was fine. I've used them since then,sending them in every couple of years for a checkup,they work flawlessly. I haven't used any other Leica slr's,so I can't comment on them. As for a camera to pay the rent with,I know it's going to sound like heresy,but if your serious,get a Hasselblad H2,some film backs,lenses depending on what you take pictures of,and a digital back. This will not be cheap,but it looks like the Hassy h2 is the pro's best choice for the future. Expensive,Yes,But-you can deduct the cost of everything used in a business to make money with. And I have friends who have the H1 and H2,and use it. It feels right in your hands,and does the job well.

<I>"Modern slr's can do everything, and then some, that an old R body can, but not the other way around, right?" </I>

<P>

Wrong. Look through the viewfinder and tell me which is easier to focus off-center (away from the focussing aids or AF sensors). Makes composition much easier than the focus-lock-recompose work-around when you have a shallow DOF and a fidgetty subject:

<CENTER>

<P>

<IMG SRC="http://www.wildlightphoto.com/birds/tetraonidae/blgr02.jpg">

<BR><B>Blue Grouse</B> Yosemite California<BR>

<I>Leicaflex SL, 280mm f/4 APO-Telyt-R, Provia 400F</I>

</CENTER>

Wrong? Come on man. I've only been trying this auto focus thing out since using the D2x. And it's weird to get used to, like going from a stick to an auto trans. But previously though, those handy AF sensors (that give you an option by the way) are only like windshield wipers and rain drops on the windshield, you look through them, not at them. Besides, with auto focus and a VR lens, you would have nailed more shots quicker, and sharper? Why are you using 400F and not 100? Have you tried a VR lens and gained a couple stops?

 

Glass, it's all about the glass. That's the only reason I still crave an R body. And mostly for studio shooting of course.

 

Nice shot, as usual Doug.

Eric, VR isn't worth squat if the subject is moving. I used 400F because I knew that at 1/15 sec (@ f/4) I'd be tossing virtually all of my slides. The bird stops fidgeting for 1/60 sec much more often than for 1/15 sec. My objection to the AF sensors isn't that they obstruct my view, it's their placement. They don't cover 100% of the viewscreen. Try looking through the viewfinder of an SL or SL2 and then try telling me that the D2x is as easy to focus away from the AF sensors as the SL is anywhere on the screen. I'm not knocking the D2x, it's great for quickly producing lots of technically excellent photos. The Leica reflex viewfinders are better for composing photographs, particularly when the composition you want doesn't fit the standard patterns assumed by Nikon's (or Canon's) engineers.

"Leica is the benchmark"

 

Where did I say it wasn't, Pete? And it's their lenses, not their bodies, that are the benchmark. If their bodies were up to snuff and gave N and C a run for their money, we'd see more out there wouldn't we?

 

My first post here was inquiring about which genre of photography Francisco was intending to do to pay the rent. If he's simply into owning and loving Leica gear like the rest of us, then that's a different matter than the thread presents. Read his post, I infer the fellow is on a tight budget and is looking to expand his kit from RF's and into slr's. Does it sound like he has a farm and stable of Italian motorbikes and the ability to own anything photographic he desires to have fun as a hobbyist? No, he is starting from zero and wants to purchase gear and make money with it. His choices presented here made me wonder why he wants to spend so much on a dmr that it hence limits him to a single old body and a single lens? That?s all I asked and never intended to hijack his thread about how ridiculous I think this dmr really is for anyone other than current R owners with a bag of glass.

 

If the neighbour kid that pumps your gas asked for your advice on what system to start out with in order to make a bit of pocket money on the weekends, what objective answer would you give? I'd like to know.