F2 is a tank, no doubt. I presume you have no experience with the Leica R system?
Leica R reliability
-
A
- Thread starter gorbas
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale FS: Gundlach-Manhattan Hyperion Diffusion 7in f/4 Lens
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
For Sale FS: Linhof Recessed lens board
- Started by dirkfletcher
-
For Sale Leica M4-2
- Started by chriscrawfordphoto
Forum statistics
For the cheapest yet reliable Leica R camera I would suggest you go for a R4s Mod 2 (Europe) / Mod P (US). The subclub.org link provided by xkaes is not entirely correct on Leica R4 models. What differentiates the R4 generation from the rest of the R line is the high magnification viewfinder of 0.85x. R4s Mod 2 / Mod P gives you the benefit of the most reliable electronics which is the major change from the R4 / R4s.
Last edited:
You've just reminded me that my R4 is actually the R4s Mod 2, so can attest to its reliability, I bought it second hand in 1994 and shot three successful film/lens test rolls with it this year.
I used to work for a large photo shop dealing mostly with their used inventory, so I would rarely see a Leica SLR now and then. But realistically, I have very little real world experience with them on a day to day use basis.
What I can say, based on that experience, is that both Nikon and Canon mechanical film bodies were just beasts that could take a bunch of abuse. Our rental deprartment at that time rented primarily Nikon SLRs for 35mm pro users and they were used really hard by the renters but just kept on running.
OP
OP
Last edited:
The R4 mod 2 is based on which Minolta X body?
XD-7
R4 to be exact,
R4 and xd7 were built in collaboration. Mod 2 was the fix for R4s problems.
I could never decide whether I despised Riefenstahl more (for her vile pro-Nazi propagandism in artistic drag) or Susan Sontag more (for her pompous self-involved bloviating about it all). I guess they deserved each other.
Sontag is one of the arts darlings that gets a lot of credit for saying nothing very important.
Yes, Leicaflex. She later switched to the EOS system.
R7 is the choice in my experience. The R5 suffers often with lightleaks because of the dried out foam in the door at the back. The R6 and .2 are highly praised for their durability but that went wrong two times in my case; shutterproblems. The R7 lasted very long and I could sell it with a clean conscience to fund an M7. I don’t do R camera’s anymore because it gives every travel thoughts whether it will still hold this time. Perhaps the R9 is best choice.
Isn't this expected on any camera with old light seals?
Also, any camera with that stupid little window over film cassette is also prone to cause problems.
While I agree R7 is top choice from R5-R7, I don't think R8/9 are, more of a historical pieces, too complex, overthought, overbuilt, sign of changing times.
The F801/90 series is known for being perhaps the most reliable of the electronic Nikons. But you obviously got a dud.
Rob Skeoch
Advertiser
Although it sounds weird when I think back at it, I used Leica R cameras when I worked at newspapers in the late 80's. The rest of the world was Nikon and some used Canon, but I had Leica. I started with the R5, then purchased the R4sM2. I never had service issues with either of them. I was told the R4sM2 was the most reliable of the R4 family being the final production models.
However, the issues were not reliability but the lenses were always stiff to focus, the 280mm f2.8 was too expensive compared to the Nikon 300mm f2.8, the motor drive was slow compared to the F3 or F4 which was an issue shooting sports.
The lenses were always sharp, but so were the Canikon high end lenses and it didn't really matter since it was being printed on newsprint anyway.
I've always thought I should have bought the R6.2 and felt it was the pinnacle of the system but I switched to Nikon and traded the R system against the 400m f2.8.... which was a great move.
However, the issues were not reliability but the lenses were always stiff to focus, the 280mm f2.8 was too expensive compared to the Nikon 300mm f2.8, the motor drive was slow compared to the F3 or F4 which was an issue shooting sports.
The lenses were always sharp, but so were the Canikon high end lenses and it didn't really matter since it was being printed on newsprint anyway.
I've always thought I should have bought the R6.2 and felt it was the pinnacle of the system but I switched to Nikon and traded the R system against the 400m f2.8.... which was a great move.
OP
OP
Rob, Thank you for your contribution.
Interestingly you were not the only Canadian photojournalist to use R Leica.
Ted Grant " The Father of Canadian Photojournalism" used it extensively.
leicasocietyinternational.org
Interestingly you were not the only Canadian photojournalist to use R Leica.
