Leica R system

[jon_martin2]

Hi guys,

 

I like using the 35mm SLR. I have had run-ins with Leica lenses and

build quality before and have been impressed. I currently shoot a

Nikon FM. I'm curious about Leica's R system. May I have a URL to a

webpage that compares R bodies/lenses? Advantages/disadvantages of

the various R bodies? I would also appreciate opinions/knowledge from

the group on some of the middle R bodies: R3-R7 (?).

 

Thanks much,

 

 

 

Jon

[robert_davis5]

Try nemeng.com. Doug Herr used to have an informative site but it may still be shut down. He was invaded by folks that were hijacking his photos to scam on the net.

[james_.1]

http://www.wildlightphoto.com/leica/, www.imx.nl, www.leica-camera.com, photo.net

[doug herr]

My R-reviews aren't gone. They're password-protected. e-mail me privately requesting a user name and password. The user name and password may be ones you choose, or I will assign them to you. doug at wildlightphoto dot com

[derek_stanton2]

<a href="http://www.ozdoba.net/leica/leica_reflex_home_e.html">Ozdoba</a>

<p>

<a href="http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/index-frameset.html?Lens-

R.html~mainFrame">Photoethnography/Lenses</a>

<p>

<a href="http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/index-frameset.html?Lens-

R.html~mainFrame">Photoethnography/Bodies</a>

<p>

<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leica">Wikipedia</a>

<p>

<a href="http://homepage1.nifty.com/RLFC/">RLeicaFanClub</a>

<p>

<a href="http://www.itntokyo.com/users/nomoto/Galleryfiles/R_Sample/

rlensgallerymenu.html">RLensGallery</a>

[g_pena]

www.summilux.net/r_system/rsys_f.htm

[john_boyle3]

Don't rule out the Leicaflex SL. The build quality is superior ro the R3 to R7 and 3-cam lenses are readily available. Doug Herr has some comments about the SL that are worth noting.

[xavier_dalfort]

Hello Jon

 

Addig to Douglas Herr site, please feel free to look at the site of David Young,

http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm

 

This gentleman, I know personnally, is providing the manuals for many R cameras.

 

A good thing to discover the capabilities of each model.

 

Enjoy.

Xavier

[mark cortella]

And when you go to Doug Herr's website,don't forget to check out the rest of it to see what Leica R cameras and lenses can do. Excellent pictures!

[donald_brewster]

As I've said before, a used R7 is about the same price as a used R8 -- I think the market is telling us something. I think the R7 is a fabulous camera -- a basic and well functioning camera -- and it will feel somewhat similar to your FM. I've put the R7 through its paces over the years and has always done well for me. The R lenses are indeed great (I presently use a 35 sumicron, an 80 Sumilux, and a 180 Elmarit).

[john_jovic]

There's a lot to be said for picking up a cheap R4 with one or 2 simple lenses (50/2, 90/2.8 or 135/2.8, 35/2.8) as a starting point and seeing if the system does what you want. The R4 has it's problems but if you get a good one, replace the original focusing screen with a modern one (designed for the R6-7) then you'll have a great camera. The original focusing screen in the R4 is very dark, the modern screen is much brighter and easily obtained as a leica standard focusing screen for R6-7. I use an R8 but find that the slightly larger viewfinder magnification of the R4 makes for slightly easier focusing with wide angle lenses. The viewfinder magnification of the R4 is slightly larger than the RE-R7 and R8-9 bodies.

 

JJ

[jason]

IMHO i think either ADD a M-system or stay with your Nikon-FM. The price and size, plus the weight of R-lenses is really impressive.

Nikon lenses in MF are real cheap and very good. Leica lenses "are or might" be a shade better. I find the Nikkors have stronger contrast and better colour. Others will disagree. I would consider the M system and digital in a simple P+S..

Read also Ervin Puts. Here on the Leica forum he is most disliked. I like his writing and value his opinions.

[stuart_richardson]

I think the R system's advantage is more in the lenses than in the bodies, though the R9

that I use is a very good body. I have almost never had the matrix metering fail me

(though I take over when I know I am in a situation that will trick the meter), and the

camera has pretty much all I want in a camera body -- shutter speeds on the dial from 16s

to 1/8000th, AE (and T and P, though I don't use them really), mirror lock up, second

curtain flash and a very well damped shutter. The ergonomics are good, though the

camera balances the heavy lenses better with the motor drive or the dmr. The 50mm and

19mm are great on the body alone. <P>As for the lenses, the 100mm apo macro is

unbelievably good at all distances and in almost any situation. I could not ask for a better

lens. If anything, the 180mm elmarit is even better. The 50mm summilux r (E60) and the

19mm elmarit are also excellent, though I don't think they quite reach the heights of

performance of the 100mm and the 180mm. Those are the only lenses I have used, so I

will not comment on more. I would respectfully disagree with the people who say the R

system is dying and so forth. I think the DMR has been received very well by those who

have gotten their hands on it.

[john_jovic]

Yes, the R system is definitely dying. Lets do all we can to encourage this line of thinking. Dump all yor R lenses, and when you do can you please drop me an email as I would be very eager to buy your obsolete and useless lenses, especially if it's a current 28/2.8 or 50 lux (E60). Yes, dump all you leica gear now before it's too late...

 

JJ

[feli]

I have an R6.2 and a Leicaflex SL. Both cameras are a joy to shoot. Personally I am a big

fan of the Nikon FM, but prefer the Leica glass...

 

The SL feels like it was carved from a solid block of metal and is by many considered to be

close to indestructible. There are a handful of lenses that can't be mounted on the SL, due

to mirror clearance issues. See http://www.nemeng.com/leica/index.shtml for more info.

 

The R6.2 is more compact, about the size of an M, with an exceptionally bright viewfinder.

It can use all R lenses and is fully mechanical (except the meter). Leica also made a R6,

which is very similar, except it tops out at 1/1000th (R6.2 1/2000th).

 

My picks for the R system would be:

 

Leicaflex SL

R5/R6/R6.2/R7/R8/R9

[ben z]

"I have had run-ins with Leica lenses and build quality before and have been impressed. I currently shoot a Nikon FM. I'm curious about Leica's R system. May I have a URL to a webpage that compares R bodies/lenses? Advantages/disadvantages of the various R bodies? I would also appreciate opinions/knowledge from the group on some of the middle R bodies: R3-R7 (?)."

 

Until recently I owned a fairly complete R outfit: R8, 15/3.5, 21/4, 35/2, 50/2, 90/2, 28-70, 70-210. I only had it a fairly short time, some things I really liked and some things disappointed me after hearing the R lovers rave so much. What I liked was the control layout of the R8, the fact it had no built-in motor yet the film loading was semi-automatic and fast. I liked the build-quality of the lenses. Wow, they were solid as tanks and everything turned with a viscous smoothness. What disappointed me was the somewhat grainy focusing screen (like a lollipop dropped on a carpet) that masked the fine details I wanted to focus on. Someone tried to tell me I didn't know how to focus right, but 40 years of tack-sharp photos and I'm not quick to doubt myself. The 28-70 made by Sigma lens had horrible distortion (though the 70-210 made by Minolta lens was quite nice). The rest of the lenses were good optically, but did not astound me. My screwmount SMC Takumars were as sharp or sharper, and had much less tendency to flare in backlighting. I've only recently gotten some Nikkors, after I'd sold the R outfit, so I can't really compare. All in all I thought the R glass was very nice but not any better than equivalent lenses from Canon I had borrowed and happened to do some comparisons as long as the opportunity had presented itself. Now then, had I had some of the APO R lenses perhaps my experience would've been entirely different. However my whole outfit came very cheap, pretty much wholesale prices, and those APOs are way out of my reach. Once I got to see a DMR in the flesh and realized it made the R8 bigger and heavier than I would ever want to carry, as well as way more expensive than my whole R outfit itself, I sold it all. But I did so rather reluctantly. If I had the luxury of owning multiple systems just to use occasionally, I surely would've kept it. As to the R3-R7 bodies, the reason I went looking for something other than my Spotmatics was because I need a diopter but still to wear my glasses. The diopters on the Leicaflexes and R3-R4 are like the Pentax, they fit over the eyepiece and that makes the eye relief too short for me. I would only have considered an R5/R-E,R6/6.2 or R7 because they have adjustable eyepieces. Of the automatic ones, only the R7 can set the shutter manually in less than full stops, and only the R7 has a graphic display for manual metering, so that would've been my choice. However all of them have a maximum flash sync speed of 1/100, and the TTL flash is kind of klutzy. The R8 is technologically a quantum leap beyond the R7 IMO, and it's fatter but fit my small-to-average sized hands quite well. I would definitely only want an R8 (or an R9 if it was like $100 more, considering it really doesn't have many advantageous features).

[joseph_wang3]

Can I ask a question. Does any of the R-bodies have a mirror pre-release mechanism

? What I mean Is the mirror lifting up followed by a time gap and then opening of

shutter.

[claude_batmanghelidj]

I just sold my Leica SL for around $650, so they certainly hold their value. If you really want to go the Leica SLR route, then you should either get an SL, SL2 or even an old original Leicaflex with external meter, or head straight to the R8/R9. Don't waste your time or money with the Minolta designed R4-R7. In my experience they are mechanical electronic nightmares.

 

Personally, if I was starting into Leica R and I had the money, it would be a Leica R8 or R9 and then, as far as lenses any R mount lens would be ok, I would not worry about mount compatibility as I am happy to stop down to meter.

 

Some seem to be convinced that there is a universe of difference between Leica and Nikon lenses, specifically bokeh and tonal rendition and I am inclined to agree, but I still really like Nikkors, and consider them my favorite of the Japanese made lenses, and I can live with the harsh bokeh. The Nikkor on my 6x6 Bronnie is sharp as all hell, and I love the way it does colors, but true to form the bokeh stinks.

 

If you have money, and you don't need a lightweight or compact 35mm SLR, then I think the R8/9 with the lenses of your choice would be the way to go.

 

I have one lens left, a 90mm summicron that I mount on a Canon EOS 630, which has the advantage of metering in low light, something I could not do with the SL, but the camera is plasticky and the sound of the shutter is annoying. The SL is simply superbly constructed. But in my case, I needed cash, so out it went, and unlike the M6s I have sold, I have no regrets.

[doug herr]

Joseph Wang wrote: "<I> Does any of the R-bodies have a mirror

pre-release mechanism ? What I mean Is the mirror lifting up

followed by a time gap and then opening of shutter.</I>"

<P>

The R6, R6.2, R7, R8 and R9 have a mirror pre-release. The

Leicaflex, Leicaflex SL and Leicaflex SL2 can be tricked into

pre-releasing the mirror but on the Leicaflex series it's

something of a kludge.

[colin_elliott]

The Leicaflex has a proper mirror lock-up. This was necessary to accomodate the f3.4 21mm Super Angulon. The mirror stays in the "up" position until you release it.

[claude_batmanghelidj]

Doug, that trick of flicking the shutter release always worked for me. It's one of the hidden glories of the Leicaflex. May she R.I.P. (the one I sold).

[fotografz]

Used the R system for decades prior to going digital ... first with a Nikon, then on to

Canon for full frame capture. I've recently returned to R work with the advent of the DMR

... which isn't a replacement for the EOS system, rather as a supplement providing a

different look and feel for my wedding work.

 

While I did spring for the costly ASPH lenses in some cases, I also hunted down some older

R lenses that provide certain characteristics I like. Lenses like the SL vintage 50/2 and 90/

2.8. I also recently picked up a mint 135/2.8 3 cam for a pittance even compared to Canon

glass. The lens is a sleeper in terms of performance IMO.

 

Take a look at what a couple or three hundred bucks can deliver ...<div></div>

[fotografz]

Here's an even closer view ...<div></div>

[frederick_joicey]

<p>Perusing this site for information about the Leica R8, as I am thinking about buying one. Some very good comments, and criticism also, here. Came across Marc Williams close up shots. I think he is employed by Leica to hypnotise people into buying their equipment ! The 135 lens looks to produce fantastic results. A bit more thought on the R8, and possibly the 135 lens, and might consider searching for them. Have an R5 with 35-70 lens, and had been researching the R7 model, but will now look seriously at the R8, since their used price is falling to about £450.00 here in the UK.</p>