Minolta- Leica

KlausWehner · 2009-06-20T19:55:04+00:00

Liebe Minoltaexperten, bestimmt kann mir jemand von Euch das Kameramodell nennen, das später bei Leica zur R4 wurde? Wer hat Erfahrung damit? Gibt es even...

KlausWehner

Dear Minolta experts, I’m sure one of you will be able to tell me the name of the camera model that later became the Leica R4? Does anyone have any experience with it? Are there any particular issues I should be aware of when buying this camera? Thanks in advance – and best regards, Klaus

Wolf_XL

...you’re probably referring to the Minolta XD-7 – it shares some components with the R4. I’m not aware of any typical weaknesses – though you must be aware that the XD-7 was launched in 1977, so you might be getting a camera that’s over thirty years old. At the very least, the light seals are likely to consist more or less of nothing but a sticky, black mass... But that’s no problem – they’re relatively easy to replace. Otherwise, you’ll get a camera that’s still great fun to use... Especially when paired with the truly top-class lenses, where the collaboration with Leitz really comes into its own. In any case, you get top-class lenses without having to pay a ‘professional surcharge’ as you would with Canon or Nikon...

KlausWehner

Thanks, Wolf, That’s exactly what I wanted to know! Age… I’ve got cameras that are much older than that and they work perfectly fine! Replacing the light seal (after 30 years) isn’t a big deal either. I’ll have a look at what’s on offer on eBay… Thanks and best regards from Paderborn Klaus

Andreas_23

Hi Klaus, The R3 also has its roots in Minolta; it’s based on the XE-1. Have a look here: Leica R3 or here: Leica R on Wikipedia Best regards, Andreas

Renate

Hello, With purely mechanical cameras, the age of the camera is of little consequence. If in doubt, you simply take it apart, clean it and re-grease it, and you’ll be able to enjoy it for many years to come. It’s different with cameras that contain electronics. If the electronics break down, the camera is scrap. Electronics always have a limited lifespan; the more complex they are, the shorter it is. Cameras with electronics are never a purchase for life. This will soon hit our digital friends particularly hard. Best regards, Renate

Wolf_XL

Hello, With purely mechanical cameras, the age of the camera is of little consequence. If in doubt, you simply take it apart, clean it and re-grease it, and you’ll be able to enjoy it for many years to come. It’s a different story with cameras that contain electronics. If the electronics fail, the camera is as good as scrap. Electronics always have a limited lifespan; the more complex they are, the shorter it is. Cameras with electronics are never a purchase for life. This will soon hit our digital friends particularly hard. Best regards, Renate

...somehow, this notion of ‘fussy and imperfect’ electronics just won’t go out of people’s heads... I reckon a lot of nonsense gets bandied about when it comes to electronics in cameras. We should simply free ourselves from the idea that mechanics and electronics are fundamentally different when it comes to spare parts and repairs. Whether an irreplaceable moulded part breaks, or an integrated circuit that can no longer be sourced gives up the ghost – the result in both cases is ‘precious scrap’... It’s probably more of a psychological phenomenon: people seem to find it easier to cope with the loss if they know that something mechanical is broken – if they can understand the fault. A broken spring or a faulty gear is usually accepted with a regretful shrug. But if the camera won’t work because of an electronic fault, people are quick to curse the damned electronics... Yet a camera with an electronic problem isn’t any more ‘broken’ than one with a broken spring... On the subject of electronics, I can say the following: Generally speaking, the electronics are rarely the problem – they are usually wear-free and only age in very rare cases (such as the capacitor issue with Minoltas). The problem usually lies in the interface with the mechanics. This is where very specific, camera-specific components are usually fitted, which cannot be replaced with standard parts. These include parts such as specially shaped potentiometers, special switches and the like. It’s extremely rare that you can make do with a part from your DIY kit – but the same applies to mechanical parts too... Come to think of it, I’ve certainly bin more cameras due to mechanical faults than because of electronic glitches...

