Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/11/11

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] so called "R8 glut"
From: Ted Grant <tedgrant@islandnet.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 08:29:28 -0800

Rich wrote:

>I listened to a lot of the anti-hype on the R8 until about a year ago when I
>actually used one. The truth is, it is a REALLY nice camera. I wonder if a
>lot of detractors have actually owned one, or even used one, for any amount
>of time.>>>>>>>

Rich,

I agree with you, as that has been my feelings since the R8 came out. Many
of the detractors were making comments from looking at magazines, played
with it for a few minutes in the store, never used it real time, had small
human hands and were ergonomically challenged. Therefore the camera was all
bad!

Hell they were even shooting it down because it didn't "look nice!" Which I
can't ever figure out what "looking nice" has to do with successful
pictures.

My R8 came out of the box 4 years ago and it's been a dream camera ever
since, (although the original was an "MIA for 14 months" and about to be
corrected in a few days on return.)

I'd have been much happier with a motor attached, the camera is one of the
best they produced.  I say that because of past experience of working three
Leica SLR type cameras at a time since they arrived into the world many
years ago.

Yep it's been unfortunate for Leica they didn't have their act together
with all the bits and pieces ready to go when the R8 was announced, it's
cost them dearly in sales and image since 1996. Maybe when they finally get
the motor out to the world on mass production level, back orders are filled
and lots of them available the sales level will increase.

>The R8 certainly had a balance and viewfinder that the other cameras lacked.
>(In fact it remains my favourite viewfinder in any camera I can think
>of...including the F5.) The mirror seems to be better dampened and of course
>the new features etc... I don't use a motor drive in ANY of my photography,
>so that never factored in for me.>>>>>

The motor may not have been required by photographers like yourself and I'm
sure there were many sold to those in similar position.  But the
"production image loss" and constant "later later later" had to wreck havoc
with sales, even if a  motor wasn't required.

It created a bad image of "How well is this camera made," if they can't get
the rest of the pieces right?  Which of course was unfortunate, as the
camera is just a hummer of a machine, certainly for the majority that are
using them on a daily basis.

>I hope the R8 doesn't become a photographic POTATOE. ;-> It is far too nice
>for that. >>>>>

I don't think it will it's too soon to tell. I feel the R8 will gain
stature when motors are available even though some photographers don't use
it, for many it's an essential part in using a camera. Whether shooting
sports or not, as in some cases like myself with one good left eye, the
motor makes all the difference to the success of my picture taking.

Winder's are fine but much too slow, particularly when using R7's with
motors at the same time.

>I don't want to sound like a cheerleader for Leica, but I simply am curious
>if the anti-hype has already gone far beyond what the R8 ever deserved.>>>>>

I don't doubt that it has and some on the LUG have contributed to that
without even working the R8 in an honest to goodness time frame. But the
true believers are out there and working them well and are happy with them.

ted

Ted Grant
This is Our Work. The Legacy of Sir William Osler.
http://www.islandnet.com/~tedgrant