Need tips regarding Leica r4

[jdog]

Hi!

I'm pretty new with analog photography. I have been looking around for a new camera, specifically Leica r4. My question is if it is a good buy? Considering from what I understood I can only use Leica R lenses, which seem to be pretty expensive. Are there any medium budget R lenses out there?


Thanks for helping out

 

[jochen]

Hello,
the Leica R 4 was indeed a modified Minolta XD-7 with spot metering. The first series (especially with the inscription "R4 electronic") had much problems with broken printed circuit boards and were not very reliable. If you find a still working sample today, it is very probable that it will work for the coming years. Leitz did not give licences for their bayonet to other lens manufacturers with exemption of Angenieux or Schneider. The register of Leica R is the longest of all 35 mm SLRs, so you cannot adapt foreign lenses with adapters. Most (not all) of the original Leitz lenses are among the best you can get for your money. You cannot use any Leitz R-lens on the R 4 because there were some modifications because of the open aperture measuring and the shutter priority mode. Leica specialists can tell you more about this.

 

[summicron1]

just to clarify what jochen tried to say -- the R4 is baed on the Minolta design, yes, but is a separate camera entirely. There are no "cheap" Leica R lenses because nobody else ever made any and Leica R lenses are popular now to modify to Canon and other digital cameras.

Having said that, the R5 can be had pretty cheap these days too, and is considerably upgraded from the R4. If you really want a good Leica SLR experience, though, go backwards and pick up a Leicafled SL or SL2. They're mechanical perfection and can use any Leica R lens made without modification.

If price is an object, however, you might consider a Nikon or Canon product -- Nikon F lenses are very very cheap these days.

 

[Alan Gales]

I don't see the point of wanting to shoot a Leica with a budget lens. The main reason for shooting a Leica SLR is the Leitz glass. The same with Contax and Zeiss glass.

I agree with the above post about buying a Nikon or Canon product since money is an issue.

 

[mweintraub]

I thought about jumping to the R system because I wanted to use Leica quality lenses, but after some research I found that I wouldn't get the quality of the M lenses in R lenses. That's what I was looking for. Something to consider.

 

[cliveh]

Leica R. What's that?

 

[chriscrawfordphoto]

Leica R. What's that?

Leica's 35mm SLR system, now discontinued.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

The R4's may be one of the more affordable R bodies, so you can save your money for lenses. There have long been reports about electronic issues with the R4 and it's been said to avoid serial numbers below 1 600 000.

From the R5 onwards, the cameras have a bias-shifting program mode that is interesting and I believe unique in implementation among cameras. If I were to choose, I'd get an R7. If you're really fond of manual operation, then either an R6 or R6.2 is perfect.

The first place I'd look for an R and lenses is KEH. Also, consider the Leicaflex bodies - they're solid beautifully finished instruments.

At one point in the 1990's I went to a camera store to buy a new R6.2 and ended up getting my first M6 instead: I just didn't like the sluggish focusing of the 50mm R lens and turning the aperture ring felt like dragging a wooden box across a stone path.

 

[cliveh]

Leica's 35mm SLR system, now discontinued.

I wonder why.

 

[jjphoto]

The R4 has larger viewfinder magnification than later R bodies so is nicer to use with wide angle lenses. I find focusing easier on the R4 than on RE or even R8/9 bodies. The original focusing screen in the R4 is quite dark compared to later versions of the focusing screens used on R6-R7. I replaced the focusing screen in my R4 with a later screen Leica R screen and it is much brighter and easier to focus than with the original R4 screen.

I'm not sure the prices are justified for Leica R lenses however, but that's a personal choice one makes. If I were on a budget I would consider Olympus and Zuiko lenses, but in terms of images quality alone, the Contax bodies and lenses are probably a better option overall.

 

[macfred]

My vote for the R4s (Mod.2) - it's inexpensive, has less electronic issues than the R4 and has also a high viewfinder magnification.
My R4s from the first series had those electronic issues as described above - the R4s (Mod.2) worked without any problems for several years.

Worth a look (but a little more expensive): Leica R6- the first mechanical, manual-exposure-only SLR by Leica, since the Leicaflex SL2.

 

[jdog]

Thanks for helping out guys! I have not decided which camera to buy yet, but the guy that offered me the Leica camera also has a few lenses. Would a Summicron 50mm for about 200USD be a good price?

 

[film_man]

I wonder why.

Same reason every other film camera is discontinued.

 

[film_man]

jdog I have two Leica R8 bodies right now with the 35 Summicron-R, 50 Summicron-R and 135 Elmarit-R. I haven't shot the 135 much but the 35 and 50 are spectacular lenses.

One thing, Leica R lenses come in 1-cam, 2-cam (ie covers 1+2-cam), 3-cam (1+2+3 cam) and ROM (which only have the 3rd cam plus electronic contacts) versions. Check what the R4 needs, I know for example the R8 needs 3-cam or ROM lenses and ROM lenses are useful for the R8/R9 only.

200USD for a 3-cam 50 would be very good. I don't know about the 1/2-cam versions.

Body-wise, before buying the R8, I used the 50 summicron with a cheap adapter on a Canon EOS 3 body and then with a Leitax adapter. It worked perfectly, however the pain of stop-down metering was getting to me so eventually I moved to the R8 system. Can't helk with the R4, no experience but the R8 is a spectacular camera, the viewfinder is just amazingly clear and bright.

Overall, I'd say if you want to try the R glass then get a cheap adapter for your current camera, try it like that and if you do like it then get an R4.

 

[jdog]

jdog I have two Leica R8 bodies right now with the 35 Summicron-R, 50 Summicron-R and 135 Elmarit-R. I haven't shot the 135 much but the 35 and 50 are spectacular lenses.

One thing, Leica R lenses come in 1-cam, 2-cam (ie covers 1+2-cam), 3-cam (1+2+3 cam) and ROM (which only have the 3rd cam plus electronic contacts) versions. Check what the R4 needs, I know for example the R8 needs 3-cam or ROM lenses and ROM lenses are useful for the R8/R9 only.

200USD for a 3-cam 50 would be very good. I don't know about the 1/2-cam versions.

Body-wise, before buying the R8, I used the 50 summicron with a cheap adapter on a Canon EOS 3 body and then with a Leitax adapter. It worked perfectly, however the pain of stop-down metering was getting to me so eventually I moved to the R8 system. Can't helk with the R4, no experience but the R8 is a spectacular camera, the viewfinder is just amazingly clear and bright.

Overall, I'd say if you want to try the R glass then get a cheap adapter for your current camera, try it like that and if you do like it then get an R4.

Nice, thanks for replying So when the lenses are listed on ebay etc with a number 1, 2 or 3 it means cam? I thought it meant versions. Like, upgraded and better versions of the same lens. What does cam mean though?

 

[pdeeh]

a little googling will get you a long way in researching the ins and outs of cameras and lenses, eg http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/Lens-R.html

 

[film_man]

There are various version of various lenses and then there are 1/2/3/ROM mounts of that particular version. As said above, google it and you'll see what it means.