Re: [Leica] HELP PLEASE W/QUESTIONS ABOUT THE INFAMOUS R4

["Roy Zartarian" <royzart@connix.com>]

On 2 May 00, at 20:57, michael a. marcus wrote:
> base?"  I ask because I read that R4's from about late #159xxxx were
> more or less OK if the number was inscribed not "on the base but on the
> rear edge of the base." 
The conventional wisdom here on the LUG about the R4 bdy placed 
the demarcation at 1,600,000

[snip]
> reason I thought that I had to set the shutter speed to 1/30.  The whole
> roll came out with an orange band of light leak on left side of prints,
> which I suspect is because I had set the shutter speed so slow.  OR is
> that PERHAPS A KNOWN PROBLEM because of the finicky electronics?   AND
Every print? On the negatives as well? Same place? This could be 
a sign of bad seals on the camera back or inside the camera.  
Internal seals are a pricey job.

> FINALLY QUESTION #3:  If I ascertain that I have a dog of an R4, should
> I exchange it (w/Leica) for an R6.2 or an R8?  I'm asking more with
> respect to known problems with the cameras, rather than with regard to
> my own preferences on picture taking.  THANKS IN ADVANCE FOR ANY
> RESPONSES!
I once had  a pre-1,600,000 R4. I was so convinced that it was 
possessed by demons that I named it Christine after the car in the 
Stephen King novel.  Fortunately, it fell off a table, landed on its 
rewind knob, and completely destroyed its top plate and damaged 
the film advance/rewind mechanisms. Repairs would have made 
this the most expensive R4 in history, so I replaced it with an R4sp 
which now serves as a backup body to an R8.  As to the choices 
you mentioned, you have to decide for yourself whether you prefer 
the feel of the smaller body over the larger and whether you want 
the all manual functioning of the R6.2 or the electronic brains of the 
R8. 

Roy