I love my Leicaflex!

[AdamSinger]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just got a Leicaflex, with a clean 50mm Summicron,from a well known London dealer. It was at least £300 cheaper than a film M with lens, and the Leicaflex comes with a free built in MR meter; which shock horror, by using the 1.5 to 1.3 volt adapter from the Small Battery Company this meter is within half a stop of my R9. Even the focusing is rangefinder like, relying on a circle in the middle of a bright screen. Once you cross to Leica reflexes you do end up in the mire of what lens can I use on a wet Thursday if the 2nd cam is in Sagittarius? It all gets a little complicated, and ROM Com takes on a whole new meaning.

 

True the camera is a tad heavy, and at the end of well wielded strap it needs to be registered as a weapon in certain States; but all that said this is a great camera, that just feels Leica. In fact you could argue the controls especially the shutter are better than the M

 

The Leicaflex was obsolete the day it came out, and 55 years later, its quirks of obsolescence no longer look like a serious failure to compete, but are engaging anachronisms like wearing a waist coat to a football match. After all this camera can't get any more obsolete, unless they stop making film, but then what a gorgeous paper weight to have. Leaving aside the “yes but I got a mint titanium Janis Joplin edition M6 with a prototype Mandler 63mm F1.33 lens for a bag of washers and two coke bottle tops at a car boot sale, or droppings from the back of Ford Transit Van, and the roulette that is eBay, this might just be the cheapest way to get into post 1956 Leica film photography, buy’ em while you can.

Edited July 13, 2018 by AdamSinger

[thebarnman]

The Leicaflex was obsolete the day it came out,

 

That's the only part of your post I don't understand.  Obsolete in what way when it was originally released?

[gbealnz]

I think he might have been taking the piss.

Gary

[hektor]

I think he might have been taking the piss.

Gary

 

Agreed.  I bought my Leicaflex when it was being discounted after the introduction of the SL.  Since then I have added an SL x 2, SL2 MOT, R4, R5 and R7.  After that they became too big for my liking.  I still have the Leicaflex, one SL, one SL2 MOT and R7.  Which reflex do I use most of the time?  The Leicaflex.  When visiting Wetzlar in the seventies I was told that the reason the Leicaflex was late being introduced was the desire to make a reflex M3 and to achieve this had the mirror mechanism controlled by a cam to ensure said mirror slowed and stopped before the shutter opened.  The mirrors of other reflexes bounced off sponge and other Heath Robinson devices which caused the well known vibration common to those cameras.

 

A camera body only needs to contain a shutter and focusing mechanism.  The rest, such as in-built or through-the-lens metering, is for convenience, and unless using extremely long focal length lenses or shooting close-ups, the Leicaflex meter is all one needs if at all.

 

The Leicaflex was only obsolete for those who did not know the f/16 rule.

[masjah]

I think he might have been taking the piss.

Gary

 

 

Not necessarily. The built-in obsolescence point has been argued in terms of what the Japanese competition were offering even at the time of the camera's introduction. This does not of course at all contradict what Justin and others have said with regard to what a camera actually needs - that is to say, how can a camera be considered obsolete for failing to provide features that are not actually needed? Two different definitions of obsolescence - no contradiction.

[Michael Geschlecht]

Agreed.  I bought my Leicaflex when it was being discounted after the introduction of the SL.  Since then I have added an SL x 2, SL2 MOT, R4, R5 and R7.  After that they became too big for my liking.  I still have the Leicaflex, one SL, one SL2 MOT and R7.  Which reflex do I use most of the time?  The Leicaflex.  When visiting Wetzlar in the seventies I was told that the reason the Leicaflex was late being introduced was the desire to make a reflex M3 and to achieve this had the mirror mechanism controlled by a cam to ensure said mirror slowed and stopped before the shutter opened.  The mirrors of other reflexes bounced off sponge and other Heath Robinson devices which caused the well known vibration common to those cameras.

