Re: [Leica] Quit picking on the R3

[Vick Ko <vick.ko@sympatico.ca>]

Thanks.  About the 50mm Summicron, I was going to look for one for
the R3.

I contacted Sherry, and she doesn't fix R cameras any more.
The collected wisdom on the LUG responses, and contact with
a couple Canadian Leitz repair experts has made me conclude that
repair is not economically viable.

This conclusion is okay as well - one real bonus of buying an
"as-is" camera is to dissect it.  So far, this camera feels really
solid.  It is a real shame that the electronics were so uncharacteristic
of Leica quality.  And I'm glad to hear that with the current series
of R cameras, they have corrected their past errors.

Thanks all for your enthusiastic responses.

Vick


Dan Post wrote:

> Vick-
> I might be worth having Sherry give it a look over- if it was a really good
> bargain, than spending a bit to have it braought up to spec might be about
> the same as you would have spent getting a working one- and plus, you would
> know that it was CLA by a master of the art, and that it was indeed, in good
> shape!
> Dan
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Vick Ko <vick.ko@sympatico.ca>
> To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
> Sent: Sunday, July 16, 2000 6:01 PM
> Subject: Re: [Leica] Quit picking on the R3
>
> > Sorry - let me tell you the background.  I picked up an "As-is" R3 for a
> good
> > price,
> > and so far, my local camera shops have told me that it isn't worth fixing,
> and the
> >
> > general opinion from this thread is that the R3 isn't worth fixing.
> >
> > Coming from a history of owning M cameras, and recent, some LTM cameras,
> > I was really surprised that any Leica would be deemed "not worth fixing."
> >
> > It seems like there are a few good R3's, like the one you own, but a
> significant
> > number of not-so-good ones.
> >
> > I guess I should have done my homework before picking up this "bargain".
> > For a bit longer, my SLR shooting will be my Nikon.
> >
> >
> > ...Vick
> >
> >
> >
> > Summicron1@aol.com wrote:
> >
> > > someone said: Back to the R3 -
> > >
> > > When the battery is dead, what shutter speeds should the camera be
> capable of?
> > >
> > > The collected opinion is that the R3 was unreliable, and astromonical to
> > > repair.
> > >
> > > Hmmm - the first throw-away Leica.
> > >
> > > ..Vick
> > >
> > > hmmmm.  yourself.
> > >
> > > So, the Leica R3 that I've been using for almost 20 years and which has
> only
> > > been in the shop once (disconnect of the mirror-shutter mechanism, cost
> $170
> > > for DAG to fix it and completely service the camera about 8 years ago, a
> fair
> > > price I think) and which meters as accurately as any camera I have ever
> seen,
> > > combined with simplicity of use to the point of being idiot-resistent,
> is in
> > > reality a disgustingly poor piece of equipment, prone to breakdown,
> > > impossibly expensive to maintain, and a "throw-away" Leica?
> > >
> > > How foolish of me not to notice!
> > >
> > > I'd better go spend $2000 on an R8 immediately! Oh no, there's an auto
> focus
> > > Contax! I find myself irresistably drawn! What shall I do?????
> > >
> > > Nothing, actually. I'm sure I'll get my comeuppance some day.
> > >
> > > With a dead battery ithe R3 works at 1/90th mechanical speed, by the
> way. I
> > > believe you have to take the battery out to get this, but could be
> mistaken.
> > > It's so dependable that I repay the compliment by always keeping a spare
> > > battery handy. They last about a  year under heavy use unless I forget
> to
> > > turn the camera off, it's one weak point in my opinion.
> > >
> > > charlie trentelman
> > > ogden
> > > marching to a different drummer
> > > utah
> >