Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,205   Posts: 1,531,736   Online: 998
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20
  1. #11
    Lee L's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,244
    For shooting street, I'd definitely go with the R3 over the R4 if only because of the shutter lag. You can speed up the R4s by holding the shutter release halfway down, so it's faster than from full throw, but it's still not as fast as the R3 from any position. The R3 is also one of the most predictable shutter releases I've ever used.

    My favorite street camera is my CL with 40mm Summicron, although I like the 1:1 finder on the Bessa R3A better. The CL attracts no attention, spot meters accurately, and is very quiet. The 40 Summicron is a great lens. The side hanging strap also lets it hang in the crook of my left arm as I walk, so it's almost hidden. I once shot a photo of a carney who was threatening me for attempting to photograph him. I hit the shutter and then lowered the camera. He never knew I took the shot.

    There are some issues with numbers of lens cams on the SL vs R bodies, but IIRC, the 3 cam lenses work on all but the Leicaflex (original non-TTL metering SLR) body. I'll see if I can find a reference. If not, someone will be along to post the correct info soon. The SL has an overall fine microprism for focusing with larger microprisms in the center circle, and the finder is BIG and bright, really nice. The SL2 has a central split image rangefinder and fine microprism field, 3 stops more meter sensitivity than the SL, and finder illumination for low light.

    Lee
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Carney2.jpg  

  2. #12
    rbarker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Rio Rancho, NM
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,222
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Sean
    . . . I am finding I like shooting two subjects 35mm street & 8x10 largeformat landscape. . . .
    You have streets down there?

    I think you'll find that Leica R users love 'em, even though Leica R models tend not to have features common on competitive brands of the same vintage. But, you get the advantage of Leica glass. Too bad you didn't like the M. It's perfect for street work.
    [COLOR=SlateGray]"You can't depend on your eyes if your imagination is out of focus." -Mark Twain[/COLOR]

    Ralph Barker
    Rio Rancho, NM

  3. #13
    Sean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    New Zealand
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,553
    Blog Entries
    7
    Images
    15
    ok, I've got my mf kit in apug classifieds now, will see what happens..

  4. #14
    Sean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    New Zealand
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,553
    Blog Entries
    7
    Images
    15
    Have also been looking at Contax SLR's anyone want to comment on some of these compared to the leicas? http://keh.com/shop/product.cfm?bid=...&crid=12420915

  5. #15
    df cardwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Dearborn,Michigan & Cape Breton Island
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,342
    Images
    8
    On their own merits, most Contax cameras are good. But if you can shoot a Leica instead ? Electronic nightmares.

    The Leicas are much better, to me, for making pictures.

    The SL2 is a wonderful camera, but may need some renovation at this point.

    For me, the R4 - R7 series, without a moment's doubt, are preferable over the R3.

    I'm curious about the 'shutter lag' attribution about the R3. I was shooting things like soccer at the time, and recall the 'temporal parallax' of the R4 to be an improvement over the R3, but it's been 25 years so I don't remember the numbers. It was faster, too, than an F1 or F3... it just sounded 'cushier'. At the time, I was working at a largish Leica dealer, and Leica still had great support - there was a lot of data available- but like I said, I don't remember the actual numbers. And nowhere near an M camera.

    .
    "One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid,
    and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision"

    -Bertrand Russell

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Montgomery, Il/USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,026
    Then again, the 6.2 is a little smaller and a mechanical camera to boot, battery is only for the meter.

  7. #17
    df cardwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Dearborn,Michigan & Cape Breton Island
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,342
    Images
    8
    That's the winner, I'd guess.
    "One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid,
    and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision"

    -Bertrand Russell

  8. #18
    Lee L's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,244
    The SL2 and R6.2 are wonderful cameras by all reports, although I can't report from first-hand experience. I'd love to have either one. I thought Sean might be price sensitive, and that's where the R3 has the advantage. The SL2 and R6.2 are rarer and much more expensive used, whereas the R3 sold very well, and is readily available used. You can check the usual suspects for prices. My recollection is that a clean R3 is in the $250 to $300 range, and both the others are in the $1000+ range in very good or better condition.

    I don't have the actual numbers on the shutter lag times for the R3 and R4s, but the difference is very noticeable to me in use. As I mentioned earlier, there appears to be much less difference when the R4s release is already held halfway depressed (to the exposure lock point). The Sept '78 catalog I have mentions the short "time parallax" on the R3 as a feature, but doesn't give numbers. Given its mechanical shutter, I'd expect the R6.2 to be faster.

    I shoot soccer myself, but for that I use rangefinders with 1:1 built-in (Bessa R3A) or auxiliary hot shoe mounted finders. On the Bessa T, R2, and R3A I have to consciously delay my shot so that the struck ball is leaving the foot as it follows through to imply action. Otherwise, if I press the shutter button at the moment of impact, I get a foot that on close inspection is putting a 2 inch dimple in what looks like a static ball on the ground. I use a 135mm Hektor (readily available in VG condition for $99) outdoors and a 75mm CV Color Heliar indoors. The 1:1 brightline finder is tremendous for sports. With both eyes open you can still see the whole field, watch the whole game with camera "at the ready", and anticipate action coming into the frame.

    If anyone has data on shutter lag times for the SL and R series, I'd be interested in seeing them.

    Lee

  9. #19
    titrisol's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Rotterdam
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,671
    Images
    8
    I can only speak on behalf of the R4
    I borrowed one for a few months once. Lovely camera, great balance and features
    The location of the controls was super intuitive and the pictures came out wonderful... unfortunately they are a few thousand miles away (in Ecuador)
    Mama took my APX away.....

  10. #20
    gnashings's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Oshawa, Ontario, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,376
    Images
    17
    Funny that these should pop up (Leica SLR threads) just as I was "tracking" some on eBay. I too was intrigued by the affordibility of such high quality hardware, a little lured (I have to admit) by the legendary name (shame on me, I know...).
    Well, the verdict for me is this - as I wrote in the other thread, I can't afford the lenses. Perhaps they are better than Canon/Nikon/Minolta, whatever brand x you may use - but they will never make up for the fact that for the price of one lens I can build a rather capable system of, lets say, Canon FD lenses. And the lowest quality picture (I know I am repeating myself, indulge me) is the one you never took, because you didnt have the lens to catch it with.
    But, if money was no object...

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin