Some Leica SL questions

[terry_rory]

I have noticed that my favourite dealer has a mint- Leica SL for 250

UK pounds and a couple of mint Leica SL2's for 750 UK pounds each.

(All of them boxed)

 

Assuming there is little difference in condition between mint- and

mint (this dealer is very accurate) then why the 500 pound difference

between SL and SL2 ? Is the SL a dog? The pricing suggests so.

 

I understand there are different generations of Leica R lenses with

different numbers of cams and ROM and non ROM. Basically, is any

generation of R lens compatible? (I would only be thinking of lenses

in the the 35mm - 85mm range.)

 

Are older R lenses (nice clean ones) as good, optically, as Leica M

versions?

 

Thanks

[bob_peters]

Trevor

 

I haven't used M lenses but I have seen and heard a lot of people saying that they find the R and M lenses are indistinguishable from each other. The only difference I would imagine is the ease of handholding a rangefinder compared to an SLR, which of course will effect sharpness at slower speeds.

 

Hope this helps.

[michael s.]

Trevor - I believe Douglas Herr is quite familiar with both cameras. I am not personally familiar with either (other than having seen them) but as memory serves, he speaks highly of both Leicaflex SL and SL2. He's also a helpful guy and an excellent wildlife/nature photographer. You should drop him a note.<p><p>

 

His website is <a href=http://www.wildlightphoto.com/>here</a>.

[brunom]

Trevor Hi

 

I do have both systems and can assure you there is no difference in the quality of the lenses.The only prime R lens I own is the 80mm Summilux which is a fantastic lens, more or less identical to the 75mm M lens. You should have no reservations about the lenses. Doug is the one to ask about the SL/SL2. I have an R8.

 

Regards

 

Bruno

[ishik_tuna]

i certainly do not think the SL is a "dog"..i've used one continously for over 3o years with great pleasure.

 

as for the condition of the camera..check the viewfinder by looking at it from an inch away, and see if you spot any brownish spots in the viewfinder, or remove the lens and look through it. if you see the spots..your looking at fungus in the prism which may set you back about $100 U.S. to replace/fix.

 

also, you will need a 1.5v adjustment made to the battery system to accomodate current generation batteries, as the original batteries were a mercury based product rated at 1.3V (or something like that). the adjustment for using a standard 1.5v battery should be relatively cheap.

 

the camera should have a few upgrades from the original version to be worry free...the film takeup spool (black plastic) typically cracked and had to be replaced (grey plastic)...and the red squared off tab you depress to get the lens off also was prone to breaking..it should now be replaced by a metal tab.

 

SL2...don't know why they are more expensive...but this seems in general.

 

250 pounds for a "mint" Leica SL (assuming no CLA is needed) is a reasonable price in my opinion.

[david11]

Trevor, I can assure you that the Leitz SL is no dog! I owned one years ago and regret selling off my R system - I especially liked the 60 Macro Elmarit and the 90 Summicron. The SL2 was considered the top Leitz slr, having "improved" specs - I think a hot shoe and maybe increased shutter speed and flash sync; all so many years ago that I cannot expound with authority. The SL2 was much more expensive then as now. Save a bundle and buy a very fine slr in the SL. I had 3 cam lenses, but I also used an R4 along with the SL and believe that the 3rd cam was necessary for the R4; perhaps with the SL a two cam was all that was necessary. Anyway, it was not a problem to add cams, but I understand there is difficulty going to and from the ROM contacts. I believe that ROM is not needed unless one is using the newer cameras: R8 and R9 (unsure about R6 and R6.2). Perhaps some other R expert with a better memory and/or more recent experience can expound further. I doubt that you would see much difference in R vs M lenses, although I can say that my M photography is "better" overall than my R photography: I prefer the rangefinder, although I really miss that 60 Macro Elmarit. FWIW, I used the 21 Super Angulon, 35 Summicron, 50 Summicron, 60 Macro Elmarit, 90 Summicron, 90 Elmarit, and 180 Elmarit. All were great lenses; I find that the M system fits my needs better.

[terry_rory]

Thanks for the link.

 

Excellent site and answers many of my questions. (All of them actually.)

 

I now find the two mint boxed SL2's are 750 pounds each cos they are chrome. (which is rarer)

 

It makes me happier about the mint- (boxed) SL for 250 pounds. And Douglas Herr's site is great for all the pro's and cons (not many cons) and details.

 

I have found out from him that the ROM lenses are a no-no for SL cameras and that 1, 2 and 3 cam versions will all be OK.

 

I may well order this when the dealer re-opens in the new year.

[terry_rory]

Oh rats. I was sooo long writing that last bit (got distracted) that I missed yards of really good input from some more folk.

 

Sorry.

 

Gonna read it all now.

[ben z]

I spoke with DAG at some length about the SL2 (which has a meter 3 stops more sensitive in low light than the SL, an illuminated finder display, and a mirror path that permits using some lenses that the SL mirror would smack). He told me that if you leave the shutter wound for an hour or so, on many of them from 1/250-1/2000 both curtains will travel across at the same time resulting in no exposure. A typical CLA ($185 at that time) can rectify this temporarily but the problem will come back. He told me that to permanently cure the problem required a complete teardown of the camera--he described an entire benchtop covered with parts--and would cost $350 (at that time). I would've gone for the complete overhaul because I had dibs on a chrome SL2 for $700 US (this was a couple years ago when a chrome one was usually $1300 or more), but my problem is I need a correction diopter plus my glasses and the way they fit over the eyepiece on the SL2 I wouldn't have enough eye relief to see the whole finder. Pity, I always wanted an SL2.

[kens]

About cams - for either the SL or SL2 you'll be good with 2-cam or 3-cam lenses. Avoid ROM or R-cam lenses - most can be converted but no need to incur the cost of conversion.

 

About 1-cam lenses - you know, I've never actually seen one, but they exist for the original Leicaflex. It would probably work on the SL/SL2 but you might have to stop down the aperture to get a reading.

 

2-cam and 3-cam lenses are plentiful. Stick with those.

 

Also, as I'm sure Doug already pointed out, there are a few lenses that won't mount on the SL - the 24mm for example. They changed the mirror movement in the SL2 to accomodate lenses with more rear-protruding backs. The SL2 also displays both shutter and aperture in the viewfinder, while the SL displays only the shutter speed.

 

If these differences are all acceptable I would probably choose the SL over the SL2 if only because it's less "fussy" - simple basic camera with super build quality.

 

Good luck, Merry Christmas, and Happy New Year.

[terry_rory]

Thankyou all for the information. Especially as it Christmas day here (UK) and almost Christmas day where you all are.

 

I am convinced now that the SL is by far the better bargain of the 2 machines (for what I would need) I will leave the (rarer and more expensive) mint boxed chrome SL2's for the collectors.

[doug herr]

Lots of excellent advice here - for what I do the additional

features of the SL2 aren't worth the price premium so the SL is a

better deal - for ME. If I wanted to use one of the lenses that

require more mirror clearance the SL2 would obviously be a

better choice. Aside from the additional features the SL2's

pricing is driven more by collectors than by users, particularly for

a mint chrome sample.

[al_kaplan1]

Single cam lenses can be very inexpensive. With a bit of practice you can learn to manually stop them down with the depth of field preview on the camera without even thinking about it. The more recent lenses may have improved coatings.

[mike_elek]

Trevor, if you can find it, Ivor Mantanle did a really nice write-up on the Leica SL models a few weeks back for Amateur Photographer.

[terry_rory]

Ah the man himself. Hi Doug. Thanks for all the good stuff on your website. I had a good read earlier.

 

Hi Al

[terry_rory]

Mike I will look at AP, if I have it at home, in the morning.

 

I have been collecting the last few issues for the AP Leica MP competition tokens :)

[olivier_reichenbach]

One thing, Trevor: good as the SL and SL2 are, you have weighed them, right? I had an SL2

a few years back. It was so heavy I gave it up. Fantastic body and lenses nevertheless.

[neil_gowlland]

Trevor, Olivier is right. They are very heavy cameras. I bought an e++ SL2 with 50 and 90 Summicrons early this year from your favourite dealer. Wonderful camera but I decided it was best used on a tripod, especially with the 90. The M5 I also bought from Steve is much more practical and versatile. A mint- SL for ?250 is very reasonable but it depends what you would use it for. For example, the exposure meter of the SL2 would be better suited to your interiors of churches.

 

My black SL2 and the lenses are now on sale at Westcliff and I bought a Rolleiflex 3.5E3 for B&W.

[johnny massey]

Trevor, what will you do if you win that one-off '120 years of Amateur Photography' MP? I'd take evens on 'sell-it and buy many more cameras I can actually use' - maybe even chrome SL2's! Good luck with the draw - Johnny.

[terry_rory]

John, the Amateur Photographer commemorative engraved Leica MP is not going to be worth any more than any other MP (possibly less because of the AP engraving) so I would use it rather than sell.

 

That may dismay a few collectors but that would be half the fun!

[paul_neuthaler]

A couple of months ago, I was able to get a truly mint SL2 for $500 on Ebay. I put it together with a 28 Elmarit ($260), 135 Elmarit($135), 50 Summicron[$175] (which I use for macro with Elpros & extension rings), and just recently a gorgeous 180 Elmar that I picked up for $290. It's a great kit. For "hit & run," I use a 1957 M3 with a 1954 50mm collapsible Summicron. DAG did a CLA on the SL2 for $180. Even the 1/2000 works great!

[johnny massey]

Trevor, I think you are right and it probably belongs with the publishers.