Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/05/02

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

Subject: [Leica] why is the R4 so cheap?
From: jkoplen at mindspring.com (Julian Koplen)
Date: Sun May 2 07:07:55 2004
References: <200404301427.i3UEPri8049457@server1.waverley.reid.org> <006901c43045$8de22020$7d02e042@pcr>

Aram,

Have you tried replacing the original "R4" viewfinder screen with the more
recent "R" screen?  I read that it is significantly brighter than the
original.  I did the replacement and find the brightness adequate.  Of
course, there's a lot subjective here, since I am unable to do an effective
A-B comparison.  My R4 has done perfect service under light use for the past
19 years, without so much as a CLA.   I also have an R8 and an SL.

As you, I have also concluded that it is worth much more to me as a backup
camera than it is on the resale market.

Regards............Julian

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "langhans" <langhans@compwrx.com>
To: <lug@leica-users.org>
Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2004 9:00 AM
Subject: Re: [Leica] why is the R4 so cheap?


The R4 was my first Leica about 4 years ago.  Mine is 16xxxxxx and had not
had any problems.  I have read some of the comments to your post and here is
my take.  Since buying my R8, the R4 has seen little use.  I kept it because
I thought that if I am hiking a long distance I would leave the R8 behind,
but since the lenses weigh so much,  there was no real advantage to that.
So my R4 sat on the shelf for a few years seeing very little use.  When my
R8 had to go into the shop, I had no choice but to use the R4.  I cursed at
it more that a few times and now that my R8 is back, the R4 will gather more
dust.  The pictures it took in that time are just fine.  My biggest grip is
the manual mode metering.  Hard to use and I don't like being in spot meter
mode only.  Next grip is the dim viewfinder.  My 54 (almost) year old eyes
love the R8.  However, I was glad I had it as a backup or I would be would
have been w/o any camera.  Since they are going for hardly anything, I might
as well keep it around.  If I could afford it, I'd buy an R9, but I'm saving
up  my pennies in case the digial back proves to be something that might pan
out as a good thing..

Aram


> Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2004 08:11:25 -0400
> From: Rei Shinozuka <shino@panix.com>
> Subject: [Leica] why is the R4 so cheap?
> To: "Leica Users Group (LUG)" <lug@leica-users.org>
> Message-ID: <20040430121125.GB8213@panix.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> i recently borrowed an R4 from bergen county camera, because my SL2MOT
> was visiting DAG to have its screen changed to non-split rangefinder.
> i just wanted anything that could mount 3-cam lenses.
>
> to my great surprise, i found the R4 rather likeable.
> the only thing i didn't really like
> was that in manual you had to watch the shutter speed numbers to the
> left and then down to see the set shutter speed.  as opposed to a
> match-needle or electronic equivalent that would just indicate + or -.
> the way the scale changed when you went from aperture to shutter
> priority was kind of neat.
>
> it's no M3 or even an M6, but why are these cameras so cheap?  you see
> them priced with 3-handles or even in the 2's.  i mean, you are getting
> a whole camera for around the same price as the M eyepeice magnifier.
>
> am i missing something?
>
> thanks,
>
> -rei

_______________________________________________
Leica Users Group.
See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information


In reply to: Message from langhans at compwrx.com (langhans) ([Leica] why is the R4 so cheap?)