leica leica

Discussion in '35mm Cameras' started by paresh_pandit, Jan 19, 2005.

  1. hi

    i own Leica R3...
    thinking of getting rid of it and getting a Leicaflex SL instead...
    is this wise ?!...
    seeking your opinion/help...
    thanks
    regards

    Paresh Pandit
    Mumbai, IN
    19 Jan 2005
     
    paresh_pandit, Jan 19, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Maybe. I prefer the all-manual Leicaflex SL2 to the R3.
     
    uraniumcommittee, Jan 19, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Just to position myself: I own a R3, R4 and M3 and M6TTL. In 99% of the time
    nowadays I use the M-cameras because they fit my style of photography best.
    On the other hand I have used my R3 extensively. I took it up in the Alps
    above 4000m and used in in the humid of the Carribean.It always worked
    flawlessly and in my opinion it is on the whole a very underrated camera. It
    is sturdy, has a beautifull viewscreen, and a very nice lightmeter system
    with both integral and selective metering. Not to mention the aperture
    priority automatic exposure. The only problem i can think of is when your
    batteries stop. Then it has only 1 mechanical time of 1/100 sec.In use it is
    way better than the Leicaflex, although the latter starts te get something
    of a cult status but that has nothing to do with the photographic practice.
    It is not for nothing that Leica replaced the Leicaflex with the in those
    days (1976) much more modern R3. I would stick to the R3 with open lens
    metering and the use of the modern Leitz lenses.

    Peter
     
    Peter Ingen Housz, Jan 20, 2005
    #3
  4. paresh_pandit

    Andy Evans Guest

    Left field solution - get a Canon EF-M with split screen metering, and an
    adapter from Fotodiox and put your R lenses on the Canon body. You're ready for
    a digital body whenever you want it, and you get to keep all those lovely Leica
    lenses..

    === Andy Evans ===
    Visit our Website:- http://www.artsandmedia.com
    Audio, music and health pages and interesting links.
     
    Andy Evans, Jan 20, 2005
    #4
  5. "In use it is way better than the Leicaflex, although the latter starts
    te get something
    of a cult status but that has nothing to do with the photographic
    practice.
    It is not for nothing that Leica replaced the Leicaflex with the in
    those
    days (1976) much more modern R3. I would stick to the R3 with open lens
    metering and the use of the modern Leitz lenses."

    What utter bullshit. The SL2 was very expensive to manufacture and
    offered no facility for auto-exposure, which Leitz at the time thought
    was important. They chose to adapt a Minolta-made body to save money on
    development costs, to avoid reinventing the wheel, so to speak.

    The SL2 is a far-better handling camera than the R3, and I don't need
    or want auto-exposure. The SL2 is about the most perfect SLR ever made.
     
    uraniumcommittee, Jan 21, 2005
    #5
  6. paresh_pandit

    Art Guest

    They are pretty cheap on ebay these days.
     
    Art, Jan 25, 2005
    #6
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.