Leica R reliability

Andreas Thaler

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 19, 2017
Messages
4,863
Location
Vienna/Austria
Format
35mm
I remember Leica R in the windows of camera shops of the 80ies here in Austria.

The prices were so higher than other systems that it was dizzying. There was no sensible relationship discernible. You paid a multiple for a Leica R standard lens than for one from Minolta, which was hardly worse. I thought to myself at the time that anyone who bought a Leica already had their Porsche in the garage. Accordingly, the customers were people with budgets and they were well served.

The image that resonated with me at the time was that Leica was intended for the elite photographers, which is of course nonsense. A brilliant marketing success to date.
 
Last edited:

Hassasin

Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2023
Messages
1,426
Location
Hassasstan
Format
Multi Format
@Andreas Thaler I'm all in agreement with your sentiments. I only have some Rs and "lower end" lenses because they all became reasonable. At the time of their production years, all of them were non takers for me.

And I started with an SL2 actually, that came with several lenses. That got me interested in R line more than anything. For many reasons, in spite of SL's uniqueness in every way, I have found Rs to fit me well (and better), handling wise. Yet, they are not my first choice.
 

Andreas Thaler

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 19, 2017
Messages
4,863
Location
Vienna/Austria
Format
35mm
Of course the Leica R is something fine, otherwise I wouldn't have any of it myself And the quality of the optics is proven.

Today, this is no longer an issue given the low prices.
 

guangong

Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2009
Messages
3,589
Format
Medium Format
"Ask the man that owns one." was a Packard advertisement motto. People did just that and Packard went out of business. I have owned Nikon since 1964. After Leica M4 and M3 I was seduced into the Leicaflex system and eventually acquired SL and SL2. On a whim also bought a "Standard". Prisms on all SLs became discolored, giving viewfinder a yellow filter look. Replaced prism on SL2 (How many prisms do repair people still have on hand?) The electronics for my R4 died; I'll continue to use R5 until it dies. On the other hand, my two Nikon F and F2 (all with prism without meter) have gone on and on since '60s and 70s flawlessly. I attribute this outcome to superior mechanical design and materials. At the time of my purchase I assumed that Leicaflexes would possess equal or even better design and materials. Indeed, manufacturing cost of SL2 was more than selling price. Time has revealed my folly. I should add that one reason for getting Leicaflex was the ability to use many of my Leica lenses with adapters.
Unfortunately, Leica users were resistant to the Leica M5 (my wife's favorite camera), which doomed Leitz because unable to recoup development and manufacturing costs. Eventually various parts of Leitz were sold as brand names to various manufacturers.
 

Hassasin

Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2023
Messages
1,426
Location
Hassasstan
Format
Multi Format
@guangong But that does not discredit what Leica R was and is.

SL2, in m y luck, has nothing in the finder, same for SL, but original Leicaflex (which I bought for cheap, because they had lenses attached) all 3 have prism issues, but those were not what market wanted, Then SLs had proven to be a flop too. But wouldn't they? Can't just run on a brand name, take on strong holds, and at a much higher price point with virtually zero history.
 

Rob Skeoch

Advertiser
Advertiser
Joined
Apr 25, 2005
Messages
1,346
Location
Grand Valley, Ontario
Format
35mm RF
Yes, it's true that Salgado used the R system, but he used a lot of systems including Canon and Leica M and I think even Pentax 645. We first met decades ago when I volunteered as a photographer with MSF and met up last time he was in town
 

Attachments

  • Salgado_01 (1).jpg
    382.4 KB · Views: 107

RezaLoghme

Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2024
Messages
1,111
Location
Europe
Format
Medium Format

R5+ 135/2.8 is surely a great combo, for EUR 500-600 you can buy a wonderful portrait outfit.
 

otto.f

Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2017
Messages
356
Location
Netherlands
Format
Multi Format

I own an R5 which is not usable anymore, first lightleaks at the door, after repair the electronic circuits didn’t work anymore shortly after. Then I owned an R6.2 which has the reputation of being as reliable as an M4, which I own a long time now without problems, but it ended in the bin because the mechanism of the mirror in combination with the shutter was unrepairable. Then I tried the R7 for quite some time and without problems. On forums the message is often that it is the most reliable of the magnificent 7 (although the R1 and R2 didn’nt exist as such). I traded it in to afford my APO 35 M. My son has the Leicaflex 2 which is still working as it should. But it is quite a bulk.
The R8 is not as reliable as the R9, which is too expensive. In the end I decided to use my M10-R for the R lenses I love.
 

