Which is a better system, the Canon AE-1 with FD lenses or the Leica R3?

[menz10]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

So I've had my AE-1 since I was about 13 and used it all through college, etc. It's got a 50mm f1.8, a 200mm f4, a 500mm f8, and a cheap Tokina zoom. However, a friend recently offered me a Leica R3 with a 50mm Summicron (made in Canada) and a 75-200 f4.5 (which is just a Minolta zoom made in Japan). Is it worth selling the Canon FD system and switching to the Leica R system or are both system just old and going to give me basically the same results? I've been searching for some comparisons between FD lenses and the R lenses, but there's no real comparison between the systems online.

[Advertisement]

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

[r+m]

Es ist schwierig einen Vergleich zwischen den beiden Systemen mit den genannten Objektiven zu wagen. Aber warum willst Du überhaupt wechseln, bist Du mit dem Canon-System nicht mehr zufrieden?

[jankap]

And what is better?

The R-system one cannot recommend, it is dying. I have R-lenses, but - in case - they cannot be repaired anymore. You could have a look at Sigma perhaps.

[Andreas_Kreuz]

vor 2 Stunden schrieb menz10:

... offered me a Leica R3 with a 50mm Summicron (made in Canada) and a 75-200 f4.5 (which is just a Minolta zoom made in Japan). Is it worth selling the Canon FD system and switching to the Leica R system ...

A.m.o. it depends on th price for the Leica R3 with the 50mm Summicron  and the 75-200 f4.5 Elmar, and the money you can get selling the Canon FD system.

[Canonier]

Am 27.4.2021 um 11:28 schrieb jankap:

And what is better?

The R-system one cannot recommend, it is dying. I have R-lenses, but - in case - they cannot be repaired anymore. You could have a look at Sigma perhaps.

Canon FD is just as dead.

Having both systems this qualifies me perhaps best for an answer.

I started with Canon FD in 1986 and have been using it ever since. Had and have numerous bodies and lenses. In 2017 I bought my firstL leica because they became affordable. Since then I have actually bought 2 more bodies and 6 lenses altogether.

While I like the cameras a lot because of their somehow old-fashioned outfit, it's the lenses that make the difference to Canon here. While there are brilliant FD lenses of course, nothing comes near the Summicron 50/f2 and also the 90mm/f2.8 is outstanding. Nothing like that in Canon land. Leica lenses are sharper and offer better contrast than most Canon lenses, but it of course it depends on your products. If you do slides or lage prints you will notice the difference. On 5"x7" it all looks the same.

The R3 is not too sexy, being more or less a Leica version of the Minolta XE-1 (just looking at both cameras tells you what I mean), I'd go for an R5, 6 or 7. They have that classic Leica feeling and are quite reliable.

[earleygallery]

I really like the R3, I had one since the 80's and it's one of the smoothest quietest SLR shutters out there (and very different from the Minolta the body was based around).

BUT a lot of R3's suffer electrical faults now, which are not always apparent until you use them. The most common seems to be faulty auto metering and a shutter which fails to open at 1/500th and 1/1000th. If you are considering buying one, check it thoroughly first!

In your position I would keep the AE-1 and lenses and buy an original type Canon F1 body - I had one new but stupidly sold it because I decided I wanted auto metering. Worst mistake.

[r+m]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Wer mit Leica-R oder Canon AE-1 fotografieren will, muss auf jeden Fall damit rechnen, dass vielleicht bald etwas kaputt geht. Leica-R-Objektive sind meistens gut und man kann sie auch mit Adaptern an Digitalkameras verwenden.