Which R should I buy?

[Banci]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi everyone, I'm new to the R world.

I've always used M bodies but they're not the best with telephoto, that's why I'm considering a reflex.

I don't need lots of features, just a good lightmeter; which one do you suggest me? 

 

 

Edited February 26, 2019 by Banci

[dkCambridgeshire]

Please consider acquiring copy of 'LEICA R COMPENDIUM - Handbook of the Leica R System' by Jonathan Eastland … it documents the whole R system . You need to be aware of the various R lens versions' compatibilities with the various R bodies. However, a quick answer is consider a late R body (as distinct from Leicaflex / Leicaflex SL / SL2)  with any 'triple cam' R lens or 'R cam only' R lens.  An R6.2 body would be a good choice with a 50mm Summicron R … either the Mk I 50/2 S'cron provided it's a triple cam model … or the Mk II 50/2 S'cron … latter can be 'triple cam' or 'R cam only' .  Avoid early R4 bodies … the electronics can be dodgy.  Leica R ROM lenses are really only of use with the R8 and R9 cameras … latter are excellent cameras but the R7 and R6 / R6 II are more reliable.  All R7 and prior cameras are getting a bit old and may need mirror housing foam and back door seals replacing . Buy from a reputable dealer to ensure you acquire a decent body. It's a big subject … the book will explain most of it.   Another book worth acquiring is 'Leica Pocket Book 8th Edition' which documents and illustrates all Leica R bodies and R lenses … latter with MTF charts; it's now published by Red Dot Cameras https://www.reddotcameras.co.uk/books/12955-leica-pocket-book-8th-edition-2018-reprint.html

dunk 

Edited February 26, 2019 by dkCambridgeshire

[Advertisement]

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

[SteveYork]

I too came to the R system from extensive use with rangefinders.  I have a lot experience with all the Leicaflex models as well as the R6 and R7.  

I would recommend the Leicaflex SL.  It's built like a tank (think M2 and M3 here), but there are two other reasons that it make more desirable then the other R models.

First, it has a large 0.9x glorious viewfinder.  Big, bold and beautiful.  A true tour de force.  People call it brighter, but it's not so much brighter as much more clarity and smoothness, much easier to see the fine details then other R cameras.  A mixture of fine and coarse micro prisms that just pop into focus in a dramatic way, especially with telephoto and macro lenses.  Taking the picture is almost as fun as getting the shot.

Second, it has this crazy good shutter damping/braking system (as does all the Leicaflex models).  Effective hand held shots at 1/15 and even 1/8 with 35mm to 90mm focal lengths are not only possible, but the norm.  When the Leicaflex SL came out, a test report stated that it had the lowest vibration level of any SLR so far tested.  About ten years later, in reviewing the SL2, a test report stated: "We tried some 'lots of luck' hand-held exposures at 1/15 and 1/8 sec., and most of them showed very little, if any, camera shake."  My experience supports these conclusions, but I don't have much experience with focal lengths longer then 90mm.

Further, like an M, the Leicaflex models have almost an instantaneous shutter.  No lag or travel like an R6, for example.  Not a big deal, but a rangefinder guy will appreciate.  A true top speed of 1/2000, and a very simple, basic camera, similar to many Ms. 

I have no real experience with the R8/9, and good pictures can be taken with any of the Leica SLRs, as is true for any system, even Nikons.  

Edited February 26, 2019 by SteveYork

[dkCambridgeshire]

22 minutes ago, SteveYork said:

I too came to the R system from extensive use with rangefinders.  I have a lot experience with all the Leicaflex models as well as the R6 and R7.  

I would recommend the Leicaflex SL.  It's built like a tank (think M2 and M3 here), but there are two other reasons that it make more desirable then the other R models.

First, it has a large 0.9x glorious viewfinder.  Big, bold and beautiful.  A true tour de force.  People call it brighter, but it's not so much brighter as much more clarity and smoothness, much easier to see the fine details then other R cameras.  A mixture of fine and coarse micro prisms that just pop into focus in a dramatic way, especially with telephoto and macro lenses.  Taking the picture is almost as fun as getting the shot.

Second, it has this crazy effective damping system (as does all the Leicaflex models).  Effective hand held shots at 1/15 and even 1/8 with 35mm to 90mm focal lengths are not only possible, but the norm.  When the Leicaflex SL came out, a test report stated that it had the lowest vibration level of any SLR so far tested.  About ten years later, in reviewing the SL2, a test report stated: "We tried some 'lots of luck' hand-held exposures at 1/15 and 1/8 sec., and most of them showed very little, if any, camera shake."

Further, like an M, the Leicaflex models have almost an instantaneous shutter.  No lag or travel like an R6, for example.     

For these reasons, I believe a rangefinder user would appreciate the Leicaflex SL (or the other two 'flex models) more then an R model.

I have no real experience with the R8/9.

BUT … Many Leicaflex SL/SL2 bodies suffer from viewfinder balsam separation / prism silvering degradation making them difficult to resell … and dealers do not always mention same or else only hint at the defect with a disingenuous description e.g. 'mark in finder'.  And SL/SL2 bodies must be used with twin cam or triple cam lenses … not compatible with 'R cam only' lenses … and SL/SL2 bodies require obsolete  PX 625 mercury batteries unless converted. And the SL metering only covers a limited EV range. A Leicaflex could be 50 or more years old … first marketed in 1964 … SL bodies date from 1968 … plenty of time for the finder's silvering to degrade and balsam to separate. However, everything has a price … viewfinder is bright … If under £100 and preferably well under you'll likely enjoy using within its limitations … provided a suitable twin cam or triple cam lens is also sourced.  

dunk 

Edited February 26, 2019 by dkCambridgeshire

[Einst_Stein]

Now you should consider more on the durability and serviceability instead of the features.

if ignored the serviceability, no doubt R8/R9 are the choices. I find R3-R7 simply too small to hold. R8/R9 is the most convenient and balanced body among all SLR. They also have the most advanced and true Leica DNA. The problem is they are no longer serviceable .

Among R3-R7,  R3 and R4 are less mutual in design.  R4s and R5 are stabled. I would choose R4s since it has the bare minimum features. R5 has more electronics that are waiting to break. R7 is the most advanced electronic controlled version, and is controlled bu microcomputer instead of less integrated components. This is its strength but also make it less durable and serviceable compared to the early models. 

R6 and and R6.2 has the least electronics. People may think it would be more reliable. But I don’t think so. All my fully mechanical cameras suffered the shutter speed degradations. Any mechanical shutter requires recalibration once a few thousand cock or once a few years, whichever comes first. Not using a mechanical shutter for a long time is equally bad. Of course , an old mechanical shutter is like an old soldier, they never die, only fade away!

so, my take is, for the reliability and serviceability ,R4s > R5 > R7.   It is hard to rank R6. I could rank it above R4s or below R7. 

 

[otto.f]

Leica R6.2 has been my choice recently for R lenses with film. I had an R5 formerly but it suffered from electronic problems at an older age. The smaller R’s up to R7 have a little problem with balancing the newer and best tele’s like APO Elmarit 180 or the 280’s and an R8 or R9 would be better for that, but it is a lot of weight extra for something you should be able to get trained in: systematically hold the lens instead of the camera. 

Edited February 26, 2019 by otto.f

[earleygallery]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm a fan of the R3, but it's quite heavy and simple compared to the multi mode R4/5/7/8/9.

The cheapest R model generally speaking is the R4. It had a reputation for electrical problems but that was early on in it's life, a working one bought now should be fine, but as with any older electronic camera something else might go wrong.

Given that you can buy user R4 cameras for £100 it's just a case of replacing it if it fails. Most R cameras are now at a point where they're either not economically worth repairing or simply not repairable due to lack of necessary parts.

However, unless you already have some R lenses I would suggest that you consider other options. R lenses have increased in price lately and manual focus SLR's such as Nikon FM/FE/F3/3/5 etc., or Pentax MX/ME's, or a Canon F1 and their lenses/accessories offer amazing value for money these days, with more used examples to choose from.

[ramarren]

I have both a Leicaflex SL and an R6.2. They're very different cameras, both are excellent. Some triple-cam R lenses are not compatible with the Leicaflex SL (both the Elmarit-R 24mm and Super-Elmarit-R 15mm in my experience) because of mirror clearance changes that came in with the Leicaflex SL2; they're all compatible with the R6.2. The Leicaflex SL was a life-long dream for me, glad I got one finally. The R6.2 is a modern, smaller, and lighter camera, I bought it so that I could use it with the Super-Elmer-R 15mm really but it proves to be a delight with all my R lenses. 

[dkCambridgeshire]

1 hour ago, earleygallery said:

I'm a fan of the R3, ….    However, unless you already have some R lenses I would suggest that you consider other options. R lenses have increased in price lately and manual focus SLR's such as Nikon FM/FE/F3/3/5 etc., or Pentax MX/ME's, or a Canon F1 and their lenses/accessories offer amazing value for money these days, with more used examples to choose from.

🤔👎

… OP Banci is a Leica enthusiast.

dunk 

Edited February 27, 2019 by dkCambridgeshire

[earleygallery]

Good, so am I. I'm just saying I wouldn't buy into the R system now, when the better R lenses are silly prices due to collectors and/or SL users and R bodies are no longer serviceable - see the other R thread about someone's R9 which Leica have said can't be repaired.

Of course if our OP absolutely must have an R camera and lenses then it's a different matter.

[dkCambridgeshire]

James, There are excellent / better R lenses which are not listed at silly prices, e.g., all  versions of 50mm Summicron R and 90mm Elmarit R … also 135 Elmarit R … and all are usable with reasonably priced R extension tubes and the various Elpro supplementary close-up lenses.  

Banci, another book well worth studying to learn about the R system is Günter Osterloh's 'Excellence in Photography, Applied Leica Technique' which covers both Leica R hardware (including accessories) and Leica R technique and is very well illustrated. The above mentioned R lenses share the same designs as equivalent Leica M lenses … but are cheaper to buy than their M equivalents. The Leica Pocket Book 8th Edition documents the similar R and M design facts 

dunk  

Edited February 27, 2019 by dkCambridgeshire

[SteveYork]

11 hours ago, dkCambridgeshire said:

James, There are excellent / better R lenses which are not listed at silly prices, e.g., all  versions of 50mm Summicron R and 90mm Elmarit R … also 135 Elmarit R … and all are usable with reasonably priced R extension tubes and the various Elpro supplementary close-up lenses.  

 

I would also add that some of the expensive, exotic lenses are not very practical in real world, out in the field situations.  Thinking here of such heavyweights as the 35mm and 80mm Summiluxes.  The analogy in the M line is the Noctilux; a true speciality lens which isn't practical to use all the time, or wasn't when I shot rangefinders exclusively.

As mentioned, some of the more practical R lenses, with terrific optics -- the later 35mm Elmarit, any 50mm Summicron, any 90mm Elmarit, any 135mm Elmarit -- are not expensive, either in Leica terms or absolute terms.

Now the original poster is concerned with telephoto lenses, and the more modern APO telephoto lenses have always been expensive, even before the advent of the digital M or S or adapters for C/N.

Always a bit amused that Leica fans so easily recommend Canon or Nikon when it comes to SLRs.  It's true that Canon and Nikon made good stuff, capable of great pictures, but the optics are different.  I just spent the majority of two years shooting Nikon SLRs and rangefinders, hoping to like them just as well, based on their reputation of reliability, but the optics are different -- not as sharp at wider apertures and less contrast.  There's a reason old Leica R optics sell for more on the used market then old Nikkors.  My very limited experience with Canon FD mount is the same.  I'm not saying Leica is better, just different, and I and apparently many others, prefer that difference, at least for B&W film.

Now if the original poster doesn't see that difference, or doesn't appreciate it, then go for the less expensive option.

Same argument for rangefinders too.  Why shoot an M3, if you don't see any difference, when, for example, the less expensive Canon P is available?  The reason is the availability of M mount optics -- Leica, Zeiss, Voigtlander?  

Anyway, if expense is the sole criterion, then we should all be shooting Canon FTb's or Minolta SRT's; which are very good cameras.

 

 

Edited February 27, 2019 by SteveYork

[earleygallery]

I'm not sure you're getting my point. I've used the R system since about 1983 so I'm not bashing it at all. It depends on what the OP is after but there are more (and more affordable but still excellent) lens options for other systems as well as bodies which are still repairable. There's been a number of threads recently about R users finding their cameras to be unrepairable, including myself as it happens.

My (owned from new) R3 failed and couldn't be repaired. I've got a selection of R lenses, some of my favourite lenses in fact, so it made sense for me to replace the body and older R bodies are available for bargain prices. I can also use my R lenses on my Canon DSLR bodies.

Leica gear is always going to be more expensive than Nikon/Canon/Pentax/Olympus (generally speaking). Yes some R lenses are cheap by Leica standards but for someone looking to buy into a manual focus SLR system now, the R is going to be more limited if only because fewer R lenses were made/sold. Worth mentioning that some of the R tele zoom lenses were made by Sigma, Minolta and Kyocera.

The R system and cameras were fine products, it's just a shame that Leica deserted it.

