Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/05/21
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
This is unfortunately true. Everyone seemed to get turned off when the R
series came on the scene because of many teething problems. however with
the R4SP and R5 those problems went away, and all subsequent R models have
been very reliable and very usable cameras, which have been overlooked. My
R4SP has had only one failure in the 15 years I have used it with daily
use. The repair time is about one week, although Leica quotes 4 -5 weeks,
mine is scheduled to be on my doorstep this Friday, I sent it in last
Tuesday so turn around is very good if repairs are needed. I feel the
Leica R cameras have endured much unearned criticism due to some early on
problems. The R8 has an High Eyepoint viewfinder every bit the equal of
the Nikon finders. Function wise the R8 and R9 are very well packed with
goodies and need only auto focus to be current, imho. The R lenses are
excellent and have no need for excuses.
The Leicaflex SL and SL2 are tanks, my SL just had its only failure since I
bought it 17 years ago - the red plastic lens release button finally broke,
Leica sent me the replacement button and shaft at no charge and I fixed it
in 5 minutes.
Service support wise Leica has always come through the few times I have
used it. While I am not a pro I certainly have put my share of film
through my R's and 90% of the use has been in the woods and deserts in
dusty and wet conditions and the R's have been there every time plugging
away. I have been told that Leica users who are pro's won't go into the
field without a second camera in case of a failure - My answer to them is
what pro would not take at least one or two extra bodies into the field? I
know of none.
I'll take an Leica SLR any day to the Nikons and Canons. My only Nikon
SLR, an F-3HP will go back into the desk drawer when Gabby goes back to
Poland next month. I will probably ship it off to one of my daughters in
the near future.
Gene
Ernest Nitka
<enitka@twcny.rr.com> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Sent by: cc:
owner-leica-users@mejac.palo Subject: Re: [Leica] Non Leica Topic..New Canon 'L' series lens
-alto.ca.us
05/21/2003 08:42 AM
Please respond to
leica-users
Ted - no bashing but I think that there are folks on the list who adore M
cameras when they use a rangefinder but look elsewhere for their SLR
needs. Many on the list use Canon or Nikon for their SLR needs so I
suspect this is the nidus for this discussion. OT defnitely but
inappropriate OT - probably not.
Ernie
Adore M's
Nikon F100 for SLR use
At 06:03 AM 5/21/03 -0700, you wrote:
> >>>Non Leica Topic..New Canon 'L' series lens<<<
>
>Hey guys & gals,
>
>May I ask a very stupid question for a moment and if any of you feel like
>head bashing as an answer please feel free to do so. ;-) However, just
>remember you're beating on a senior citizen and that's a chargeable
offence
>in any country. ;-)
>
>My question is...
>
>"What does all this Canon lens testing have to do with using a Leica of
any
>model?" I suppose it's some kind of learning curve or something, so fire
>away. :-) Or maybe it's to illustrate why the Leica is the best there is
and
>why so many of you "Leica Users" use them?
>
>Naw I bet that's not the answer. Is it?
>
>ted
>
>Ted Grant Photography Limited
>www.islandnet.com/~tedgrant
>
>Samples from the Women in Medicine project:
>http://www.sandycarterphotography.com/WIMcollagePage.htm
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "CC Yau" <ccyau@iohk.com>
>To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
>Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2003 4:47 AM
>Subject: Re: [Leica] Non Leica Topic..New Canon 'L' series lens
>
>
> > I also came across a similar set of test photos from another tester.
> >
> > http://www.pbase.com/ashleycheng/1740_comparison
>
>
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html