Wolfgg

Most electronic components age so slowly that they will outlive us all by a long way. In my drawers, I have 40-year-old ICs, 50–60-year-old diodes, transistors, resistors and capacitors – and they all still work. There are only a few components that are particularly susceptible to ageing, such as electrolytic capacitors (Elkos) or LCDs. Electrolytic capacitors are standard components and therefore easy to replace; LCDs, on the other hand, are always developed specifically for the model and can therefore only be obtained as spare parts from the camera manufacturer, if at all. Integrated circuits are extremely reliable; if I’ve had a single failure in the last 30 years (with over 10,000 ICs in use), it was always due to overvoltage or overcurrent. The reliability of the electronics is determined by the connections between them – i.e. solder joints, cables, connectors, switches, buttons, etc. – and the contact materials used there, as well as the parts with sliding contacts, namely the potentiometers. The problem with digital cameras is the shoddy mechanics, including switches and buttons; for example, if the lens accidentally extends whilst in your pocket, the plastic gears lose their teeth and that’s it. Regards, Wolfgang

Andreas_23

Hello Wolfgg and Wolf XL, Nevertheless, I agree with Renate when she writes:

Cameras with electronic components are never a purchase for life. This will soon hit our digital friends particularly hard.

I very much doubt that in 20 or 30 years’ time there will still be special batteries or compatible memory cards for our current digital cameras (does anyone still remember SmartMedia cards?). Perhaps there won’t even be any computer programmes left that can read the image file format. On the other hand: if roll films are no longer available, it won’t help me that my Lipca Rollop is still in perfect mechanical working order. And spare parts for the FA will surely run out at some point too. I just fear that this will happen sooner with digital cameras. Best regards, Andreas

Wolfgg

The manufacturer’s intentions play a major role here. Take Canon, for example: the designers of the F1 (the old one) had a very different idea of how long ‘their baby’ should bring joy compared to the designers of the PowerShot… or rather, the marketing department’s guidelines were set accordingly. You can see this in the haste with which successor models are rushed onto the market; Renate is quite right about that. The same can be observed with cars: classic cars without electronics enjoy greater trust among those who want to still be driving them decades from now. Best regards, Wolfgang

StefanCaspari

The manufacturer’s intentions play a major role here. Take Canon, for example: the designers of the F1 (the old one) had a very different idea of how long ‘their baby’ should bring joy compared to the designers of the PowerShot… or rather, the marketing department’s guidelines were set accordingly. You can see this in the haste with which successor models are rushed onto the market; Renate is quite right about that. The same can be observed with cars: classic cars without electronics enjoy greater trust among those who want to still be driving them decades from now. Regards, Wolfgang

You’re absolutely right. I’ve got three F1 bodies (old) myself – the first one’s been in constant use since 1978, and I bought the other two later on. The whole FDS system is practically ‘indestructible’. The bodies from the AE1, A1 and so on, however, aren’t quite as resilient to stress anymore. Generally speaking, in my day-to-day work, I still have the most confidence in the mechanical parts. Best regards: Stefan

Wolf_XL

...well, what we’re seeing with digital cameras right now is exactly what happened in the early days of analogue photography. How many long-forgotten formats were there in the period before and after the First World War? It was only when it became clear that 35mm film and 120 roll film were set to become the de facto standard that things settled down a bit. Only Kodak couldn’t resist, and in doing so got quite a few film and camera manufacturers into serious trouble. Had the money squandered on the stillborn Instamatic, Pocket and Disc film formats been invested straight away in the further development of 35mm and medium format, analogue would probably be in a better position today... Be that as it may – I certainly get the impression that, at least in the professional digital sector, the situation is easing – at least there, nobody needs to buy a new camera every six months just to stay up to date. Be that as it may – my oldest electronic camera, which I still use, is a Minolta XD-7 that’s over thirty years old. And if my Rolleiflex 6008 lasts that long too, it’ll probably outlive me... ;-)