Re: [Leica] R8 Question

["Steve LeHuray" <icommag@toad.net>]

> On Tue, 22 August 2000, "Steve LeHuray" wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Sorry, but, I can not resist after listening to all this foo-foo-ra over the
>> R8 ever since I have been on this list. I have two Nikon F's bought used 30
>> years ago, heavy pro useage on dirty, dusty motorsports tracks around N
>> America. Never even been serviced, never broke. F2, ditto. F3, FM2n, fifteen
>> years and ditto, ditto. Still have all five, still trucking right along. For
>> the marginal gain (if any) in Leica optics why are ya'll doing this to
>> yourselves????? Can somebody start a separate R list please.
>>
>> Steve (Love my Leica M's)
>> Annapolis
>
> Steve,
>
> You obviously don't have functional meter heads on your F bodies.  You also
> don't have one of the early F2 bodies (or, it was repaired before you
> bought it).  I don't know what Nikkors you're using or what you're doing
> with your photos but in my experience and for my uses of the photos the
> difference in optics is not marginal.
>
> Have you used an R8?  For a more current perspecitve of the Nikon system,
> find a Nikon list and read about the electronic glitches on current Nikon
> bodies, some of which leave the camera completely useless.
>
> If you really want to compare brands, compare contemporaneous models.  I
> bought a Leicaflex SL (1968-1972) 21 years ago after multiple Nikon meter
> failures.  I've used the Leicaflex SL in the tropics, the arctic, in rain,
> snow and very dusty conditions, and have accidentally dropped it on
> concrete.  The entire camera, including the meter, is still working.
>
> I'm not saying that failures like some R8 users have seen are acceptable,
> I'm saying that they are not unique to Leica R equipment.  You've found
> some Nikon bodies that meet your needs, and you don't think the benefits of
> the R system would be worth the costs.  I don't have a problem with that.
> An M camera is not for me, but I can acknowledge the value of the M system
> even after reading of rangefinder flare and mis-adjustments, parallax
> errors, partially blocked viewfinders, bad pressure plates, slow sync
> speeds and excess battery consumption.  Can you do the same for the R system?
>
> Doug Herr
> Sacramento
> http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/telyt
> --------------------------------------------------


Doug,

Sorry, but this is the first time I have ever commented on the R8 and will
probably be the last. And probably most Leica R cameras are just fine, but,
there seems to be some problems attached to at least the R8. And all these
problem R8's seem to show up here on the LUG which is really to bad for the
entushiastic Leica R8 owners, to be honest it drives me nuts to keep hearing
all this. In fairness I have never even touched a Leica R so maybe I  am
missing out on a great camera, but, after a couple years of hearing all
these problems, I have no inspiration or incentive to think of them as
anything other than a not very good camera. Also, please note that my
comments were directed toward the R8 as a follow up to a post Tina had made
about her R8 going back to Leica over what seems to me to be an inexcuseable
problem.

As far as the meters on any of my Nikons they all work to the same exposure
from my first to my last and I have checked them all with two handmeters. I
have had 30 years trouble free experience with 5 Nikons and I doubt that is
possible with Leica R's. While the M's are the standard for rangefinder
cameras the R's are really not more than novelties in the reflex world.

As far as hearing the problems over on the Nikon Group, I don't belong, this
list, the LEG and the SP list are the only lists I belong to and at times
that seems to be to much.

Steve
Annapolis