Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/11/13
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Thank, David, for you comments. I have 5 lenses already and I know they are not cheap. But, like you, I didn't buy them for cheap quality, but to give me the best images for a long time. The last time I bought a camera was almost 30 years ago when I bought two Rollei SL-35's because I wanted good lenses. I have 5 Zeiss lenses for them and I only got into Leica last year because I was having meter problems with my Rollei's that no one could solve. Not even Harry Fleenor. I still have those cameras and don't know if I can part with them, as they have been my buddies for so long. I have shot maybe three rolls with them the last year, however. A shame to let them sit, but we have a history, one that I hope to develop with Leica. Aram Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 08:28:55 -0800 > From: David Rodgers <drodgers@swiftnet.com> > Subject: > Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20011113074925.00a5c6b8@swiftnet.com> > References: > > 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 > - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html