[LRflex] Re: Camera Choice Advice Sought
- From: frncscoco@xxxxxxx
- To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 15:13:52 -0400
-----Original Message-----
From: Douglas Sharp <douglas.sharp@xxxxxx>
To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wed, Jun 17, 2009 10:36 am
Subject: [LRflex] Re: Camera Choice Advice Sought
If you don't want all the bells and whistles of the R4, R5 and R7,by
all means look for an R6 - though you'll still need cells for the
metering function, only the shutter is mechanical.
The R5 has the advantage of being powered by the winder/motor batteries
when it's attached, the R7 has the advantage of a separate mirror
release and also has a good fill-in flash option, but it's not powered
by the winder/motordrive, so when the meter batteries go dead on you,
it's dead.
Both are wonderfully compact, the R7 is a tiny bit higher (which means
the accessory handgip is different to clear the shutter speed dial)
they are quite light and very ergonomic (a Canon 20D looks enormous
next to an R7) - though excellent ergonomics is a feature of all the R
series cameras from the R4 on.
The whole series also offers excellent handling with a motor/winder and
handgrip attached if you find the need for motor drive.
Unless you find one that is really in perfect working order, keep away
from R3 and R3Mot Electronic cameras, repairmen also tend to shy away
from them.
In fact, it's probably easier to get an SL or SL2 repaired or properly
serviced than any of the
R-series so, if you are looking for something
purely mechanical, consider an SL2 or an SL - both are very pure and
simple and built like the proverbial tanks - and have the meter
calibrated for silver cells when (if) you get the camera CLA-ed (use a
Wein Cell if you don't).
One more thing, the SL2 has a hot shoe, the SL hasn't.
Getting back to motordrives - the SLMot and SL2Mot motors are very hard
to come by, almost impossible to service or repair (even the best
repairers run screaming from the workshop) and the battery holders tend
to crack or break easily and there's no adhesive I've found that you
can use to mend them - not to mention total disaster if you had some
leaky cells in them (like I did). The overall weight with a motor also
leaves quite a bit to be desired - 10 AA batteries are NOT light.
On the second hand market, both the R6 and R6.2 tend to be overpriced.
A decent R5 or R7 would probably cost between a third and a half less.
A "Made in Portugal R5 is even cheaper here in Germany (Portugal = red
dot on the left when seen from the front, Germany = red dot on the
right), even though the cameras are otherwise identical and equally
reliable.
Cheers
Douglas
Gary Pinkerton wrote:
I would personally not pay the extra premium for a R6.2, the R6 is
one > half the cost !
I've not had an R6.2, but have had 3 R6 bodies at one time or another
> and did not find them to be any more reliable than the electronic >
bodies. Yes you can shoot without batteries, but batteries are cheap >
and last a long time [normally]. The best R body I've ever had was a >
used R4 which was still going strong after 7 years when I traded it. I
> would probably go for a R7 if you want a smaller body to accompany >
your R8. Or, better still, a good used SL :)
> > Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 23:08:06 -0700
> From: speleo_karst@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [LRflex] Re: Camera Choice Advice Sought
> To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Kevin Willey <kevinwilley@xxxxxx>
> To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 3:15:09 AM
> Subject: [LRflex] Camera Choice Advice Sought
>
>
> Also, love the process of shooting MF with Hassi but I want a
travel > camera and long zoom options and a backup body. Rather than go
the > M8.2 as I originally intended and then have to invest in a M lens
> line, I am considering a second R8 or R9 body. Yet the R6.2 tempts me
> because of reputation, size, all mechanical so I can keep it a long >
time w/o worrying about electronic parts to repair R820or R9. Do I lose
> noticeable image quality with a less capable metering, programming >
system in R6.2 versus R8/9? There is currently a new 6.2 on eBay for >
$1,700.
>
> ________________________
>
> As Doug mentioned, depending on your preferences, subjects and >
situations, there is no reason for a manual exposure camera to produce
worse images than an R8 or R9.
>
> The cameras of the R4-R7 series will be lighter than what you now >
have (I have an R4, which has been very reliable, despite its >
reputation. The only reason I might upgrade it is to get 1/2000).
> The problem remains that, for a travel camera, the R lenses >
themselves are bloody heavy!
> So when walking/backpacking long distances, I'll usually take my M6
> (the body itself isn't that light, but the lenses are, as well as >
being tiny) or my Rolleiflex SLR (also has a lineup of very small, >
light & good lenses).
>
> For 1700$ you can get lots of camera, including a basic M kit!
> In any case, cameras like the R4 are so cheap now, that if an >
electronic component does fail, you just get another one (horrible >
consumerism, yes...)
>
>
>
> ------
> Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
> http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/ ;
> Archives are at:
> http://ww
w.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/
Archives are at:
//www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
Other related posts:
