Will R10 too expensive for me?

[earleygallery]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

But seriously, lots of people think something like a Canon 5D is the benchmark that Leica need to be aiming for in overall terms, so imagine if they stuck a red dot on a 5D (the fact is its a decent camera) would it satisfy those people?

[Advertisement]

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

[doctorlol]

C5D now comes with a red dot, and costs more than 'other brand'. How would you know that it not the real McCoy? Lens and body are branded Leica. What would give the game away? Sleuths needed.

 

Laurence

[earleygallery]

Remember the Simpsons episode where Homer gets the car company to build his idea of the perfect car..........

[telyt]

But seriously, lots of people think something like a Canon 5D is the benchmark that Leica need to be aiming for in overall terms, so imagine if they stuck a red dot on a 5D (the fact is its a decent camera) would it satisfy those people?

 

Those who have owed and used both the 5D and the DMR do not consider the 5D an image quality benchmark. It would be like the R3 all over again, sacrificing quality for convenience.

[mgcd]

The 5D as a benchmark for quality... you must be joking! I think the people you mention were referring to size.

 

Cheers,

[earleygallery]

I meant benchmark for features, full frame, auto focus, reasonable size etc., not just image quality.

 

I've owned an R3 from new, it's been totally reliable and in my opinion is of as good quality as one could wish for.

[mgcd]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I meant benchmark for features, full frame, auto focus, reasonable size etc., not just image quality.

 

I've owned an R3 from new, it's been totally reliable and in my opinion is of as good quality as one could wish for.

 

Some Canonites whom have never seen an R camera before perhaps... I have no issues with AF as long as it does not affect the way we use manual focus on Rs and that the quality of the viewfinder (the R8 for me is the best around in terms of ergonomics) is not adversely affected. In addition, analog controls as they are currently featured on the R8/9 and our lenses today must remain.

 

BTW, I still love my R3MOT although I seldom make use of it.

 

Cheers,

[telyt]

The R3 marked the decline, no, make that disappearance of Leica reflex among wildlife photographers. The unreliable early samples coupled with the merely average viewfinder prompted many to abandon Leica after many years of using the SL and SL2 with the f/6.8 Telyts. "Never again!!" was what I was told over and over, particularly by those who were bitten again by the early R4 troubles.

[ho_co]

Doug--

You're absolutely right that the R3 finder was dim compared to the SL and SL2. But it was a disappointment only for people who were used to the Leicaflexes.

 

Remember, the R3 was also noticeably less expensive than the previous cameras, and as you imply, its finder was of merely average quality.

 

I won't argue if you say it was troublesome, but that's not my recollection I would say it was far less troublesome than a lot of cameras at their introduction, including obviously the M8.

 

With the R4, Leica again had a brilliant finder, but the early samples showed a much higher problem rate than the R3 as I recall.

 

If I recall correctly, LFI in their articles on used reflex equipment singled out the R3 as the best buy on the market, both extremely reliable and much under-appreciated.

 

--HC

[telyt]

With the R4, Leica again had a brilliant finder

 

The R4's viewfinder is not what I'd describe as brilliant. Comparing it side-by-side with the SL (I have both cameras) the R4's viewfinder is noticably dimmer than the SL's. I agree that now the R3 is a good value, the ones with problems have been sorted out and have been either repaired or junked.

[jaapv]

Somehow I have a feeling Leica's heart was never in the R series after the demise of the last real Leica SLR, the SL2mot (and a beautiful machine it was) The R3 was of course a straight Minolta clone and the R4-R7 series were also Leica-ized Minolta's. Not that that did not make them great camera's, on the contary, I have always used them with great pleasure.

Even the R8/R9, despite Porsche design, still had a lot of Minolta DNA in them.

The same goes for a considerable number of the the lenses. All zooms up to the current series were external designs (Agenieux,Minolta, Sigma) the same goes for a number of primes ( the infamous 24, PC 35, etc.) or shared with the M (135 2.8, 400-560-800 telyts, f.i.).

Only lately Leica seems to be recovering its motivation in this department with the current zooms, apo-telyt lenses etc. It may well be that Mr. Lee's interest will be the final contributing factor to get them up to speed in the SLR world.

[mgcd]

Even the R8/R9, despite Porsche design, still had a lot of Minolta DNA in them.

 

That's not my recollection, how do you mean?

 

Cheers,

[Guest tummydoc]

Those who have owed and used both the 5D and the DMR do not consider the 5D an image quality benchmark. It would be like the R3 all over again, sacrificing quality for convenience.

 

[response]I meant benchmark for features, full frame, auto focus, reasonable size etc., not just image quality.

 

Some Canonites whom have never seen an R camera before perhaps... I have no issues with AF as long as it does not affect the way we use manual focus on Rs and that the quality of the viewfinder (the R8 for me is the best around in terms of ergonomics) is not adversely affected. In addition, analog controls as they are currently featured on the R8/9 and our lenses today must remain.

