What is a Leica RE, and why is it so expensive

Hi guys

 

I came across mention of the Leica RE SLR, and that it is rare.

What is it? Is it rare?

 

Thanks

 

Josh

The Leica RE originally was a CHEAPER alternative to the R4/R4s/R5 (it lacked the T(ime) and (P)rogram modes, I believe - just Aperture-priority and Manual). Dates from c. 1990 +/- a few years.

 

There were actually 2 versions (or was it two and a half?) with small upgrades borrowed from the R5 when it was introduced (or something to that effect). The upgraded version has Mod. 2 stamped on the accesory shoe (?).

 

Only in Leicadom could the cheaper, downrated version of a no-more-than-average SLR become a valuable collectors item, simply because it might be rarer than its more capable cousin. (and I'm not sure it IS rarer - reference book is elsewhere at the moment).

The RE is an economy version of the R5 with only manual and aperture priority modes. The RE a rare camera? I wouldn't say so but I don't know actual production figures. KBCamera rates it as "Fairly Common", the RE Olympic 1992 is rated as "Rare, available from time to time"

 

The RE is a real workhorse camera and at the time offered a cheaper way of entering the R system because both the R5 and R6 were more expensive.

Ooops! - clarification. The R4s was a de-rated R4, the RE was a similarly de-rated R5.

 

Current used prices (at KEH) have the RE's selling for about $50 less than the R5's for similar condition, which is a lot smaller difference than between the new prices 10 years ago.

I thought the RE is quite cheap compared to other Rs ???

The R-E is relatively scarce, about 6,000 made (or is it 8,000?). I

don't know what commemorative models were made, but from a

functional point of view there was only one version. The R4s

was made in 2 versions, the 2nd had mod 2 or mod P on the hot

shoe depending on where it was originally sold.

The R-E is actually a pretty nice R body as R bodies go. It was produced from 1990-92, another of Leica's desparate band-aid moves to keep the R system afloat. With Nikon's 8008, 8008s, F4 and Canon's EOS 1 and A2 offering far more features for far less money, Leica tried a price leader rather than upgrade features. Evidently they were too proud or stubborn to simply drop the price of the R5 without stripping the T and P modes and glueing on a plastic dymo-label 'R-E'. In 1992 the R7 was brought out and both R5 and R-E were given the heave-ho. Today the price of the R-E is so close to that of an R5 it makes little difference or sense to buy one. As R bodies go the R7 is really the one to have, as it has 1/2-stop shutter speeds and a graphic finder readout, plus the ability to sync TTL flash at all speeds 1/100 and below while the R5/R-E default TTL flash to 1/100 making fill-in practically impossible in TTL. They also have no manually-settable 1 sec shutter speed!

Thanks guys for the input and help. I was looking at one for $575.00, but i now think it might be a little pricey

 

Thanks again

Josh

I agree with Jay, as a user camera the R-E is good but R7 has a lot more to offer.

Interesting information. So many different variables on the R side isn't ther?

 

Out of curiosity, Can the RE use the motor drive?

Yes, the R-E can be used with the motor-winder-R and motor-drive-R. Everything that can be fitted to the R5 will also fit and function on the R-E.

The R-E is a stipped down R6.2 not a 4,5 or 6.I should know,I just sold mine.

There's nothing cheap about the re.I felt it more to be a pro slr than a low cost.

Spot meter,Aperture priority and Exposure lock.I may be old school but I feel

this is all you need to get great photo's.The R7 on are the only R's to better the R-E.

Did I say that?I ment the R-E is based on the R5.

The RE is definatley not an R6 or R6.2 downgrade, these two cameras are mechanical the RE is electronic. The RE is a lower spec version of the R5, fact.

I am one of 6000 Leica R-E owners, and have actually owned more than one at one point. In my view, it is one of Leica's finest cameras. It is simple, totally reliable and has everything one needs without the useless redundant systems. Don't get me wrong, I have other cameras with extraordinary automation and electronics, but rate the R-E as my most favorite SLR.

RE is not yet more expensive than R5<p>

 

In collector market, there are many cases where initially lower priced

products because of their scarcity have become two to three times more expensive than its better performing but more abundant brothers<p>

 

For example, Minox C was highly sucessful, it was the first automatic

exposure Minox, more than 232 thousands cameras were sold. At about

the same time, there was a not so popular and cheaper Minox BL, sold

only a mere 17,880 cameras. Yet because of this mere 17880, a BL today

is a much sought after collector item, a Minox C can be bought for about $200-$250, for a BL, one are looking at $600<p>

The same with Riga Minox, 17,000 made; Riga Minox has only a triplet lens; a Riga is priced at > $1000.<p>

At the time of introduction, people probably loved to compare features, " I have a C with this and that features etc etc", hence newer is better, more demand....<p>

Many many year passed<p>

Collectors compare different thing: "I have a Riga, a black BL, how about you ?" the one collector who owns no Riga or BL then start looking....<p>

May be some years later, Leica collector A may say to collector B:

" I have a RE, I see in your collection you miss this camera "....<p>

 

AFter all 6000 is far less than 17,000....<p>