Best performer of Leica R series??

[JBA]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I note that one earlier poster brought up the familiar old chestnut that the Leica R3 is apparently plagued with electronic problems &c&c. I certainly do not doubt that there was some truth to this -- look at the horror stories about the M8 and M9 -- but the half-dozen or so actual R3 users that I have personally ever known or run into myself have every one of them sworn by it (like many M8 and no doubt M9 users). I think there are some R3 users on the Forum that would say this. (I've never worked with an R3).

 

My most recent camera purchase was a Leica R3 MOT with motor that was priced too good to pass up. I was told it belonged to a pro who only recently let it go, and he obviously used it heavily but also took very good care of it. Later, I was told by an acquaintance at another camera shop that the Minolta XE's meter had a tendency to fail, and since the R3 was built on an XE platform, the meter was its Achilles heel. Mine is working perfectly after decades of clearly intensive use and I expect it will give me many years of trouble-free service. The R3 is a great camera, and thanks to its being very underrated, it can be had quite cheaply.

[razerx]

I prefer the R4 and its variations for the high mag finder. My tired old eyes can't focus the R9 without the Brightscreen magnifier.

[Posto 6]

As far as R cameras are concerned, after trying all of them, I find that I always go back to the SL2 Mot (I have 3 of these, and one SL2, as well as an R7, having sold the rest over the years). The combination of viewfinder, control and ease of use of the SL2 is unbeatable, and once you get used to it, very difficult to replace with another model. The shutter speeds are highly reliable after a modern CLA with new lubricants, the viewfinder is unbeatable, and, best of all, virtually all R-lenses will fit (unlike the SL, also a marvellous camera by the way).

 

If you really wish to look at value, the prices for these are currently almost ridiculously cheap, and these should prove very good investments as well.

 

If, however, you need digital/DMR, then you have to have the R8 or (better) R9. Otherwise, I would go for an SL2 or, even rarer and more desireable, an SL2Mot.

[Joachim123]

I have been using an R4 for a few years now. Just love this camera. Had it in once when I first got it to have the light seals replaced and a CLA and have not had any problems since.

[Joop van Heijgen]

Best performer of Leica R series??

 

In retrospect there are no bad Leica R cameras:)

[roguewave]

I have 3 R8 cameras & have also owned the SL2. Each has it's own use. I owned an R9, but sold it. I'm always amazed by statements that the R8/R9 is too big & heavy. I have relatively small hands & all I can say is that the first time I held an R8, it felt perfect. When Olympus rolled out the OM series in the early 70's I was given 3 bodies and a full complement of all their lenses. I alway thought that camera was too small.

 

The R8 is the best SLR film camera I have ever used. It always works & feels like an extension of myself. The R8/DMR remains my favorite digital camera, even though I have an M8 and several other digital cameras.

 

For film use, the R8 perfectly balances my preferred lenses, the 80 & 35 Summilux & the R19. I also use a full motordrive, which is the identical form factor of the R8/DMR. Results are the real test. I like what I get & the reliability is unmatched in my experience.

[dickgrafixstop]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My favorite has always been the latest acquisition that's paid for. Now they're all

gone once leica decided to orphan the line but I miss the R8 most. That camera

with the 35 Cron and the 80 Lux was a great combination.

[SteveYork]

Among Leica reflex cameras, I've used the R6/6.2, SL, SL Mot ("resilvered" prism) and SL2. I like the SL the most (and still have it) with the SL2 coming in second. The main reason is the big, bold and beautiful viewfinder. The R6s are very grainy in comparison. Even from day one, focusing on the SL was just so easy. Things just popped into focus. I came from rangefinders (and still use them), and except in low light, I can focus the SL as fast or quicker then an M. And the pin and needle metering is so quick. I find it even a little more quick then the M6/R6 type metering.