 

A camera body only needs to contain a shutter and focusing mechanism.  The rest, such as in-built or through-the-lens metering, is for convenience, and unless using extremely long focal length lenses or shooting close-ups, the Leicaflex meter is all one needs if at all.

 

The Leicaflex was only obsolete for those who did not know the f/16 rule.

 

Hello Hektor,

 

The Original Leicaflex is NOT obsolete for people who do not know the "F16 rule".

 

Don't forget that it has a perfectly usable external meter.

 

The only place where it might have limitations is when it is doing close-ups. At which time there are plenty of ways of calculating & there are tables.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

Edited July 14, 2018 by Michael Geschlecht

[thebarnman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

With all this talk of obsolescence; I guess you could say the Leica R4 was obsolete just one year after it's introduction because in 1981 the Pentax ME F was the first 35mm camera introduced with auto focus.  Of course auto focus hadn't been introduced to any of the Leica R or M cameras, but I've never considered them obsolete.  The point was made if film was no longer available which is a very good point; in that case all film cameras would be obsolete except of course the Leica R8/9 which have the option of using a Digital Modul R. 

[AdamSinger]

That's the only part of your post I don't understand.  Obsolete in what way when it was originally released?

Thank you for reading it . My understanding is that the  Leciaflex came out in 1964, with  a viewing screen where only the centre portion of it focuses, same as on the first Contarex.  The  1959 Nikon F  had interchageable prisms, full screen focusing , motor dirve , plus interchangeable  screens, titanium shutter  and stop down preview lever  all now standard things and the Leicaflex didn't,  and in 65 the Nikon F got TTL metering , which the  Topcon had since  1963  and the Pentax since 1964 .  A lot of this was solved by the 1968 Liecaflex SL but by then  much of  Pro market had gone to Nikon. When the Leicaflex came out it was a beautiful anachronism , and 54 years later the Leicaflex is still a beautiful and a very useable anachronism , I luv it , for me its an almost perfect 'street' camera,  and my comments about the Leicaflex apply almost as much  to the Contarex. Its an interesting  thought that the Japanese did to the wonderful German camera Industry  what  they did to the wonderful British Motorbike Industry the Japanese made products that were right for consumers ,  the  1960s German Camera Industry and the Brit Bike industry  wanted consumers right for thier products.

For the sake of clarity I mean obsolete,  as not at the same competitive  edge  as its peers  in the pro market of the time.  If it had been Nikon would not have won  the pro market of the 60s, 70s an 90s.   I drive  a 1968 car it is not obsolete in that gets  me from A to B but it sure is obsolete when I compare it  with  my daughter' s modern  current hot hatch, ........and if the the sunny 16 rule is a palliative against obsolesence then my Voitlander Bergheil is cutting edge. I love Liecaflexes but Leicaflexes almost cost Lieca 'the farm.'

Edited July 14, 2018 by AdamSinger

[Michael Geschlecht]

Thank you for reading it . My understanding is that the  Leciaflex came out in 1964, with  a viewing screen where only the centre portion of it focuses, same as on the first Contarex.  The  1959 Nikon F  had interchageable prisms, full screen focusing , motor dirve , plus interchangeable  screens, titanium shutter  and stop down preview lever  all now standard things and the Leicaflex didn't,  and in 65 the Nikon F got TTL metering , which the  Topcon had since  1963  and the Pentax since 1964 .  A lot of this was solved by the 1968 Liecaflex SL but by then  much of  Pro marlet had gone to Nikon. When the Leicaflex came out it was a beautiful anachronism , and 54 years later the Leicaflex is still a beautiful and a very useable anachronism , I luv it.

 

Hello Adam,

 

Welcome to the Forum.

 

I think that what some people are trying to write here is that: If a "something", such as a a refrigerator, comes with options that you do not want or need such as a double sized freezing compartment, then: Is the refrigerator with a single sized freezing compartment obsolete if you don't need the other compartment?

