So the local photo store just put up two used camera one Leica R8 and a R9, and just looking and trying them out in the store i think they are pretty nice. Both camera comes with the 50 f2 Summicron, there is also a 90 f2 summicron.
I have never used this camera, and i would like to know what people who use/used them think about them. What is good and more important, what did you not like?
Clarify my post for people who dont understand, i am interested in the R8 and R9:s ergonomic, day to day and functionality, not price nor quality.
Last edited by sandholm; 11-09-2010 at 06:02 AM. Click to view previous post history.
? I am asking because I have never used a Leica R, I do use Leica M, both a III and a 7 along side with Hasselblad and 8x10, and how you wrote the replay I dont even think you are qualified to judge my ability to use a camera, actually I dont even care.
Originally Posted by Mustafa Umut Sarac
If you read my post I am interesting to know what people who use this camera daily and what they think is good and bad with the camera, and then more with the ergonomic/functionality of the camera. Personal I think that the ability to do flash sync on both the first curtain and the second curtain is something that could be nice, but never used. The camera also looks very simple to handle, but its very hard to judge just trying them in the store.
so lighten up dude, if you want a leica go and get one, there are tons of them on several action sights (if you can afford)
and I posted this question in the 35 mm forum, because this is a 35 mm camera.
if you dont have anything constructive to say dont say it, it dont bring anything to the forum.
Last edited by sandholm; 11-09-2010 at 06:38 AM. Click to view previous post history.
I own a R9. It is an excellent camera. Both the R8 and R9 have a very bright, high eyepoint viewfinder, a definite improvement over the previous R generation (R4-R7). I think the bright viewfinder would be important to someone used to focusing with M cameras. From an ergonomic perspective the R8 and R9 are the same. Functionality is excellent and typical Leica. What I didn't like about the R4-R7 cameras is the lack of mirror lockup, which for me is a total must in a professional SLR. The R9 addressed that issue and I love everything about it. It has three very good metering patterns (averaging, center-weight, spot) that can be set independently of the exposure mode, which makes it quite flexible. It is a rather large body though. This is not something that bothers me at all, but particularly for someone coming from the M system you might find the heavier larger SLR takes some getting used to, and it is obviously more conspicuous. The R4-R7 body was quite a bit smaller/lighter than the R8/9. The 50mm and 90mm summicrons are excellent lenses.
A used R8 is hardly bragging material price-wise...
Originally Posted by Mustafa Umut Sarac
Listening to opinions (and then deciding how to interpret them) is a sign of wisdom.
What's your problem?
I can't bring personal experience with those two models (I'll probably pick one up sooner or later), but people whose opinion I trust say their ergonomics and handling are excellent, despite being objectively big & heavy (the R9 is about 100 grammes lighter than the R8) and have one of the best-ever viewfinders.
Probably the most similar R cameras - general feel and viewfinder quality wise - are the Leicaflex SL & SL2, both of which I can highly recommend.
The 90mm 'cron is a very nice lens, not as incisive as the 90mm Elmarit, but more atmospheric (bokeh land & all that).
M6, SL, SL2, R5, P6x7, SL3003, SL35-E, F, F2, FM, FE-2, Varex IIa
I don't get these cameras. Is it just because of the lenses people buy them? In the end it's just a 35 mm manual focus SLR. There are tons of these around, a nikon F100 also maxes out at 1/8000 but allows AF, and lenses far bellow the prices of leica. Maybe I'm just thick, but when I held a Leica R8 I didn't feel anything special about it at all. A nice camera indeed, but not so much nicer than anything pro made by Canon and Nikon and the rest. With new matte screens you get very bright viewfinders with those too. On the other hand, I can't really say I feel anything special with a Leica M-camera either (I have put around 15 rolls thru a M6).
If I had to get an expensive 35 mm SLR I'd go Contax. (wow, leica vs contax, feels new...)
Note, I'm not claiming to be any kind of expert or pro, I'm just a cheap guy who likes photography.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Damn Mustafa, what crawled up your butt?
Lecia is my dream camera, love have a M or a R version!
Originally Posted by sandholm
Norman is an island.Time and tide wait for Norman.
If I may make a (constructive) suggestion...it seems that body-wise there is little to nothing to set Leica's SLRs apart. So logically it would come down to optical quality and their lenses.
If it's a good deal, you likely wouldn't have problems selling it if, later, you decided they weren't a good fit to your personal tastes. Good luck!
"Never criticize someone until you've walked a mile in their shoes. That way, you're a mile away and you've got their shoes."
MY BLOG - www.reservedatalltimes.com
YOU SHOULD LOOK AT THIS SITE - www.colincorneau.com
R lenses are GREAT. Aside from that, any Nikon SLR would do. Nothing special about the camera. It's a camera, and what it does is take pictures. Again, the optics are great but I doubt anyone would notice the difference, aside from crazy tech geeks doing MTF charts, between an image taken with an F6, F100 and Nikon optics and a Leica R.
Last edited by MaximusM3; 11-09-2010 at 06:21 PM. Click to view previous post history.