Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/05/03
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]There is always a lot of discussion about the R8 - does anyone use the R6? I had a serious look at this and it seems to be a great camera. The prices second-hand are very low. Is there as problem with it? I heard a rumour that Leica is thinking of dumping the R6 and putting a mechanical camera into the R8 body. Julian - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Doug Herr" <telyt560@cswebmail.com> To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2000 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [Leica] Leica R: Is It Worth It? > On Tue, 02 May 2000, "Mitchell Halpern" wrote: > > > > > Hi LUGers: > > > > Here's the scoop. As discussed before in this forum, I am a new Leica > > afficionado that has been amazed at the quality of the transparencies shot > > with an M6 TTL, 35 f/2 Asph, and 90 f/2.8 Elmarit in terms of color > > saturation, contrast, and detail. Of course, rangefinder photography has its > > limitations (macro, telephoto etc.), so I do not want to abandon SLR > > photography. > > > > Over the years, I have assembled a pretty decent collection of N***n SLR > > equipment. However, the quality of transparencies being produced by the > > Leica M setup has me wondering if Leica R equipment would be equally > > impressive. Is it worth selling the Nikon equipment and beginning to > > assemble a Leica R kit, especially given the outrageous prices of many R > > lenses or are the quality of N***n pro lenses pretty darn close to Leica R > > lenses? > > > > I would appreciate some practical advice, especially given the fact that I > > am off to NYC for a long weekend to attend a high school reunion and plan on > > visiting Leica House, Tamarkin, etc. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Mitch Halpern > > Menlo Park, CA > > Mitch, > > The short answer is Yes, Leica-R chromes will be at least as impressive as those from your M equipment. > > The long answer to the question,"Is It Worth It?" is, of course, dependant on your needs, expectations and preferences. When I first started using Leica-R, the first roll of film knocked me off my feet. The color saturation, shadow detail, smoothness of the out-of-focus areas, color saturation, contrast, detail, 3-D effect and color saturation were far better than I had come to expect from the Nikkors. Did I mention the color saturation? The first roll of film convinced me to sell the N**** equipment. > > The most comparable N-brand lenses are the ED long lenses. My experience is limited to the 300mm f/4.5 ED (non-IF) which IMHO can produce very bright, sharp images with lots of color saturation, but also produces harsh, broken out-of-focus areas where the Leica Telyts produce a smooth wash of color. ED lenses aren't cheap either. With N-brand lenses you have to know which ones are the gems and which ones howl at the moon; there are no crummy Leica-R lenses. > > Keep in mind, I have no need for high-speed motors, auto-focus, custom functions, or, for the most part, auto-exposure. If what you want is an accurate shutter and bright viewfinder, access to some of the best lenses made, and a camera that assumes you know what you're doing, an R camera may be right for you. I certainly haven't regretted the switch. > > Doug Herr > Sacramento > http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/telyt > ___________________________________________________ > The ALL NEW CS2000 from CompuServe > Better! Faster! More Powerful! > 250 FREE hours! Sign-on Now! > http://www.compuserve.com/trycsrv/cs2000/webmail/ > > > > >