250swb

Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2012
Messages
1,570
Location
Peak District
Format
Multi Format
As always it's a common human desire to extrapolate out and hope everybody else is as miserable with their camera experience as you are. But stuff happens and complaints about the Leica R series are many on the internet, but equally we don't hear from people who haven't got something to complain about. On that ratio if you haven't got hundreds and hundreds of thousands of complaints you can be assured the actual number of gripes are far fewer than some people imagine or hope for. I have a Leica R-E, a short run version of the R5, and it's fine, and if it goes wrong the cost of another is less than the cost of a service and less than the cost of an equivalent Nikon body. And light leaks on the seals of any older camera can be repaired at home unless the prime directive is to moan about it.
 

RezaLoghme

Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2024
Messages
1,111
Location
Europe
Format
Medium Format
"Ask the man who owns one" - so true. A lot of internet wisdom and urban legends around, and confirmation bias. Camera forums are usually full of posts asking for technical help. But that is not limited to one brand, or model.

My view: but a R body from Leica Classic or a comparable, reputable dealer with a warranty and right to return the item if not satisfied. Yes, it will cost you more than a bargain from Ebay from a private seller who "knows nothing about the camera" so he "could not test it".But so what? The pro dealers now want 300-500 EUR for a R body. Cheap enough, if you use it for another 10-20 years.
 

dave olson

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 24, 2019
Messages
172
Location
Nevada
Format
Medium Format
Reliability, that is the question. How do we judge reliability? With mechanical cameras it generally is, "until lit stops". How many camera owners actually send their camera out for a routine service? Leica owners probably constitute the majority of owners. The Leica R system was produced under Leica manufacturing standards. Those standards are the M series. Leica R bodies were based on Minolta designs, the R lenses for the most part were copied from their M counterparts. I have three Canon late model F-1s, had them for decades and not a burp.
 

RezaLoghme

Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2024
Messages
1,111
Location
Europe
Format
Medium Format
Looking at current market prices for R bodies, we never had it so good.
 

xkaes

Subscriber
Joined
Mar 25, 2006
Messages
4,936
Location
Colorado
Format
Multi Format
Andreas Thaler said:
You paid a multiple for a Leica R standard lens than for one from Minolta, which was hardly worse.
Click to expand...

In many instances, they were the same lens. The Minolta Rokkor-X 80-200mm f4.5 ($400) was sold by Leica as the Vario-Elmar 80-200mm f4.5 ($1,600). Same is true for the 24mm f2.8, 16mm f2.8 fisheye, etc.
 

George Mann

Member
Joined
May 14, 2017
Messages
2,915
Location
Denver
Format
35mm
xkaes said:
In many instances, they were the same lens. The Minolta Rokkor-X 80-200mm f4.5 ($400) was sold by Leica as the Vario-Elmar 80-200mm f4.5 ($1,600). Same is true for the 24mm f2.8, 16mm f2.8 fisheye, etc.
Click to expand...

Which Minolta 24mm f2.8 exactly? Is there a 35mm equivalent?
 

xkaes

Subscriber
Joined
Mar 25, 2006
Messages
4,936
Location
Colorado
Format
Multi Format
George Mann said:
Which Minolta 24mm f2.8 exactly? Is there a 35mm equivalent?
Click to expand...

That's a good question because Minolta made SIX versions of its 24mm f2.8 lens -- three of them were VFC (Variable Field Curvature) lenses.

Leica liked the first model, which Minolta produced at the same time as its 80-200mm f4.5. At the time, Minolta and Leitz and Copal were doing a LOT of collaboration -- that's how the Minolta XE and Leica R3 cameras came to be.

You can find a lot more information about Minolta cameras and lenses at MINMAN, rather than ROKKOR FILES. PLUS, MINMAN covers ALL of Minolta's still, manual-focus, film cameras from submini to medium format -- not just 35mm SLRs.

https://www.subclub.org/minman/

And, if you are interested in Minolta-mount SLRs that were made in China (there were more models made in China than Minolta made in Japan) check out:

https://www.subclub.org/minchin
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…