Re: [Leica] R8 Question now R6

[Wilber Jeffcoat <jeffcoatphoto@sumter.net>]

From what I've been told your better off going to the R-7. Improved metering,
high strobe sync, faster top end shutter speed. I think this would be a good
move, Leica R glass is a real step up from the Nikon. My 25-30 yr. old 90/ F2
walked-no - stomped a "N" 85/ 1.8   in to the ground (did my own real world
test). You will love the 19 and if you can find a 21 I would jump on it (the f4
version not the 3.4- splitting hairs but it's better).
There are three lens in the 180 mm, they are the 180 mm/ 3.4 apo, the /2.8 apo
(better than the 3.4 but it, the 3.4 is no slouch) and the f2 ( this is a very
heavy lens, but I understand it is the cream of the crop). I made the switch
from AF and at times knowing how to use the AF it is great, but for the most
part the Eye Balls work just fine.
Cheers Wilber

"Bergman, Mark A." wrote:

> I'm in Bob's shoes.  I shoot with Nikon and the M series.  I have used both
> Nikon and rangefinders for decades.  The SLR is for all those obvious
> pictures you can't do or do easily with an M body.  However last year I
> upgraded from the venerable F3 to the F100.  After trying for a year I can
> say without a doubt that (for me) AF sucks.  Also the  Nikon glass is good
> but not the same as my leica. My reason for staying with Nikon has been cost
> of the R Vs Nikon.  Now I am starting to think about dumping the Nikon
> system and going with the R6.  I like the F3, don't care that much for the
> R8.  Lenses I am looking at would be 16mm fisheye, 19 (or other superwide)85
> F1.4 and something around 200mm.  Open for comments, especially on the R6.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: BOB KRAMER [mailto:BobKramer@COOPERCARRY.com]
>
> Lordy, Steve, but you do like to reopen cans of worms!  :-)
>
> I have never owned a Leica SLR, but do have an F3.  I like the F3, except
> for the metering.  Like you say, it is sturdy as can be and has never broken
> down on me.  But if the R lenses are anything like the M lenses, it doesn't
> surprise me that folks are willing to put up with the R8's flaws.  I'm no
> lens hugger (I never have been one to pay to much attention to all those
> lens tests, particularly from photo magazines), but there really is a world
> of difference between Leica M and Nikon AIS lenses in the real world of
> shooting, particularly wide open and into the sun.
>
> Of course, if I ever get a Leica SLR, I will probably hedge my bets, and get
> a SL or SL2...
>
> Bob Kramer (loves the build quality of those "classic" Leicas)
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Steve LeHuray [mailto:icommag@toad.net]
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2000 9:44 AM
> >
> > Sorry, but, I can not resist after listening to all this
> > foo-foo-ra over the
> > R8 ever since I have been on this list. I have two Nikon F's
> > bought used 30
> > years ago, heavy pro useage on dirty, dusty motorsports
> > tracks around N
> > America. Never even been serviced, never broke. F2, ditto.
> > F3, FM2n, fifteen
> > years and ditto, ditto. Still have all five, still trucking
> > right along. For
> > the marginal gain (if any) in Leica optics why are ya'll doing this to
> > yourselves????? Can somebody start a separate R list please.
> >
> > Steve (Love my Leica M's)
> > Annapolis