@Andreas Thaler can explain
Or:
A dead Leica R4 comes back to life.
Marwan el Mozayen on repairing a Leica M4 that one camera repair specialist claimed had a supposed fatal electrical problem.
Is the Minolta heritage of these cameras such that they use the same sort of pneumatic damper as the XD-7? If so, excessive shutter lag is due to sticky oil on it, which can be cleaned, with reasonable effort on the Minoltas. Plus the delay can be adjusted.
@Andreas Thaler can explain
Do we need to explain (again) the relationship between Minolta and the R3/R4, or can we assume that this has been discussed and documented extensively already?
Repairing a Leica R4.
Part 2 of Marwan el Mozayen's camera repair story where he repairs a dead Leica R4.silvergrainclassics.com
Today, I had someone visiting in my city, and I took my R6 and the 135mm for some outdoor shots, largely portraits. I dont know...IQ of the lens is good, but even outdoors the focal length was a bit too cramped for me. Now eyeing 50mm lenses.
Maybe the motion picture people have started to adapt these lenses to their cameras. This is what has driven up prices of 'vintage' stills lenses for quite some time now.Has the tide quietly turned? Are we in the post-bargain R era now?
I wanted to like it, but I did not...we are in the same boat.IMO I always found the 135 to be either too long or too short.... 90 jump to 180 always worked better for me
I remember when the Leica R4 and R5 were new in the shop windows, along with the lenses. The prices were insane compared to those of their Japanese competitors. Today, I wonder what added value they offered.
Here's your answer.
Back in the early 1970's when Minolta came out with the 80-200mm f4.5 Rokkor-X, the asking price was $400 (over $3,000 today). When it was sold as the Leica Vario-Elmar 80-200 f4.5 (NOT the f4.0), the price was $1,200 (over $9,000 today).
Today the Minolta sells on EBAY for around $25-30, and the Leica for around $75-100 -- so the difference remains about the same proportionately, 1:3. Of courses, prices will vary depending on the condition, etc. Either way, today you are getting some great glass for relatively next to nothing.
And these lenses must then toil with working aperture on mirrorless digital cameras
So the 28-70mm went back to the seller. I wanted to like it, but....I wanted to like it, but I did not...we are in the same boat.
So the 28-70mm went back to the seller. I wanted to like it, but....
Lens price increase could reflect the fact that many are buying R-lenses to use with adapters on cameras like my Sony 7RII. One of the very best lenses for my Leica-R adapter on my Sony is the old 180mm f2.8. It absolutely amazed me. Heavy, but perfect optically. It also works just peachy on my original Leicaflex body, but so do the rest of my R lenses.Noticed something curious while browsing Leica’s official "Leica Classic" webshop: R bodies and especially R lenses — long the “shame corner” of the Leica ecosystem — seem to be picking up in price. Not just collector-condition R6.2s, but even lenses like the 135 Elmarit or 50 Summicron-R now command figures that would have been unthinkable a few years ago.
Could be wishful thinking on Wetzlar’s part — their way of softly rehabilitating the R line’s image now that the M back-catalogue is nearly canonized. Or maybe I’m just projecting because I happen to like the R cameras more than I probably should…
Still, interesting to see the shift. Curious if others have noticed the same pattern?
I am talking lenses AND bodies.
I remember when the Leica R4 and R5 were new in the shop windows, along with the lenses. The prices were insane compared to those of their Japanese competitors. Today, I wonder what added value they offered.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?