Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/09/06
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Nathan - sorry for butting in with my opinion but as a point of discussion I hope you won't mind. Sorry BD also if this is butting in. I have the R2 and have had some minor complaints about the workmanship of the R2 - I have an R2 that I put thru about 10 rolls so far. The first one had to go back because of a jammed shutter. I know that any camera including the Leica can be DOA and have to be sent back. I was willing to chock that up as nothing serious. But I have to say that the rewind is still very difficult, not smooth and the winding is likewise. I just recently used my Nikon FM3a side by side and the wind on and rewind are soooooo smooth. In the 10 rolls I've had 3 exposures that were partially overlapped onto the next exposure. This is such a rare occurrence with my other manual wind cameras that it is notable. I do agree that the R2 is more substantial than the R. Once again I'm sorry for adding my $.02. Nathan any problems so far with your R2 ernie On Friday, September 6, 2002, at 07:50 PM, Nathan Wajsman wrote: > Hi B.D., > > This is based on having just shot 3 rolls in the R2, but I am a fan. > You are > right, I am a fairly serious Leica devotee, and my primary cameras > remain the > M6 and M7. But I must say that if I were to make an objective > assessment of > R2 vs.M6/M7 and consider the price difference, then the R2 would win. > It is > an extremely well-made camera that feels nice and solid in your hands, > something which could not necessarily be said about previous Bessas. > It has a > 1/2000 shutter speed as well as the 1/125 flash synch speed. The > viewfinder > is every bit as good as a Leica one, and the finish of the black R2 I > bought > is excellent. Having said all this, there are two areas where it falls > short > of what I am used to with the Leicas: > > - shutter release is not as smooth as a Leica. It is not rough, but it > is > clearly no Leica. It is also significantly louder. > > - the rangefinder patch is not quite as contrasty as on an M6 or M7. > > But overall, this is an excellent rangefinder camera. The first roll I > shot > was a test roll of slide film, and to test the rangefinder I mounted > the R2 > on a sturdy tripod and took pictures of an inanimate object--one of our > garden gnomes--at a distance of 1 meter with the 90mm Apo Summicron. > In other > words, a rather stern test of the rangefinder's capabilities, which > the R2 > passed with flying colors. Even at f2 the focus is exactly where I > wanted it > to be. So the problems with Leica lenses on the Konica Hexar that we > have > previously discussed here do not seem to apply to the R2. > > If someone is on a budget (and who isn't?) then I heartily recommend > skimping > on the body by getting an R2 and getting a good Leica lens, rather > than the > other way round. It is, after all, the lens that makes the image. > > Nathan > > "B. D. Colen" wrote: > >> Nathan - Lovely work as usual, but more to the point... >> Knowing that you are a serious Leica devote, I'd be interested in >> reading >> your assessment of the R2. >> >> Thanks >> >> B. D. > > -- > Nathan Wajsman > Herrliberg (ZH), Switzerland > > e-mail: wajsman@webshuttle.ch > mobile: +41 78 732 1430 > > Photo-A-Week: http://www.wajsman.com/indexpaw2002.htm > General photo site: http://www.wajsman.com/index.htm > > > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html > > http://www.ernienitka.com - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html