 

Part of the Leica/Leicaflex mind set is to build a high quality, easily operable machine that thinks the way that you do. Which may not do everything that everyone else's machines do. But what it does do, it does do well. And it does it in an "as seamless" of a manner as it can.

 

The Leica/Leicaflex mind set is the idea of "doing more with less". Because sometimes you can do most everything that you want to with 1 camera with 1 lens with 1 light meter. And the other small amount that you want to do can take a multiple of what you need to do almost everything else.

 

If it does what you want it to do without all of the other "doo dads" is it an "anachronism" or is it simply the "correct tool"?

 

It is a way of doing things that some people like & other people don't.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

Edited July 14, 2018 by Michael Geschlecht

[Robinyuill]

Afternoon in Edinburgh. Camera and a coffee.

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!

[thebarnman]

Still looks very new!

[hektor]

My SL2 MOT is new.  It was never used by the original owner from whom I bought it eleven years ago.  It then went to Solms for a CLA.  I have put a few films through it, but as said before, prefer the original Leicaflex.

 

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!

[hektor]

What do you chaps use for batteries?

[wagner]

Morning!

 

Still got some PX 625, which are still working fine.

Otherwise, the cheapest option option might be the hearing aid battery A13. Just bought some for my SL and they work fine. They don't last that long, but that's fine, since you get them very cheap.

The only thing is, you have adapt them to fit. But that's easy, just put little rubber ring- or metal, whatever you got - around and they stay nicely in position.

 

Torsten

[hektor]

Thank-you Torsten.  I will try that.

[AdamSinger]

Thank-you Torsten.  I will try that.

MR9 adapter from the small battery company http://www.smallbattery.company.org.uk/sbc_mr9_adapter.htm lets you use 386 cells

 

The MR9 adapter is the same size as the original mercury battery, and puts out 1.3 volts which is the right voltage, and makes my SL almost as accurate on metering as my R9

Edited July 29, 2018 by AdamSinger

[hektor]

Thank-you Adam, another solution.  I will try both.

[AdamSinger]

 

 

Putting to one side, -but just for a moment - my passion for the M3, I got a Leicaflex a few weeks ago and the first roll back today. Every black and white TMax exposure was as per the built in meter and spot on. This camera is a joy, and having used mostly Ms all my life, I had an irrational prejudice against the flex ; "wot somebody had tig-welded a Visoflex into an M and then superglued a MR meter on the top, why would I want one of those?” Oh well bigotry takes many forms and this was mine and delayed me from having the joy of this camera , which btw was a bargain. This camera suits my style, it feels like an SLR designed and made by people who had only made rangefinders…… Adam there was a reason for that !! I am a do it all in the centre of the frame and recompose person, rangefinders train you that way , and the Leicaflex is a perfect example of do it all in the centre of the viewfinder and recompose kind of a camera. 'Oh cinders’ you shall go for decent CLA for you are worth it.

[hektor]

Putting to one side, -but just for a moment - my passion for the M3, I got a Leicaflex a few weeks ago and the first roll back today. Every black and white TMax exposure was as per the built in meter and spot on. This camera is a joy, and having used mostly Ms all my life, I had an irrational prejudice against the flex ; "wot somebody had tig-welded a Visoflex into an M and then superglued a MR meter on the top, why would I want one of those?” Oh well bigotry takes many forms and this was mine and delayed me from having the joy of this camera , which btw was a bargain. This camera suits my style, it feels like an SLR designed and made by people who had only made rangefinders…… Adam there was a reason for that !! I am a do it all in the centre of the frame and recompose person, rangefinders train you that way , and the Leicaflex is a perfect example of do it all in the centre of the viewfinder and recompose kind of a camera. 'Oh cinders’ you shall go for decent CLA for you are worth it.

 

Adam, that was the objective when the Leicaflex was being planned, to equal the M3 in vibrationless smooth silence.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[thebarnman]

I am a do it all in the centre of the frame and recompose person

 

Are you talking about for exposure, or compositional purposes?