Which Leica R to choose? Which one is the best?

[MarkP]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

& squeeze the tit!

 

Interesting relationship you have with your camera...

[SnowHawk]

I have both. The R 6.2 is slow to use because of the non-automatic

metering system and the wind on is stiffer bevcause it has to cock the shutter as well as move the film.

The batteries for the R8 last quite a long time and it is no trouble to carry a spare one with you. I would recommend the R8 for everyday use.[ It also has TTL flash control]

 

I agree with the R8. I own an R4, R8, and a Leicaflex SL. The R8 has become my daily shooter, even surpassing my digital equipment.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[erl]

I thought I was the only one to have an 'affair' with an M8. Seems not!

Bloody great camera. Fabulous ergonomics. Extremely versatile functions, both for ambient and flash light.

 

Yes, that left hand dial can be brushed into another mode, but even I'm not perfect, so what the hell.

[SnowHawk]

I thought I was the only one to have an 'affair' with an M8. Seems not!

Bloody great camera. Fabulous ergonomics. Extremely versatile functions, both for ambient and flash light.

 

Yes, that left hand dial can be brushed into another mode, but even I'm not perfect, so what the hell.

 

I've ran into the left hand dial issue once, but honestly I find it much better than the slew of issues I had with my X1 (which led me to return it). I love my R8, even more than my SL, and I hate to say it but it is the biggest detractor from buying an MP. I will probably break down at some point, but if I can get my hands on a Digital Modul R I will likely not touch my Canon equipment for quite some time.

[hamey]

I thought I was the only one to have an 'affair' with an M8. Seems not!

Bloody great camera. Fabulous ergonomics. Extremely versatile functions, both for ambient and flash light.

 

Yes, that left hand dial can be brushed into another mode, but even I'm not perfect, so what the hell.

 

Erl I presume you meant the R8 not that silly M8.

 

I also love my Silver R8, its a beauty simply a timeless classic.

 

Borrowed a Canon 17-40 mm L lens to compare it to to my Leica R 21-35mm yesterday.

 

Verdict, the Leica R... 21-35mm outclassed the Canon 17-40

 

Next I will try the Canon 24-70mm 2.8 up agains't my 28-90.

 

Ken.

[erl]

Hamey, you are right, I meant the R8!

[SteveYork]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I prefer the Leicaflex/SL to the R line, but I was impressed with the R9 when I fiddled with it at a shop years ago. A gorgeous viewfinder, and surprisingly ergonomic.

[Torquinian]

Frankly I love my R8. While it is battery powered, a spare set of batteries is smaller than a roll of film so easy to carry and will certainly last quite a long time. The controls are very simple and it is very easy to use. The viewfinder is great and it's a fun camera to use. The only real downside is that it is fairly heavy.

 

I went to the Leica Weekend at Corsham and was lucky enough to win a power winder for my R8 in the raffle. That will save a whole half second of thumb movement!

The R8 is a lovely camera. Interestingly on the "neck candy" at Corsham were no SLR Leicas only rangefinder models. [ including a new M with a demo sticker on the bottom]. I was hoping to see an "S" and talk to the owner but none there.

[S/W]

Sometimes SL 2, sometimes R6.2

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[S/W]

Sometimes R8

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Torquinian]

I agree.

[Howling Dick]

Ive been offered a Leica R-E10 055 with a Leica Elmarit 35mm f2.8 for about £500 

I don't know anything about the R series - why are they so much cheaper and are they good?

[250swb]

2 hours ago, Howling Dick said:

Ive been offered a Leica R-E10 055 with a Leica Elmarit 35mm f2.8 for about £500 

I don't know anything about the R series - why are they so much cheaper and are they good?

I have an R-E and if you don't need the few (very few) extra features of the R5 it is essentially the same camera simplified and is a great camera to use. I got mine about a year ago and it's mint and cost £220 which is a fair price for one in good condition, they can be cheaper, which makes it a good price for the 35mm Elmarit so all together £500 sounds good. If it isn't in good condition though you may be able to put them together a bit cheaper.

Edited December 4, 2024 by 250swb

[Howling Dick]

1 hour ago, 250swb said:

I have an R-E and if you don't need the few (very few) extra features of the R5 it is essentially the same camera simplified and is a great camera to use. I got mine about a year ago and it's mint and cost £220 which is a fair price for one in good condition, they can be cheaper, which makes it a good price for the 35mm Elmarit so all together £500 sounds good. If it isn't in good condition though you may be able to put them together a bit cheaper.

Thanks for that. My main concern is wether its worth investing in the R. Im assuming Im going to get great vimages as good or better than say a Minolta/Pentax of the same period (which I have) but how substantially better?

