Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/07/20
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 06:10 AM 20/07/96 -0700, you wrote: > There is someone locally, selling a 50 2.0, a 90 2.8, and a 35 2.8, all of >which are R lenses. How can I tell if they are three or two lug lenses, >and what are the differences. I will try and find out exactly which lenses >they are so I can seek more specific advice. Also, there was one R model >made, I think it was the R3. It was made in Portugal or some such place, >and is usually sold for a pittance ($2-300). Is it a "junk" model? And >what would be a good chassis for these lenses without spending too much? >The owner has an SL. I am going to offer her $600 for all four items, if I >decide to go for it. > > Claude. > Hi Claude! I owned an R3 for a few years. Bigger and bulkier than later models, it took excellent photos, but was a bit cantakerous. If you took a photo (arpeture priority mode) with the apeture set such that the shutter spead was above 1/1000th;instead of indicating an over-range, the shutter would simply stay open for 6 to 10 seconds while you stood there holding it! Other than that, it worked great! I understand from others, however, that the R3 had many flaws which turned up in various examples. The R3-MOT was apparently much better. I wouldn't blame the Portugese for the problems, My R5 is made in Portugal, and until now (another post to follow on that score), I've been *very* happy with it. If the lenses are for use on the R3, they should all be 3-cam lenses. As for your $600 price... Do you have a license to steal? :> If they're in good shape - it's a good deal if you can get it! ----------- David Young: youngs@IslandNet.com