 

These comments illlustrate precisely wherefore comes my insistence that incorporating mainstream features would alienate whatever hand-ful of R users still exists, and by virtue of any combination of price, inevitable QC issues and/or design quirks would not win over many Canon/Nikon customers. Canon customers in particular also would not be using the 5D as a benchmark. That honour would surely now fall to the 21mp 1DS-MkIII.

 

 

Somehow I have a feeling Leica's heart was never in the R series after the demise of the last real Leica SLR

 

I suspect it wasn't a lack of heart but rather a lack of brains on the part of the company's leadership at the time. The R8 was a brilliant come-back, unfortunately it was 10 years too late. Had it been released at the time of the Nikon F4 in 1986 I'm positive it would've put Leica R 'back on the map with a vengeance' as they say. But by 1996, AF had advanced significantly (Nikon F5, followed by EOS 3 and 1V) overcoming the major objections of many pros and quickly became mainstream, making the R8 look like a dinosaur.

 

Even the R8/R9, despite Porsche design, still had a lot of Minolta DNA in them.

 

Unless Minolta co-incidentally bought some of the same generic sub-assemblies as Leica bought for the R8, there was no carry-over of ex-Minolta parts in-to the R8.

 

It may well be that Mr. Lee's interest will be the final contributing factor to get them up to speed in the SLR world.

 

To re-iterate, it's clear that many of the loyal R users do not want their cameras to be fitted with mainstream technology such as AF and VR. Canon/Nikon users watching from the sidelines as the M8 has unfolded do not share the eternal optimism of us M8 owners. Most of them think the M8 a travesty and Leica clueless and incompetent. Leica must be very, very cognizant as they approach the R10 design, of 'which side their bread is buttered on'.

[barneybm]

Regarding the comparisons to the R3. I had three R3s, all of which worked perfectly for at least 25 years before they needed any service at all.

I have two DMRs. Both failed and continue to fail intermittently.

I had three M8s. All were defective and had to be returned.

My only point is that the R3 was a very fine product which actually lived up to the Leica tradition of reliability.

[Guest tummydoc]

Perhaps "expectation" would be more accurate than "tradition" yet less cynical than "myth"

 

It is curious that you had multiple failures with the DMR though. They actually have been doing rather well with respect to that. Remarkably so in comparison to the M8.

 

Do you currently own an M8? If you persevered after 3 rejects, then at least I wouldn't feel like an utter fool for having done so past my second...misery loves company as they say Seriously I believe if you were to grab hold of a late # (>3,2xx,xxx) M8 you might have a fighting chance at a functioning example.

[hamey]

The Nikon F5 and the Canon 1V makes the R8 like a Dinosaur, THATS A GOOD LAUGH.

Well sir, in this Digital world, both of these cameras are now duds, useless as titts on a bull.

The R8/9 are the only 35mm cameras that can take on board A DIGITAL BACK.

Something the Japanese havn't done with their glorious F5 and 1V.

Both of these cameras are fetching a poor price on the second hand market compared to the R8.

As a proud owner of both the R8/9 they are simply TIMELESS.

It's a pity about the DMR, but Nevertheless the concept has been proved, it's worked

The DMR is an accessory designed and built to convert the R8,

(A CAMERA WHICH WAS RECEIVED POORLY) to the Digital Medium.

It's a beautifully unique and advanced concept, certainly no Dinosaur.

 

It's becoming a big joke now, as so many on this forum think that Digital is now or nothing.

I take pity on Leica, as being pressured by so many to develop a Digital SLR.

Let them develop it their own time, and if you cant wait, go out and buy something else.

Or go out with the real Leica camera and buy some film and shoot the real stuff.

And when you're at the camera store buying film, check out the used prices of the Digital cameras.

 

THE WORLD IS BECOMING TO MUCH OF A WANK!

 

Cheers.

[pierovitch]

Leica R has never been a reliable choice.

 

My R4 experience after using very reliable Pentax LX bodies was a disappointment but I persisted through to The R7 before going Nikon D1 digital with its low battery personality changes and purple haze. I went back to Pentax digital with no further problems, until I dropped one on a concrete floor which required one solder joint repair with no further problems from the experience. A good finder, manual lenses, and 100% reliability so far. This is what an R10 should deliver.

[mgcd]

Leica R has never been a reliable choice.

 

 

Thankfully, I've had the exact opposite experience of complete reliability with my Leica Rs.

 

Cheers,

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[jaapv]

 

 

 

Unless Minolta co-incidentally bought some of the same generic sub-assemblies as Leica bought for the R8, there was no carry-over of ex-Minolta parts in-to the R8.

 

True, but not what I meant. Use a R7 and a R8 side by side and one feels immediately the care the designers took to blend this camera into the philosophy of the series, despite the new shape.

[mgcd]

True, but not what I meant. Use a R7 and a R8 side by side and one feels immediately the care the designers took to blend this camera into the philosophy of the series, despite the new shape.

 

Then that would be Leica DNA...