[LRFlex] Re: R3-R4s reliablilty, service issues and sources for help?

Hi Steven,

The only one point I would add is check all the foam seals - the foam will
probably have disintegrated by now, - the obvious one is on the door (which
everyone replaces and you mention seems OK) but I believe there is similar
foam used inside the camera (around the focus screen/ to damp the mirror??).
I would expect the service picked this up, if not the good news is replacement
is relatively cheap. 

Regards
Keith
PS sorry if someone has already said this - my email is a bit erratic!

>-- Original Message --
>From: "Dave Saalsaa" <SaalsD@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>To: <leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [LRFlex] Re: R3-R4s reliablilty, service issues and sources for
>help?
>Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 11:04:23 -0500
>Reply-To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>   Hi Steven,
> I shoot both Minolta and Leica SLRs. I have for many years.  I believe
the
>only problem with the early R4 was with electronic problems that were ironed
>out in later version R4 cameras. So by the time the R4s and the R4sP came
>around they were quite dependable.  I have had no problems with my R4s
and
>R4sP.  Also, the Minolta XE which inspired the R3 and the XD series which
>inspired the R4 through R7 have all been very dependable in my opinion.

>I
>have used them for many years with no problems except for the need to
>replace gooey foam light seals on them which is very typical with all old
>cameras.   Stop being paranoid about your R4s and just use it.  :-)
>
>Dave
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "Steven Rosenthal" <steverose108@xxxxxxx>
>To: <leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Sent: Friday, October 22, 2004 10:44 AM
>Subject: [LRFlex] R3-R4s reliablilty, service issues and sources for help?
>
>
>> Hi Kent, do you mind if I ask you about the R3 you mentioned? I  was
>> wondering where you like to send it for service and if you think they
>could
>> work on an R4s. I have an R4s that appears to be in near mint condition,
>I
>> got it from a place that offered a six month warranty on it and stated
>it
>> had been serviced, is in super operating condition and no problems. It
>> really is in good shape, even the rubber seal around the film canister
>> see-thru window is like new, so I believe that is is as they
>represented...
>> it seems really strong and reliable but I confess I am a little leery
of
>it
>> every time I use it, I guess I am expecting it to just go SPROING one
day
>> and parts shooting out from it or something. Also I am a bit gun-shy
of
>> cameras that seem reliable and then one day, let you down at the worst
>> possible moment with absolutely NO warning, which is why I have given
up
>> Russian and Eastern Bloc cameras, despite their amazing and virtually
free
>> Carl Zeiss lenses....
>>
>>  I needed a body to use with a battered but working great, 35mm f/2
>> Summicron 3-cam. But I have heard these Minolta-inspired Leicas are
>> unreliable etc. on the one hand...and from others, that if you get a
good
>> one like the one I have, no worries, that it will be reliable. I would
>just
>> like to have on hand the name of some good, and hopefully not too
>expensive,
>> service groups for future reference if necessary, or should I not be
>> worried? I have heard they are more dependable than the R3 or even the
>> original R4s. On the other hand if you have been using the same camera
>since
>> 1978 it is certainly reasonable to send it for a service at this point!
>I
>> don't shoot that many rolls of film, not like a pro at this point, maybe
>a
>> few a month during the year and more on vacations (not that I ever get
>> one....)
>>
>> I don't want to bore everyone or open up a 'can of worms' as we say,
>meaning
>> a tired subject that has probably been flayed to death in earlier
>postings,
>> so if there is a discussion of this in some archive feel free to point
>me
>to
>> it, I understand.
>>
>> I don't know if anyone in the group dabbles in camera repair as I do,
at
>> least I do on a limited basis..I always seek the opinion of  a real Guru
>of
>> that field, an old guy named Ed Romney here in the US, a lifetime of
>> experience, publishes still in semi-retirement, dozens if not hundreds
>of
>> books and courses on camera repair, etc. I finally found some comments
>of
>> his on these Minolta inspired R's and he is not too keen on them, in
terms
>> of reliability. I had hoped to find that this was just hysteria about
this
>> series, but apparently there have been problems. On the other hand, I
have
>> read elsewhere that most,  if not all of these problems surfaced in the
>R3
>/
>> electronic; were worked out by the R4s era... with the P or Model 2 being
>> even better?
>>
>> Mine is not the P, just the plain R4s.  Interestingly it has manual spot,
>> auto exposure spot, and auto exposure averaging metering... I saw one
>> on-line manual that seemed to state this model only had manual spot and
>auto
>> averaging, is mine an unusual model or an early unmarked P or Model 2
?
>> There is no engraving on the hot shoe.  I recognize that many in this
>group
>> have used them also over the years and welcome your comments.
>>
>> If I could, which would be the first of the more reliable, later model
>R
>> bodies, the 5 or 6? Anything later or current is just priced out of
>> possiblity, I'm thinking.  Or should I just calm down and trust my R4s?
>It
>> sure feels solid and like it will work forever, not like a camera that
>could
>> go out at any second. Frankly I have not read any specifics of what does
>go
>> out on these and under what circumstances. Sometimes it helps to know
>> this... for example the Sov Bloc Pentacon 6x6cm cameras have a notoriously
>> weak wind, but if you get a good one and are careful to wind smoothly
and
>> gently, manually return the wind lever to its resting position, rather
>than
>> just letting it slap back as on a Nikon etc. it will run forever, if
not,
>> plan a trip soon to the repair shop (inconvenient for those not residing
>in
>> Prague....)
>>
>> It should cheer everyone up here that Romney absolutely raves about the
>R
>> lenses and thinks if Leica had had any sense, even back then, they would
>> have made their lenses in an adaptall-type mount , e/g. Tamron's strategy,
>> to be used on - dare I say it- Nikon, Canon  or other bodies so that
>pro's,
>> who universally recognize the superiority of Leica glass and would use
>them
>> if they could, and also have a reliable and relatively affordable camera
>to
>> use them on, maybe on the bodies they already own. Of course Leica would
>> have sold many less expensive (unreliable, reputation-damaging ) cameras,
>> and a ton more expensive (reliable, reputation-increasing)  lenses.
>>
>> Thanks and I would sure appreciate any insight and tips from the group...
>>
>> ------
>> Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
>>     www.horizon.bc.ca/~dnr/lrflex.htm
>> Archives are at:
>>     www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
>>
>
>
>------
>Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
>    www.horizon.bc.ca/~dnr/lrflex.htm
>Archives are at:
>    www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/


__________________________________________________________________
Win 12 amazing weekend breaks, one every month for a year to Dublin, Milan,
the Alps, Paris and beyond

http://www.tiscali.co.uk/travel/competitions/brilliant_weekends.html



------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
    www.horizon.bc.ca/~dnr/lrflex.htm
Archives are at:
    www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/

Other related posts: