Re: [Leica] R5-R7 decision

[David Rodgers <drodgers@swiftnet.com>]

Aram,

I've used many different camera bodies over the years and the R7 is my 
favorite. The Nikon F3 is a close second, and these two bodies seem very 
much alike to me. All manual, yes, but with just the right features, 
relatively modern electronics, and durability. Still, it's hard to believe 
that at one point the R7 MSRP was around $2,700.

I never thought the 1/2 stops for shutter speeds was a big feature. But I 
like the bright viewfinder, MLU and most of all the size and handling. The 
exposure system in any mode is right on. I don't have a motor drive. I've 
come close on a number of occasions to buying one, but felt that a drive 
would change the feel and handling too much.  Same with a winder. Plus I 
the R7 may be the last manual focus SLR body I buy. I want it to last for a 
long time. Motor drives can be hard on a body. The R7 can probably take it, 
but that's still more pounding than my thumb gives it.

I've considered an R5 or RE as a second body. My SL sort of fits that role 
but my one ROM lens (80-200/4) won't fit on it. Plus, my SL has be 
relagated to High Speed IR film, something I don't shoot quickly. I usually 
carry the R7 and an M6. If I had a backup I probably wouldn't even use it.

Having looked at a dozen or so R5s and REs over the past year I can say I'd 
probably still want an R7. It just feels more durable. Whether or not it's 
worth the extra money is a tough choice. Rather than features for me it 
would come down to how often and how long I plan to use it. I use my R7 a 
lot. A couple of times a week at least, and I plan to do so for a long 
time. I just bought a 60/2.8 that will probably be my primary R lens. If 
you're use the R system a lot I'd go for the R7. I doubt you'll be 
disappointed you spent the extra money. If you're use it occasionally, then 
the R5 might be a better choice. I don't know how much an upgrade and R5 is 
over an R4, though.

Something to keep in mind is that there are really no bargain R lenses. I 
use Leica because I think they're the highest quality tools available in 
35mm photography.  After I bought 4 3-cam lenses for my SL I bought an R7 
and never looked back. Forward at the R8 maybe, but never back :-).

Dave






At 09:38 AM 11/11/2001 -0800, you wrote:
>Maybe I could get some help with my decision.  I use an R4 right now and
>would like to upgrade a bit.  My main motive is that my eye sight is getting
>to the stage at age 51 that I will need some viewfinder diopter help.  I was
>all set on an R5 from a fellow LUGite, but then a friend brought over his
>"new" R7.  A bit larger, but not much.  I have to admit I was always put off
>by the R5's lack of 1 second manual shutter selection.  I take quite a few 1
>second shots as I like to shoot waterfalls, streams and do a fair amount of
>macro work where 1 sec gives me that one extra stop DOF.  I know that this
>speed is available in aperature priority mode, but I have never trusted auto
>modes.  Having shot with an all manual Rollei SL35 for close to 30 years
>before getting my R4 last year, I haven't made the physological switch.
>Often I must use less or more exposure than the meter tells me and in manual
>mode this is easy.
>
>The R7 has this 1 second and more.  It has 1/2 shutter speeds.  I tend to
>think that f-stop is more important than shutter in my style of shooting,
>and often have to open or close a 1/2 stop to be able to use the full
>shutter steps.  Maybe this 1/2 stop thing is carrying things too far.
>
>Can anyone give me any perspective in this deilema?  Should I get an R5 or
>spend twice the money on an R7?  Has anyone seen real practical beneifts to
>the R7?  Is the meter more accurate?  Benefits of 1/2 shutter speed
>selection?  Any other real improvements on the R7?  Actually looking at used
>prices it is only a few hundred bucks more for an R8.  R7's are going for
>$8-900 and R8's are around $1100.
>
>I could get another lens for the difference in price if I bought the R5.
>
>Decisions, decisions.
>
>Aram
>
>
>
>This message is made of 100% recycled electrons.  No new atoms were
>destroyed in making it.
>
>Aram Langhans
>Science Teacher, Naches High School
>P. O. Box 159/101 W. 5th. St.
>Naches, WA 98937
>
>"Science Rules"
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html