Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/02/29
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Sorry Ken and Jim, that should read "Jim wrote". Asleep at the wheel again. John Collier > From: John Collier <jbcollier@home.com> > > My Leica distributor charges almost double to CLA the R4 "Mk-5" (first 1000 > cameras) and only provides a 3 month warranty while the R4 "Mk-9", R4s, R4s-2, > R4s-P and the rest of the R cameras receive the more usual 12 month warranty. > I have heard only anecdotal evidence against the R3 which it compensates for > by being much cheaper to buy. If I was getting into the R line I would be > tempted to start with a carefully checked out R3 which I would repair by > replacement if something went wrong. > > John Collier > >> From: christian becker <8fps@gmx.de> >>> Ken wrote: >>> R3 and R4 less reliable than those mentioned above.< >> >> AHEM! What sort of knowledge is this comment based on? >> Personal experience? Poll? Lots of friends who whined 'bout their broken >> R3s and R4s? Heard from someone who knows a guy who's friend had a broken R3 >> sometime ago? Statistics? Mean value? Standard deviation? >> >> There is definitely no reliable source of information to support this >> conclusion. >>