Ted Grant " The Father of Canadian Photojournalism" used it extensively.
A Tribute to Ted Grant - Inspiration from the Father of Canadian Photojournalism — LSI - Leica Society International
"Real photographers shoot black and white, eat sushi, and drink single malt Scotch - not necessarily in that order, but it works very well." – Ted Grant Helen Todd
leicasocietyinternational.org
I shot with an R4 Mod-P and it has high finder magnification then later models. I had trouble focusing the R8 so went back to the R4.
Agree on all points, but then I’m not sure if an R7 which is just as old as an R5 and has the same climate history will have the same foam problems because in the meantime the foam may have become better.
I had the R8, it was a lovely camera in your hands, but not in your bag climbing the Eifel Tower.
The most important part in the R line are about 6 or 7 lenses, which can be best used on a Canon 5D, Nikon Z or a Leica M10 +. In fact Leica has never been outstanding in SLR camera’s, although the SL and -2 were very interesting steps at the beginning of a dead end street.
Last edited:
I have a Leicaflex SL2 that looks and works great. I use it more than my M2 these days, but when I need small and comact it's the M2.
What's great about the Leicaflex is that the R lenses are a lot less expensive than those for the M, and the same quality.
What's great about the Leicaflex is that the R lenses are a lot less expensive than those for the M, and the same quality.
When it comes to Leica, my emotions always run high
Especially because I have a small Leica R collection (R5, R6.2, R7), I don't understand what could be special about them. For me they are not workhorses, next to a Nikon F3 or Canon F-1 New they are more of a graceful dressage horse
Yes, they are solidly made and have an interesting feature with the switch to selective measurement, but otherwise I don't see anything that would have justified the insane prices at the time.
The lenses are heavy, the system is smaller compared to Nikon's competitor at the time, all in all I see the target group at the time as amateurs. And of course also for those who really wanted the red dot. Leica always did very good marketing.
Today I'm calm about it, I had an R7 repaired expensively for an electronics problem and should check the whole gang in the closet again.
Ah yes, I returned an R5 and an R-E because of lame mechanics. And nearly all of them have the familiar cracks in the coating of the mirror housing.
Leicaflex and Leica R Cameras - R3 R4 R5 R6 R7 R8 R9
Specifications of all Leica reflex cameras from the Leicaflex to the R9. Find out how Leica's film era flagships differ!
www.apotelyt.com
LEICA R-Lenses: A Compendium
Overview and comparison of all the Leica lenses for the R-mount. Learn about the core specs of these great SLR-optics here!
www.apotelyt.com
Last edited:
True. What is more is that the lining goes light gray in colour which might or might not effect the meter.
OP
OP
Thank you for the links and your recommendations Andreas! As I mentioned earlier in the thread I'm happy Nikon user for the last 40+ years.
Just looking for some "reliable" Leica R body to accompany my new set of R lenses for work. I promise, it will not be long story.
Definitely I'm not crazy to spend "insane" amount of $ to buy another film body. Currently I have R4 and it's so-so when I manage it to work.
So far I got some good advice here.
Thank you all!
Just looking for some "reliable" Leica R body to accompany my new set of R lenses for work. I promise, it will not be long story.
Definitely I'm not crazy to spend "insane" amount of $ to buy another film body. Currently I have R4 and it's so-so when I manage it to work.
So far I got some good advice here.
Thank you all!
I knew another newspaper photographer who also used Leica R cameras. He sold them and switched to Nikon after a few years, as the reliability couldn't compare to the F3's and F4's used by everyone else on the paper.
As you mentioned, everything was more expensive with Leica ( purchase and service) and there was no advantage over Nikon. The value for money wasn't there.
Most systems are overblown, and large part of each was for targeted use only. I don't believe Leica ever fathomed competing on system size. And as brands go, price goes along. We overpay for brand names, even though a much more cost effective alternatives are available. Since Leica Rs are hardly expensive these days, even if prices have picked up as for most film cameras.
I would unlikely pick up an R over say a Canon F1 (and several others), but it does have a different feel. And in all this, I will never completely adjust to that shutter release lag. Maybe if I only used an R, but that is not going ot happen.
I'm somewhat surprised there has been no mention of Salgado, but to me that is not an indication of camera durability (or quality for that matter). Who knows how Leica was catering its products to Salgado, he might have been breaking Rs all the time, getting a new one overnight, and nobody in general would ever know.
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |