Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/03/28

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

Subject: [Leica] Considering a Backup Reflex...R4?
From: lwwesson at gmail.com (leo wesson)
Date: Wed Mar 28 07:48:52 2007
References: <032820071401.7175.460A75540009FCB300001C07220075033004040A990A02D201D202080106@comcast.net> <460A7EFE.8080801@numericable.fr> <20070328145848.GB26675@panix.com>

Rei,

That's quite a booster seat for that sl2!

leo

On 3/28/07, Rei Shinozuka <shino@panix.com> wrote:
>
> i got an R4 as an SL2 backup.  (i captured the
> pair for posterity for wikipedia)
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:R4-sl2-600.jpg
>
> i like the R4 quite a lot.
> i think the price reflects not so much a dearth of
> functionality of even usability but the steep risk premium
> of being particularly hard/expensive to repair if they go bad.
>
> they say in the bond business: "there are no bad bonds, just
> bad prices," and $200 is a good price.
>
> -rei
>
> On Mar28 16:43, Philippe Amard wrote:
> > John,
> >
> > the R4 has produced wonderful pictures ans still wil, depending of
> > course on many other factors - if price is an issue then go for an R4,
> > you'll enjoy a convenient and efficient program mode but no TTL flash.
> >
> > Phil...x
> >
> > J. Newell wrote:
> >
> > >I've been thinking about buying a second reflex body as a backup for my
> > >(knock on wood) trusty R6.  I've found an R4 that looks like a good
> > >candidate at $200.  It has some cosmetic issues but overall is not bad.
> > >The serial number is over the 1,6xx,xxx level that seems to be the
> cut-off
> > >for early electronic problems.  The only real functional gripe I've got
> is
> > >that not having the shutter speeds back-illuminated seems like a
> handicap,
> > >especially in lower light or against dark backgrounds.  Then again,
> this
> > >would just be a backup body, and an RE or R5 is going to be a lot more
> > >expensive, I think.
> > >The question is: is $200 such a good price, considering the intended
> > >purpose, that I should live with the R4's ergonomic limitations
> (compared
> > >to an RE, R5 or even an R4s-P, all of which seem to be a good bit more
> > >expensive)?  There is no right answer, but if anyone has opinions I'm
> > >interested in hearing thoughts.
> > >Thanks - John Newell
> > >
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >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
>
> --
> Rei Shinozuka shino@panix.com
> Ridgewood, New Jersey
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>

In reply to: Message from john.o.newell at comcast.net (J. Newell) ([Leica] Considering a Backup Reflex...R4?)
Message from phamard at numericable.fr (Philippe Amard) ([Leica] Considering a Backup Reflex...R4?)
Message from shino at panix.com (Rei Shinozuka) ([Leica] Considering a Backup Reflex...R4?)