Leica R4 any good?

Mr Bump

From under the bridge
Suspended / Banned
Messages
10,944
Name
Sophia aka Paul
Edit My Images
Yes
they look nice and sleek but are they any good?
how do they rate against say the Nikon FG?
 
I found this quote

"They are cheap for a reason. Poor mirror dampening, bad electronics, no repair parts, and a dim viewfinder. Cost to repair is more than value of the camera"

And although I think this may be a little harsh they were never considered to be one of Leica's jewels in the crown. The lenses however are, I believe, superb.

The R3 was supposed to be excellent and pretty much anything after the 4 is sought after.

Andy
 
Last edited:
They're a modified Minolta XD7/XD11. If you don't want spot metering and don't want to spend a premium on Leica glass get the Minolta. They are prone to many gremlins, but are lovely solid cameras. The majority of the hate towards them comes from Leica fanboys who can't stand things that aren't of purebread German origin, you should see some of the Vitriole directed at Portrugese and Canadian Leitz stuff!

(Many of the lenses are 'joint' designs, so there is a Leica version and a Minolta version, they ALL have glass manufactured by Minolta regardless of the badge, but the Leica ones are additionally breathed on a little)

I would be shooting one now if I could afford to.
 
To be honest most of the quotes about how bad they are were from the Leica faithful, but there are too many reports about, especially, failed electronics to not give it some thought before buying one.

Andy
 
To be honest most of the quotes about how bad they are were from the Leica faithful, but there are too many reports about, especially, failed electronics to not give it some thought before buying one.

Andy

Not disagreeing, I had an XD7 and an XD11 and both broke.
 
Not sure about the R4 however I have a Leica R5 and its great. Seems to feel a little heavier than the Minolta's but I find the viewfinder to be brighter.

I have a Japan built 35-70 on mine and can use it wide open with out any really noticable softening at the edges.

Something else I must blow the dust off and use if I ever get my photo mojo back :(

However I do agree with what Alan said, they are based on the Minolta's.
 
Thanks chaps was just thinking of adding another brand to my Nikon small stable of the FG and ummmmm maybe an FE2 soon.
 
Had an R4 and it was a very good camera. Very slick, well made, good viewfinder info, nice ergonomics, no electrical or mechanical probs. no diopter adjustment tho. But they only use Leica glass which is bloody expensive, so you dont normally get one unless yer loaded. Unless maybe you go Tamron. Do they even fit? My R5 is much nicer tho!
 
Comparing it to an FG tho? Like comparing a hyundai to a Merc. I will let you decide which is which. And I am a Nikon fanboy with a lovely FG in front of me. But itis all about the glass.
 
So is an R5 more of the cult Leica then to fit my needs?
 
Had an R4 and it was a very good camera. Very slick, well made, good viewfinder info, nice ergonomics, no electrical or mechanical probs. no diopter adjustment tho. But they only use Leica glass which is bloody expensive, so you dont normally get one unless yer loaded. Unless maybe you go Tamron. Do they even fit? My R5 is much nicer tho!

And quite a lot of Leica glass for the R series was made by Minolta anyway (direct copies of Minolta designs for all of the zooms in fact as Leica never designed a zoom prior to ~1995!) just differently branded and way way more expensive
 
I have an R6, an R7 and a broken R4!

As folk have said, the lenses are pricey and as some folk like to use them on their digital Canons, they are in demand too.

I've manged to get a 28mm f2.8, a 50mm f2 and a 90mm f2 for less than £200 each but I had to be patient and keep checking ebay etc. It took a while!

Great kit though if a little heavy compared to my Nikons.
 
I have to fess up here - i am selling all my Leica R gear. And my Nikon FG! Nikon F5 is all I need :)
 
Back
Top