Which Leica R to get?

[patricks]

Thinking of getting a SLR on the side, perhaps the R5 (prices on bodies and lenses are suprisingly reasonable) or a R7. Start off with a 50/1.4

 

<p>

 

What are the pros/cons of different models? Any issues/traps?

 

<p>

 

What I'm looking for is good metering, viewfinder and AE option. Will shoot mainly people and places. R8 is too bulky IMO.

 

<p>

 

cheers,

[ramy]

The R8 looks bulky. Perhaps when carrying it around it is bulky.

But when actually using the thing, it is a dream. Totally

comfortable. I use an R6.2, which is very compact and nice.

When switching to an R8 for quick use (ie. using a friends. I don't

own an R8...yet) it's just a dream. It's a sweet sweet camera,

especially with the winder and a strap. SO COMFY! think you

should rent one for a day of shooting before you decide it's too

bulk. Perhaps you've already done this, in which case, I hope

you'll forgive my presumption.

 

<p>

 

Finally you might also wait until Photokina in Sept. Rumours of

some new Leica R stuff abound.

 

<p>

 

-Ramy

[donald_brewster]

I believe the R5 is a little bigger than most of the R's. I went

through the same process -- originally got an R4 and then quickly

sold and got the R7 because of the features and other advances in the

metering and haven't looked back since. R8 too buggy and bulky to

consider IMHO. YMMV.

[doug herr]

The R7 is slightly taller than the R4-R6 bodies, has 1/2-step shutter

speeds in manual mode, more flexible fill flash, and mirror pre-

release, none of which the R5 has.

[bert_keuken2]

AFAIK the R7 is the biggest R (excluding the R8). The R7 stands 94.8mm tall whereas the R-E/R5/R6 stand 89.1mm tall.

[andy_piper2]

I use an SL, which meets requirements 1) and 2), but not 3). 8^(

 

<p>

 

The R7 has a significantly brighter, and less blue, viewfinder than its

predecessors, IMHO. And is just a touch easier to hold (with the extra

height) than the R4/5/6s, at least for my hands.

 

<p>

 

My main objection to the R8 is the high-eyepoint finder, which seems

very small and distant compared to the SL. The 'bulk' and weight are

there, but in shooting around camera stores I've noticed they do fade

into the background once I start taking pictures.

 

<p>

 

If there were no SLs and I just HAD to have Leica, I would go to the R7

next in line (actually I'd probably just get lenses for my old Nikon F!

- but that wasn't your question).

[patricks]

hey, I'm far from married to the Leica path on SLR. I use to own 2

diff EOS systems and I did like them quite a bit. Another

alternative would be a Contax Aria. Or a FM3A. Or...

[fotografz]

REGRET selling my R7. They're hard to find now. Which tells

you something about the R8 that replaced it. The R7 was a

perfect answer to all that you seek. Yet, I wouldn't trade my SLII

for one. However, the SLII is a manual camera and you want the

AE option.

[wgpinc]

I use the Leica R (R4,4S,R7) system as well as M and EOS. In JMHO

the R system is a very nice camera system with outstanding lenses,

but it is 80s technology. I probably use it a little more than the

other two systems and always get good, expected results. If I was

starting from scratch on a reflex system I would probably buy either

an EOS-3 or an F-100 and get the lenses I would use around whichever

system. Some examples, the 24mm EOS or Nikon is as good or better

than the Leica R. The 50 1.4 EOS or Nikon is at least as good as the

previous Leica R 50 1.4. The 85s (specially the 85 1.4 Nikon) for

both are as good as the 90 lux R. The high end Pro zooms are

outstanding for both EOS and Nikon and telephotos 300mm or greater

are very good and a lot cheaper than R equivalents. Both systems

offer excellent macro capability at a reasonable price. And both

systems have excellent digital SLRs if you need them. Does the R

possess some special qualities? It does so far for me which is why I

am still using it. Used R equipment is a relative bargain right now,

specially considering how durable the lenses are. My R4S is for sale

right now if anybody is interested. $375 in excellent condition.

Good luck.

[michael_kastner]

Okay, I agree, I'm getting to be the biting dog again. As to your

question "Which Leica R to get?" I'd say "None, get an M".

[doug herr]

<I>the R system is a very nice camera system with outstanding lenses,

but it is 80s technology</I><P>

Not for me. As far as I'm concerned, it's a 1960s system and that

suits me fine. The technology added since then to most camera

systems does very little to make better pictures aside from allowing

the photographer to put his brain in "neutral".

<P>

pat asked for good metering, [good] viewfinder, and AE option. He

didn't ask for the latest technology. Aside from the AE option,

1960s technology will meet these requriements, and the 1980s

technology of the R7 easily meets all requirements.

<P>

If you want to start with a 50mm f/1.4 lens, the older versions

(reasonable cost) are good but not spectacular, while OTOH the

performance of the current version ($$$) is what you'd expect for

it's price.

[sheridan]

Hello Pat. IMHO an R7 would be your best option. That said I

would be aiming for a body carrying some warranty.I will never

forget my new out of the box R4s.....locked up on it's first film and

needed factory replacement circuitry to remedy the problem.

[doug_landrum]

Hi Pat, I have a R system (R7 and R6) and a M system (M6 and M3). If

I need to produce, I pick up the Rs. The R7 is a fine camera and the

lenses are outstanding. For the R's I have the 19mm, 50mm 'cron,

100mm APO Macro, 180mm APO F/3.4 and 400mm F/6.8. I have compared

prints taken with R glass side by side against prints taken with

Nikon or Canon glass. People always pick the Leica prints over Nikon

or Canon prints. The usual comment is - Wow what film did you use to

get such good results? There is just something very special about

Leica R glass and people with untrained eyes see the difference with

4X6 prints. Nikon and Canon have a decided edge on technology and

they make fine gear, but their lenses just do not reach Leica

standards for film work. Regards, Doug

[albert knapp md]

Pat: This is a difficult question to answer as alot of it is really

subjective. Personally, I initially found the R8 a little big but as I

got used to it, I really began to love it and heartily recommend it.

the key to the Leica R system are the lenses which are amazing.

Before buying, why don't you rent one?

[kent_gastreich]

Pat, I use on a regular basis an R5, R7, and two R8's. The R5 is a

spare back up camera. The R7 is for light field work. When I doing

serious work I only turn to the R8's (one for slides and one for

prints). The controls are intuitive and easy to use. The size and

weight disappear when in use due to the excellent balance. All of

the cameras have been totally reliable. In fact, the R5 made it

through EcoChallenge 2001-New Zealand without a hitch. Try each if

you can, and get what feels best to you.

[jay_.]

I used to have 2 R7's. I sold them because they were without any

warranty and after shelling out $525 to Leica NJ to fix an R6 (a much

less electronically complex camera)I wasn't going to take a chance on

an R7 needing repairs. The circuit board alone costs $300. So I

bought 2 new R8's with 5 year warranties. The R7 has the best

viewfinder display of the pre-R8 models but the displays are set at

different virtual distances than the finder images themselves, and

for a bifocal wearer such as myself the thicker LCD numerals of the

R8 are easier to read than the small flickery red LED's in the R7.

The R7's 1/100 top flash sync is also annoying and unnecessary for a

metal vertical shutter. The fact that you can't use AE lock with

center-weighted metering is also annoying, as is the two-handed bass-

ackwards film spool loading. And the DOF preview lever has the same

tendency to stick as with all similar R bodies. Also, on more than

one occasion I accidentally touched the snap-close battery

compartment door and dumped the batteries on the ground. These are

the worst features of the R7 and they're hardly earth-shattering.

The R7 is in every way a true Leica: just enough poorly-thought-out

design quirks and failures in an otherwise beautiful camera to make

you want to cry.

[ray_moth]

Pat,

 

For information on different models of R cameras, see the following

links: <br>

 

http://www.wildlightphoto.com/leica/ <br>

http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Leica/page6.html <br>

http://www.scopereviews.com/om.html

[jacques_balthazar1]

R8 is not bulky. It looks bulky. R8 is not big and is not heavy,

compared to high end offers from other manufacturers. It becomes

*almost* as big and heavy when you add the optional motordrive.

Enough of that legend.

 

<p>

 

R4/5/6 and even 7 are smallish, but they have no "grip". They handle

like middle of the road Eighties SLRs (which they basically are). If

you want to hand hold them securely with lenses heavier than basic

35/50 'crons, you will want to add the large and clunky motordrive,

providing that needed "grip".

 

<p>

 

OTOH R8 handles like a dream, with or without motor, thanks to a very

ergonomic design. Perfect viewfinder, perfect and simple "command and

control" center, great flashmeter capability, etc, etc. Try one with

a 19 or a 180 elmarit or a 80 'lux, and you'll get that illumination!

 

<p>

 

It's only failure, from my point of view, is the necessity to use

proprietary battery back with motordrive, while, stupidly, the

smaller winder lacks the vertical grip/handstrap capabilities of the

motordrive.

 

<p>

 

If size matters for you, and you want small, go M.

[xavier_dalfort]

PAt, The R7 is the most verssatile, I put it as choice one.

 

<p>

 

I currently have a R7, bought it new 6 years ago and it works

flawless.

 

<p>

 

Make sure you have the user's manual since it gives valuable

information.

Xavier

[Robin Smith]

If you want a small camera then the R5-R6/6.2/R7 are nice. The R6.2 is

all manual and in my experience very reliable. If you want extra bulk

then get the autowinder which is only $150 s/h. The R7 is a good

camera, but personally I would try the R8 if you want a sophisticated

modern manual focus camera. The R7 is almost the same price as an R8

and so in my opinion is less value for money. The R6.2 seems to

command a high price s/h - it is probably (shame!) the last fully

manual Leica SLR. It also depends a good deal on how much flash

photography you do - the R8 has 1/250th sync, a flash meter built

1st/2nd curtain sync and SCA 3000 circuitry and all that nonsense

whereas the R7-R5 are just SCA 300. Personally this is not a big deal

for me. I would buy the R8 because of its superior ergonomics, great

mirror prerelease, adjustable selftimer (yes I like them), and timed

manual speeds down to 15 (or is it 8?) secs. The R7 was the last

camera that Leica managed to force all the electronic circuitry into

the small R4 type body - and in my opinion it handles like it. If you

want a smaller camera then the R8 may not be for you. I love the small

size of the R6.2. (I bought the R6 instead of the R7 at the time) but

might pick up an R8 one day.

 

<p>

 

An older 50/1.4 is a good idea - it is a good lens (like the current

Summilux-M) and, as it has been replaced by the current expensive and

superb one, is a bargain. Mind you you get a real bargain with the

Summicron - you can pick up a good one for $200-250 and it is a superb

lens.

[joel_shank]

Your question raises others. Do you need or want all the

sophisticated / automated features of a newer body or will an early

SLR with just an internal meter do it for you? My very old SLRs and

their relatively low prices allow more money for more lenses. If you

have a good understanding of the technical requirements of saturating

film while achieving depth of field vs. minimizing movement and...

you're willing to bracket to insure a good shot, buy and older body

and go for an additional lens. I'm presuming here you're on a budget

but still crave the resolution that Leica lenses are noted for.