[spydrxx]

My experiences have been limited to the SL, SL2, R3 and R8 - all of them, IMHO, worthy cameras. I kept the SL2 and R8 and sold the others after several years use. The SL2 (like the SL) is a tank, and my fallback when everything else (electronic) fails - and the viewfinder is almost as good and bright as the SL one, but my meter is more versatile. The R8 is peculiar, for me, shapewise...it isn't my favorite film SLR, but is easy to use and quite versatile. I loved the R3 (which was given to me by a disgruntled owner)...it always seemed to work great in spite of its reputation for problems, and it fit my hand very well. My only objection to the SL2 is that it doesn't have an ergonomic grip for my hands with a heavy lens on it...so I fashioned one myself after a couple of years, and it feels much more secure now.

 

All said and done, I don't think there is a "best" R body...you pretty much pays your money and takes your choice.

[atournas]

"Best" is not necessarily subjective.

The image quality stems from the lens; the camera body contributes a very small percentage. Long-lasting reliability and accurate exposure measurements--that's what one should expect from an R body to be called "the best". All others look like cosmetics at the end of the day.

That said, it appears that R6.2 and R7 is the "best" combo: one purely mechanical, the other with the least automation expected.

 

Paul

[taskoni]

I have the R7 and I can say is perfect for me. I really like the sexy look of the R9 but to me my R7 is great performer, size is just right, never had any mechanical problems, and it looks great mith my 80,50 lux and 24 elmarit.

Regards,

b.

[Joop van Heijgen]

A few months ago the shutter of my SL has broken, and my SL2 have also shutter problems (black outs and the shuttertimes does not work).

 

What do you think should I repair these camera's or buy an new one, like a R8.

 

 

The R8 is at the moment very cheap to be had (€400.-).

A SL is also very cheap (€150) but needs naturally a CLA.

 

I love the use of the Leicaflex SL for more than 30 years but I am afraid that they will be too old for reliable use.

Furthermore I don't have problems with electronic cameras; at the moment I do use the Leica RE and it works fine.

 

Can anyone give some advice? Thank you!

 

A few months ago my Leica repairman Ton Scherpenborg in Nijmegen The Netherlands have repaired my Leicaflex SL2 in a perfect way. He is a real Leica man, educated in Leitz Wetzlar. The Leicaflexes seems to have no secrets for him.

This after disappointing experiences with Will van Maanen in Holland, he could not repair my Leicaflex in a definitive way.

I do still find the Leicaflex SL2 the best Leica R camera ever made.

Edited April 13, 2011 by Joop van Heijgen

[holmes]

I may have posted to this question earlier, if so excuse me. If I didn't, my $0.02 (two cents) would be to ask what is meant by best performer? Here we get into one of subjective/objective problems. Those of us who shoot with an "R" will have a definite opinion about the relative merits of the unit. I have two R6.2s and an R7. Right away I'm confronted by two totally different types of cameras. Which is better, the R6.2s with almost total manual operation, or the R7 loaded with electronics. All my Leica's including my "Ms" are motor or winder driven. I'm still stuck on "best performer", mainly as I don't know the criteria laid down. So I will simply say my R6.2s and my R7 are best, and met all my demands as a professional photographer, now almost totally in retirement. That means I can shoot what I want and not some editor or publisher. I shot primarily editorial work for textbooks, children's books, position papers, and for the US Air Force.

[Joop van Heijgen]

"I'm still stuck on "best performer", mainly as I don't know the criteria laid down."

 

For me the 'best' performer of the R series means the build quality and the very clear and big viewfinder of the Leicaflex camera.

To compare with a Leica 6.2 or R7 I advice you to take a Leicaflex SL2 in your hands.

The Leicaflex SL(2) will feel more like your M Leica.....and that's not a bad 'performer'.

For me the 'best' in this case it is the 'good' feeling I do have with this camera when I am making pictures. On the other hand there are no bad Leica cameras:)

Edited April 14, 2011 by Joop van Heijgen

[taskoni]

I have the R7 and using it occasionally with my Lux 80mm, 50 and 35 lenses.

 

I would go rot R8 if I were in your shoes.

 

Regards,

b.

[grillage]

I have two R 5's . They have been with me on every New York bridge and I would not trade them for anything else! I mostly use my 28-70 zoom but sometimes I will use my straight 28 mm. With the former Kodachrome and now Ektachrome the colors and detail is second to non!