[250swb]

8 hours ago, Howling Dick said:

Thanks for that. My main concern is wether its worth investing in the R. Im assuming Im going to get great vimages as good or better than say a Minolta/Pentax of the same period (which I have) but how substantially better?

It won't be substantially better at all, stick with a Minolta or Pentax or Nikon etc of the same era and they would be generally as good if you search for the best lenses in each range. The difference comes incrementally over using a range of lenses and wanting/recognising the subtle characteristics between them all. I bought my R-E purely on a whim not to long ago because in 40 years of using Leica M cameras I'd never used an SLR variant and thought maybe I should just find out about them. My Nikon cameras and lenses were/are fine in every comparison, but I found myself intrigued by the new feel and product range and especially the Leica zoom lenses for the R system (21-35mm and 35-70mm) which are a cut above any others I've used. So as a landscape photographer I found two exceptional short zooms that fitted pretty much all my requirements instead of carrying multiple primes. There followed in my R adventure an R9 body which was a revelation in camera ergonomics and which despite the futuristic shape I find to be the most comfortable, capable, and satisfying 35mm SLR I've ever used. But would I ditch my Nikon's,... no.

A new camera can always lead to some new enthusiasm and inspiration, and I think be an excuse to take on new projects. But so can buying a new film you haven't used before and you never know until you try it what it can unlock.

[earleygallery]

11 hours ago, Howling Dick said:

Thanks for that. My main concern is wether its worth investing in the R. Im assuming Im going to get great vimages as good or better than say a Minolta/Pentax of the same period (which I have) but how substantially better?

The R models (up to R7) were actually based on Minolta bodies of the same era. Also some R lenses were Leica versions of Minolta and Sigma designs.

I don’t think the Elmarit was an outstanding lens in the Leica range so don’t expect some amazing difference to a Pentax or Minolta lens of the same type and era.

[masjah]

If you are thinking of an R8, I would definitely go for an R9. There have been meter failures in older R8s and I've also seen ageing of the (liquid crystal?) numerical displays in the viewfinder. But both are ageing cameras, and unserviceable. I've still got mine, though I hardly ever them these days.

[Howling Dick]

11 minutes ago, masjah said:

If you are thinking of an R8, I would definitely go for an R9. There have been meter failures in older R8s and I've also seen ageing of the (liquid crystal?) numerical displays in the viewfinder. But both are ageing cameras, and unserviceable. I've still got mine, though I hardly ever them these days.

Thanks - interesting about unserviceable - the one Im looking at R-E 10 claims to have been serviced! 

[Howling Dick]

14 hours ago, 250swb said:

It won't be substantially better at all, stick with a Minolta or Pentax or Nikon etc of the same era and they would be generally as good if you search for the best lenses in each range. The difference comes incrementally over using a range of lenses and wanting/recognising the subtle characteristics between them all. I bought my R-E purely on a whim not to long ago because in 40 years of using Leica M cameras I'd never used an SLR variant and thought maybe I should just find out about them. My Nikon cameras and lenses were/are fine in every comparison, but I found myself intrigued by the new feel and product range and especially the Leica zoom lenses for the R system (21-35mm and 35-70mm) which are a cut above any others I've used. So as a landscape photographer I found two exceptional short zooms that fitted pretty much all my requirements instead of carrying multiple primes. There followed in my R adventure an R9 body which was a revelation in camera ergonomics and which despite the futuristic shape I find to be the most comfortable, capable, and satisfying 35mm SLR I've ever used. But would I ditch my Nikon's,... no.

A new camera can always lead to some new enthusiasm and inspiration, and I think be an excuse to take on new projects. But so can buying a new film you haven't used before and you never know until you try it what it can unlock.

Thank you so much for detailed advice. Originally I eschewed the zoom options but between you and someone else Im now seriously considering the 35-70.

I use the Q but following experiments with a Rollei 35 and a Spotmatic Im getting into film. I do have an F3 Nikon my son gave me but no lenses. I thought Id go down the Leica route but vintage Ms and lenses are a bit out of my price range at the moment so The R-E +35m for £500 looked a good option.

 

Meanwhile, I looked at your photos - superb sir. These were shot with an M?

 

Richard

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Howling Dick]

12 hours ago, earleygallery said:

The R models (up to R7) were actually based on Minolta bodies of the same era. Also some R lenses were Leica versions of Minolta and Sigma designs.

I don’t think the Elmarit was an outstanding lens in the Leica range so don’t expect some amazing difference to a Pentax or Minolta lens of the same type and era.

Thanks - Interesting advice. I have a Spotmatic 

R