Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/05/07

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Ten years behind? I think not.
From: n.wajsman at chello.nl (Nathan Wajsman)
Date: Fri May 7 23:19:53 2004
References: <OFFF429890.63898F5B-ON86256E8D.0072FC85-86256E8D.00732C5B@crnotes2.rockwellcollins.com>

The price Douglas mentioned does sound very expensive. I assume his
camera was serviced by Leica in Solms. I had a newly acquired CL
overhauled by Odin, the Leica distributor in the Netherlands, for around
200 Euro. Now, it may be that R servicing is more expensive but I cannot
imagine it costing 600 Euro here unless major components need to be
replaced.

Nathan

grduprey@rockwellcollins.com wrote:
> 
> Service in Europe must be allot more expensive.  I just had my R4SP
> serviced due to its only failure in 13 years, an dit only cost me $320 for
> a complete repair and servicing.  This was done at Leica NJ, and only 1.5
> weeks total turn around.
> 
> Gene
> 
> |---------+-------------------------------------------------------->
> |         |           "Douglas M. Sharp"                           |
> |         |           <DouglasMSharp@netscape.net>                 |
> |         |           Sent by:                                     |
> |         |           lug-bounces+grduprey=rockwellcollins.com@leic|
> |         |           a-users.org                                  |
> |         |                                                        |
> |         |                                                        |
> |         |           05/07/2004 10:47 AM                          |
> |         |           Please respond to Leica Users Group          |
> |         |                                                        |
> |---------+-------------------------------------------------------->
>   >-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>   |                                                                                         |
>   |       To:       Leica Users Group <lug@leica-users.org>                                 |
>   |       cc:                                                                               |
>   |       Subject:  Re: [Leica] Ten years behind?  I think not.                             |
>   >-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
> 
> Greg,
>  I agree with you on the feel of the R8/9, I found that my fingers just
> fall into place to turn twist or press whatever they should,
> BUT  , after using  Leicas from IIIG through M2, M6 , all the SLs and
> all the Rs except the R4, for ME  it is the ugliest brute of a camera
> I've ever laid eyes on.
>  The SLs looked and felt as like really  serious bits of engineering,
> The R3 was ok and the rest of the Rs were light, compact, quite
> ergonomically built and a dream to use whilst retaining  the combination
> of precise workmanship, stability and all the other factors contributing
> to what the Germans call "Wertigkeit"
> 
> If you look at the basic shape of the R8 it seems to be a retro-design
> harking back to the body shape of the Exaktas, and when you put the
> motor-drive
> on it's shaped like an army water canteen. (I think the people from
> Leicas binocular design group must have been  in on the design process
> too.)
> A camera doesn't  NEED to be the size of the R8,  with the advances in
> micromotors and micro-electronics available at the time Leica could have
> reduced its size and weight by a third without any loss of  stability or
> function. Contax started going in the right direction with the 137MD -
> compact, motorised and  running
> on AA batteries, but unfortunately didn't follow up on this design trend.
> I was on a tour of the factory in Solms a couple of years ago, just
> after the R8 came out. From what the users had to say about its bugs
> Leica should
>  have waited a bit longer before releasing it :  flash
> problems,electronics, scratched films, a weak tripod bush and various
> other teething troubles. To me it was a confession on the part of the
> constructors that the R9 was released,considering a typical Leica
> timeframe, such a relatively short time after the R8.
> 
> Don't  get me wrong, I love my Leicas and wouldn't do without them, I
> only wish they could have packed the new stuff into an R7 body.
> 
> My real complaint about Leica is that for pretty basic repairs,CLA or
> whatever you pay nearly the price of a mid-range SLR of any other marque
> you'd
> like to name. (example : general service and adjustments plus a little
> bit of electronics on an R4mot electronic would have cost me over 600
> euros,
> 100 euros more than the price I had intended to pay for it s/h)
> 
> Douglas
> 
> BTW to those of us out there who took the plunge and bought the R8 or 9
> -- what real advantages did you get from it ? how often do you use its
> extra functions ? do you feel that it's helping you to record better
> images ?
> 
> GREG LORENZO schrieb:
> 
> >I don't know any R8 users who don't like the feel, layout and features of
> the R8. I believe some people on the list who purchased an early R8 had
> some electronic gremlins which Leica seems to have dealt effectively with.
> (I've never had a single problem with mine.)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information

-- 
Nathan Wajsman
Almere, The Netherlands

e-mail: n.wajsman@chello.nl
Mobile: +31 630 868 671

http://www.nathanfoto.com/index.html

Replies: Reply from DouglasMSharp at netscape.net (Douglas M. Sharp) ([Leica] Expensive Leica service)
Reply from mail at gpsy.com (Karen Nakamura) ([Leica] Ten years behind? I think not.)
In reply to: Message from grduprey at rockwellcollins.com (grduprey@rockwellcollins.com) ([Leica] Ten years behind? I think not.)