[dkCambridgeshire]

James, Most Leica enthusiasts are aware of the reasons why the Leica R system ceased production and if it hadn't, Leica would not be the successful company with the market share it has today. There was no business sense in continuing to market a manual focus SLR system for which demand was so limited and which was consuming valuable production resources (in the broadest sense of the word) more suited to e.g. promotion of AF cameras and lenses and digital and film rangefinder products. Currently there are more than AMPLE s/h R lenses to satisfy current demands from Leica enthusiasts be they users or collectors. And anyone choosing to do a little homework (i.e., read the OP's past posts) will realise the OP is a Leica enthusiast … and likely not interested in, 'Nikon/Canon/Pentax/Olympus (generally speaking)'. Suggesting he should consider same is a little pointless … especially on a Leica Forum where a member has specifically requested advice about Leica R. Furthermore, most Leica R bodies are so reasonably priced and relatively common, that it matters little if they break and cease working … If they fail just buy another. 

dunk 

Edited February 27, 2019 by dkCambridgeshire
typo

[ramarren]

17 hours ago, dkCambridgeshire said:

James, There are excellent / better R lenses which are not listed at silly prices, e.g., all  versions of 50mm Summicron R and 90mm Elmarit R … also 135 Elmarit R … and all are usable with reasonably priced R extension tubes and the various Elpro supplementary close-up lenses.  

It's a different market now since the release of the Leica SL, but I bought 15 R prime lenses between 2011 and 2014... all three-cam models but for two ... for the average price of $350 or so. The two costliest were the Super-Elmar-R 15mm f/3.5, Elmarit-R 19mm f/2.8 v1, and Summicron-R 35mm f/2. They pulled the average up by $50. I've trimmed down the set to what I use now (15, 19, 28, 50 x2, 60m 90, 100m, 135, 180 mm) and made back about double what my total purchase cost was. 

The 1964 single-cam Summicron-R 50mm lens, cheapest of the whole bunch, is amongst the very best performers overall. And Leica USA has told me that they would be happy to upgrade it to the three-cam spec if I desire. I haven't because it works better on the Focusing Bellows-R as a single cam lens ... the other cams seem to fuss up the bellows pre-set aperture control feature. And because it doesn't matter one whit if I use it on the CL with a single cam...

I bought R lenses because one trio of them came with the Leicaflex SL body, FOC, that I'd always wanted, and because a little birdie had told me that Leica would have a camera that they'd be a natural on "in the near future." That camera was the Leica SL, and they did me great service on the SL for three years. I have since discovered that they work just as well on the Leica CL... so my rather crazy "after the obsoleting" purchase of these things has worked out perfectly, in my favor. 

Edited February 27, 2019 by ramarren

[earleygallery]

Dunk, I didn’t say Leica should’ve carried on making manual focus film SLR’s. I said they deserted the R system.

They were expected at one time, if you remember, to announce a ‘digital R’ (after the DMR) which some expected to follow the Nikon path of an AF system based on the existing mount or at least adaptable.

Leica said they couldn’t complete against Nikon/Canon. Funny as they’ve not competed directly since those two dropped their 35mn rangefinder systems! 

We also now find that Leica do not carry any spares for the R cameras, but yes prices are mostly at a level where it’s cheaper to buy a replacement than repair in any case.

 

[dkCambridgeshire]

^^^ No mention of 'film' SLRs  … only mentioned rangefinder film cameras. One day we'll maybe see some R prototypes offered at auction which might indicate the type of product Leica was considering just prior to abandoning the R system.  Leica is competing directly again with Canon and Nikon now they each have FF mirrorless systems … and the Leica L mount has been adopted by Panasonic and Sigma. Thus interesting marketing times ahead. 

Getting back on topic: 

Banci,  Please let us know which R camera you choose … none are perfect but there are plenty available … and it's worth buying from a reputable dealer who can offer a guarantee. Not all Leica reflex 135 format cameras are unrepairable and several UK camera repairers still service them … and have standard tariffs.  The books mentioned in this thread are worth studying to narrow down your eventual choice

dunk 

[Banci]

I can't decide between R7 and R8; I've found them, more or less, at the same price.

 

[dkCambridgeshire]

R8 has a brighter viewfinder and is compatible with ROM lenses … but can also be used with all non-ROM 'R' lenses … and has a more sophisticated flash system. R7 likely more reliable long term but R8 will likely fit your hand / palm better. Personally I'd go for the R8 … I've had an R8 for over 20 years and it's fine … but does not get a lot of use … it's my back-up camera for my R9.  Should you ever decide to acquire a Leica DMR module (digital back) to produce 'film-like' digital images, the DMR was initially designed for the R8. 

Other forum members might prefer the R7.

Another option for using Leica R telephoto lenses might be one of Red Dot Camera's clearance Leica T cameras:

https://www.reddotcameras.co.uk/374-new-clearance … all priced £250-£300 on 14 day approval. 

dunk 

Edited February 28, 2019 by dkCambridgeshire

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[otto.f]

2 hours ago, Banci said:

I can't decide between R7 and R8; I've found them, more or less, at the same price.

 

It’s mostly about the weight you want to carry and whether you want to shoot with big tele’s much. If it’s for general work from wide to 135mm, although the 3.4/180 is also still handy, I’d go for the R7