Re: R6 and R7

[pgs@thillana.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick Sobalvarro)]

   Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1996 14:25:58 CST
   From: Sweendog <sweenma@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU>

   I currently use an old M3 and an F4E and an FM2n. Is the switch to
   Leica R worth the hassle and are the lenses the same as M glass? Folks
   I've talked to said they didn't like the R glass for some reason,
   which was a while ago.

According to the books I have, a few of the lens formulations are the
same (like the 135mm/2.8 Elmarit-R), but many of them are different.
Marc Small has made the point that starting a few years ago, a lens
designer at Leica had decided to remove from new R lens formulas the
residual spherical aberration that gives M lenses their characteristic
look (I think Marc calls it the "Leica glow"), so if you shell out a
jillion skillion dollars for that hot new APO lens that tests so well,
you might find that it doesn't have the look you liked so much from
your M lenses.  But there are plenty of older lenses around, and I
think you will find that almost all of them are really very good.

You can also use Visoflex lenses on your R Leica, although I
personally never have.

   I have one other question, how are the older R bodies, such as the
   R4s and R5? Does anybody still use these older bodies or have they all
   switched to the R7?

I have an R4s that I bought from Bill Grimwood last summer (I think
he's a subscriber to this list now).  I'm quite happy with it as a
second body, and always put it in my backpack along with my R6.2 when
I'm going out to do some shooting.  However, the design of the R4S is
not everything one might like -- you can't see in the finder what
shutter speed you've set and there's no mirror prefire.  Now that the
R7 is out used R5's are more of a bargain, so that'd perhaps be a more
flexible choice (although it still doesn't have mirror prefire).

-Patrick