Re: [Leica] Leica R: Is It Worth It?

[Henry Ambrose <digphoto@nashville.net>]

>Nikon for several reasons:
>
>- The R6.2 system was quickly costing more than the M.
>- The images seemed to have a softer / gentler look than ones I was used to
>seeing from the M.
>- The electronic self timer failed me (very chilly outdoor shoot)
>- Despite the great build quality, there was still too much plastic.  Does
>this really matter that much? Probably not.
snip
>Has anyone else noticed the image quality to which referred, or is it just
>me?  It's not that it's bad -- it's just different, and I definately see
>the difference when I compare R transparancies to M ones, even across
>different lenses.
>
>Despite all that, I do love and recommend the R6.2 (and if I ever had a
>chance to try the 35-70 Vario, I might very well still have an R6.2!), but
>for my purposes (and budget) the FM2N wins especially when coupled with a
>couple great Nikkors.  Wide open performance might not be there (haven't
>tested thoroughly) but that's M territory for me.
>
snip
>--Andrew

Andrew,

Here are my thoughts -  I suspect very flammable.

I think some of the difference in M and R pictures may be in the absence 
(in  the M) of mechanical clatter we get from SLR cameras in general. 

I think it is more apparent at slow shutter speeds but I believe its 
still there even at 125 and 250. I think that's part of why the Ms are so 
sharp. nothing but a little cloth shutter. No mirror, no aperture stop 
down monkey-motion.

I can tell you that the Nikon lenses are not near what I expect from M 
lenses at open apertures. The new M lenses are a very noticeable step 
above ANYTHING I've seen from Nikon. Some of the Nikkors are good stopped 
down. I have yet to find one that comes close to Leica performance 
otherwise.

I've used the Leica R Summicron 35 and 50 and they are noticeably better 
than Nikkor glass. For what its worth, the 60 2.8 macro is the best Nikon 
I found. It starts to get good at f4 and is very good at 5.6 & 8. If you 
are working outdoors and don't need the speed its hard to beat. The 35 f2 
Nikkor is a definite step behind the Summicron R - it never comes close 
at any aperture. Its just OK.

I have a fair Nikon set that I keep for flash, AF, fast action and long 
lens use. I think often of selling it and getting Leica R to replace it. 
For my use I can't really justify the switch, to say nothing of the 
mind-boggling cost. But that may change. 

Henry Ambrose

btw, your old 75 has a good home here and is doing well