LEICAFLEX SL2: The victim of "Cost Cutting" Measures?

[carlprad]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello

 

I so often hear that LEICA began to lose money during the production of the LEICAFLEX SL2 camera.

 

Therefore, they had to impose cost cutting measures that lead to the demise of their legendary quality control and use of exceptional materials.

 

Is it true that the SL2 is of lesser quality than the previous LEICAFLEX cameras?

 

If so, what parts must I replace on the SL2, in order to bring it up to the LEICAFLEX standard and SL caliber?

 

Thanks in advance for your help.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[earleygallery]

Wow, you're talking about quite an old camera and one which is built like a tank compared to many others.

 

Issues today are purely age related rather than quality - prism deterioration, meter sensitivity, battery compatibility etc.

 

If the camera has a red plastic lens release they can snap after 40+ years of use, but metal replacements can be fitted.

[wildlightphoto]

Wow, you're talking about quite an old camera and one which is built like a tank compared to many others.

 

Issues today are purely age related rather than quality - prism deterioration, meter sensitivity, battery compatibility etc.

 

If the camera has a red plastic lens release they can snap after 40+ years of use, but metal replacements can be fitted.

 

The SL2 never had a plastic lens release. The SL does.

[ganzosrevenge]

a) Only the SL had a plastic release. The Original had a metal button a la "the upgraded SL button", and the SL2's button looks like the round button on the M5. If you get an SL, get that button replaced. Even if you're like me and have one lens / one body, if it breaks... you *WILL* be one lens to that body without an INCREDIBLE amount of effort.

 

prism deterioration is inevitable on the Original, the SL, and the SL2. If it doesn't bother you, you deal with it or if you're flush with extra $$, have the prism resilvered, or even replaced - the latter option is at greater cost than the former option. As a grad student, I'm just happy to have a working Leicaflex of some sort that I can use; the prism will be replaced in due time.

 

c) I think the fear is that because the SL2 was made sort of a "last hurrah" to the "old-school" Leicas, that some of the "Minolta" influence may have permeated the production line. If my memory serves me, there are lenses that fit the SL2 and NOT the other Leicaflexes due to the mirror spacing. Someone with more Leicaflex knowledge could fill in the little details better.

 

d) The entire Leicaflex line in terms of empirical field, is built like a tank. It feels like someone came with a BIG billet of brass / aluminum and carved away everything that didn't look like a Leicaflex, shoved in some glass bits, and called it a Leicaflex. You can't go wrong. The most tank-like is the Standard, then the SL, and finally the SL2. But that shouldn't deter you from an SL2; it's a TANK compared to almost anything on the market today, and if it's lasted this long in working order, a CLA should keep it working another 40 years

 

e) if you feel ABSOLUTELY compelled to replace something... *MAYBE*, and only if you have tons of money, you may want to get the prism resilvered, or get a new prism (see earlier in this post). With regular maintenance... a Leicaflex should last many lifetimes and shoot TONS of rolls of film.

 

The SL2 may be the "last hurrah" for the old-school Leica R-series, but don't let its little quirks throw you away from it. If you have the money to care for it and use it, by all means go for it. Just be aware, they're rarer than the standard or the SL, they command a higher price than either of the other models, and they have quite a bit more complexity in their metering. Once you get over the fence of repairs and maintenance, it'll most likely outlive you, your kids, grandkids, and great-grandkids with regular CLAs of every 10 to 20 years.

 

Jason