[brt]

I am using a R6.2, a R7 and a R8.

The metering of my R 6.2 is not very precise compared to the R8 and not at all compared to the spot metering of a 200 series Hassy, which always meters what my Sekonic reads. I have to rely on the latitude of Film with the R6.2

The R7 is nice.

My R8 is a nightmare. I own it since 1999 and it needed new electronics shortly after the purchase, later the shutter was dead and last year the spot metering was defect. The metering was never spot on and the customer service was not able to adjust it. I have to dial in a permant compensation. None of my other cameras behaves like this. I like the flash metering.

I do not abuse my Leicas. My oldest camera is a OM4ti from 1985 and it is still working properly. It got its first CLS last year just for cleaning and adjusting. It has sailed with me across the Atlantic on a small boat. It has seen beaches and deserts and it has never let me down. It is a robust and reliable camera.

For professional documentary purposes I am using a Canon 20D for macro work. This piece of plastic always works.

Leica lenses render wonderful images on film, and that is why I still use them, but sometimes it is really a pain with the cameras.

Best performer? The one which works!

 

brt

[LuxBob]

I had a lot of cameras before my R8 and most of all I liked my Minolta SRT101 and Olympus OM's. Then I got an R8 and it felt like an extension of me. Everything was perfectly placed and form the start one saw through the camera straight to the image - I guess that's what you do anyway. With the Elmar 35mm it seemed perfect to me. But there was also a tactile feel in using it , a little bit like driving a high quality car, the smoothness of operation the exactness of the movements.

I still use it from time to time just for the pleasure.

Needless to add it helped to produce some of my best shots.

[bull40]

Well, I think instead of starting yet another new thread on this topic, I'll see if I can breathe new life into this one...

 

As I have decided to quit my DSLRs and return to film and Leica R, I am making final decisions on replacing my R kit, much of which was sold off when I fell for digital. Bad decision.

I have used extensively since 1985 the R4s, R4s MOD P and RE and been completely happy. I prefer the smaller R4-R7 bodies for size and weight. If I could get on well with the rangefinder viewfinder I would have an M system; I love the Leica M glass, construction and size and weight, which is why I love my smaller Rs. I can not consider the R8 due to weight restrictions, I have an old neck injury that really makes carrying more weight on my neck/shoulders than I have to a real bummer. I do not need Program capability, and don't mind a full manual/mechanical body. Electronic or mechanical is not a priority for me. I do like having Aperture priority for lazier days. I'm looking for two main, daily bodies and I will probably add an SL2 for some nostalgic fun, but don't want a Leicaflex for everyday use. I guess what it is boiling down to for me is finding the largest, brightest viewfinder in the smallest, lightest package. So, having laid out those considerations, I ask those of you who have shot with a variety of the bodies I'm discussing:

1) Does the R7 have a noticeably brighter, better viewfinder than the previous R models? Is it unique to the R7 or is it shared with the R6.2? If it is unique to the R7 that would be my choice.

2) Is the viewfinder of the R8/R9 DRAMATICALLY bigger and/or brighter than any of the other smaller R bodies? If it is, I could rationalize dealing with the extra weight of the R9, but not the R8.

3) If the viewfinders are all really pretty much about the same, I'll probably just pick up another RE and maybe an R6.2

 

So, there is your assignment. I would very much appreciate your thoughts from your experience.

All my best,

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[wildlightphoto]

1) Does the R7 have a noticeably brighter, better viewfinder than the previous R models? Is it unique to the R7 or is it shared with the R6.2? If it is unique to the R7 that would be my choice.

 

I can't comment on the R7 but the viewfinder of the R6 and R-E I used was easier to use than the R4 because the later R bodies have a built-in viewfinder diopter adjustment.

 

2) Is the viewfinder of the R8/R9 DRAMATICALLY bigger and/or brighter than any of the other smaller R bodies?

 

Not as dramatic as the difference between SL/SL2 and the R bodies.