Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/05/03

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Leica R: Is It Worth It?
From: "Julian Thomas" <>
Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 16:47:24 +0100

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.

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug Herr" <>
To: <>
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
> > 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
> > 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
> > lenses?
> >
> > I would appreciate some practical advice, especially given the fact that
> > 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****
> 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
> ___________________________________________________
> The ALL NEW CS2000 from CompuServe
>  Better!  Faster! More Powerful!
>  250 FREE hours! Sign-on Now!