Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/06/23

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

Subject: [Leica] Re: R 6.2
From: Andrew Nemeth <>
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 99 10:25:58 +1000

"TSL" <> wrote:

>It comes in waves, but the R6.2 is a consideration of my Leica yearnings.
>I've very little experience using this camera, although more with the R6.
>Is the .2 a big .2?

I have been a R6.2 user for a year now.  Use the camera professionally
to earn a living and drive a lot of film through it.  Photos & 
about it on my 'equipment' page at:  <>

".2" supposedly indicates that the camera is just a R6 with a bumped upper
shutter speed of 1/2000 instead of 1/1000.  Rumour also has it that there
were a few minor interior improvements in the .2 change as well, although
have come across more people who deny this than agree.

Big bug-bears for me: the 1/250th detension buzz, mirror pre-release 
than true MLU.

Positives: no f***ing useless auto-exposure modes or programmable
features; access to R-lens line; battery independant shutter; as far 
as SLR shutters go, quiet (not 'KLACK' but 'clomp'); compact & easy 
to hold, especially if you add a GMP R grip; solid metal construction; 
detatchable winder or motor; retains resale value much better than
earlier Rs.

"Moore,Andrew" <> added:

>How does the R6.2 compare to the FM2N?

Way more solid and much better finished.  The R6.2 has a built-in
spotmeter (not that I care as I always incident hand meter).  Alas 
x/sync at 1/100th is much slower (again no probs for me as I haven't
used a flash in years).

>Some of my concerns: Expense.

Huge problem, especially here in Australia where 2nd hand 'ok' 
condition R6.2's all hover around the $AUS 2800 mark.  Frankly, 
a rip-off when you consider that some of these cameras are over
5 years old.

Things are better in the US, where you can pick up a EX/MINT R6.2's
for @ $US 1100-1400.

But the camera cost is only a minor problem compared to the cost
of Leica R lenses.  You can buy entire Nikon camera *systems* for 
the price of a single R lens.  (BTW, 'apo' doesn't mean apochromatic, 
but rather it is the sound you make when you hear the price.)

You can save by buying 2nd hand, but you will still end up paying
more than you would for equivalent *new* N or C glass.

But... what price quality?  These things are built to last and will
still be going strong in 20 years time.  And image quality is beyond
question.  In my case, a 16mm lens you can point into spotlights or
the sun with minimal flaring, or a 100mm macro lens which can 
out-resolve film.

>With the FM2N, a second body and lenses are relatively
>cheap.  Second body would be mainly for carrying a second type of
>film, and reducing the amount of lens-swapping when I'm pressed for

In my case, I am having a Nikon F2 modified to accept R lenses.
This will be my 'second body' and have true MLU, is way cheaper
than a 'spare' R6.2 and just as practical/manual/solid.


Andrew Nemeth

nemeng  Warrimoo   Australia