Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Leicas and other Leica Mount Cameras > Voigtlander Bessa Leica Mount Cameras

Voigtlander Bessa Leica Mount Cameras Made in Japan by Cosina in partnership with Voigtlander, the many modern Voigtlander Leica Screw Mount and Leica M mount bodies offer inexpensive and often unique options into entering the world of Leica rangefinder photography.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Without Comparing them to Leica, What is Your Experience with the Bessa Rangefinders?
Old 07-09-2018   #1
Kumachrome
Registered User
 
Kumachrome's Avatar
 
Kumachrome is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 57
Without Comparing them to Leica, What is Your Experience with the Bessa Rangefinders?

Hi everyone, wanted to know your own personal experiences with the Bessa rangefinders. I'm thinking about getting one. I'm considering the Bessa R, R2, R2A/M, etc. I've owned two Leicas in the past but the Leica magic has kind of worn off of me, but I do love rangefinders. So, without comparing the Bessas to a Leica (because the Bessas AREN'T Leicas, nor trying to be) what is your experience with them? Do you still have one? Did it ever break? Is it prone to certain mechanical failures? What do you use it for?
Thanks!
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-09-2018   #2
presspass
filmshooter
 
presspass is offline
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Lancaster County, Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,129
I have an R2 and have used it for years. Mine has the bottom lever winder on it and that's been the only problem. When I'm in a hurry and pull it too quickly after firing the shutter, it tends to overlap frames slightly. Other than that, it's an excellent camera; the manually selected frames are good and the viewfinder is bright. I do like the fact that two of the frames - I don't have the camera in front of me so I don't remember which ones - are the only ones in the finder so I don't have to deal with pairs of frames. The higher flash synch is also helpful at times.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-09-2018   #3
charjohncarter
Registered User
 
charjohncarter's Avatar
 
charjohncarter is online now
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Danville, CA, USA
Posts: 8,350
My experience with my R is good. Not much bigger than my IIIf, and the R has a meter. I have been using it for ten years and still have film in it now. It has never broken, but I am very careful advancing film and not forcing it at the end of a roll. It is my daily 35mm user. I find the rangefinder very good and I get more in focus shots than with SLRs. My eyes are getting old so the rangefinder really helps.

The last roll I shot had something that looked like a light leak on 2 frames. I'm hoping this isn't my first problem. We will see.

If I were buying a Bessa now, even though I have LTM lenses, I would get the R2A. It is so nice to set the shutter on 'A' and shoot.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-09-2018   #4
RichC
Registered User
 
RichC is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Brighton, UK
Posts: 1,282
I found the rangefinder a bit delicate - prone to going out of whack and needing recalibration if the camera wasn't mollycoddled. Didn't like the knocks and vibration when travelling off-road in trucks, for example.
__________________

-=Rich=-


Portfolio: www.richcutler.co.uk
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-09-2018   #5
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 5,932
I just didn't like using my R3A. The meter read outs were hard to see unless your eye was perfectly placed, the rewind knob design seemed unnecessarily complicated and delicate, the shutter just felt clanky.
I actually did like that I had to set the frame lines manually. Because this meant I could use any ltm-m mount converter as it didn't matter as there was no auto indexing. I heard the RF mechanism was very delicate and easily knocked out, but mine was fine. Then again I baby my gear.

I tried it out of curiosity, used it, happily sold it on. It just made me wish I was using something else.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-09-2018   #6
MaxElmar
Registered User
 
MaxElmar's Avatar
 
MaxElmar is offline
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Central New Jersey
Posts: 584
I have used the Bessa R, R2, and Bessa T extensively over a dozen years or so. They have been excellent shooters and very reliable. They are among my favorite cameras to shoot with. I don't think twice about taking them anywhere. The meters are very rudimentary compared to, say, a modern Nikon matrix meter. I think for this reason I personally would avoid the R2A and R3A. I had an R3A for a bit - it was well used - very worn actually - and it jammed once or twice. I returned it. I wear glasses and I found the 40mm frame lines - and the meter readout very difficult to see.

The lenses are great. I have mostly Voigtlander LTM lenses (I own several Leica LTM cameras) and they are a fantastic value. My lone M-mount lens is a CV 40/1.4 - again, a wonderful lens that seems to work fine with the 35mm frame lines on my R2. (I have a tendency to frame very loosely - the 40mm counteracts that!)
__________________
Chris L.

Still Photographically Uncool
https://www.flickr.com/photos/xenotar/


  Reply With Quote

Old 07-09-2018   #7
Scapevision
Registered User
 
Scapevision is offline
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Toronto
Posts: 439
Bessa R and R2A experience. The R was crap, but already came with issues with rf alignment, which I tried to fix, however, previous owners had glued the adjustment screws, so I left it and got rid of it. R2A was as close as I could get to a great usable camera. It worked well, no issues. Felt much better designed than the R, minus the form factor I actually preferred on the R. Rubber grips eventually started to come off though.
Out of the whole rf experience I've had, the Minolta CLE was the ultimate bestest.
__________________
Flickr
scapevision.ca
Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-09-2018   #8
mpaniagua
Registered User
 
mpaniagua is offline
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Tijuana, Baja California, Mexico
Age: 45
Posts: 878
Bessa T and Bessa R2 myself. For Bessa T, I really like its size. For R2, viewfinder is one of the brightness I ever seen. Pretty reliable lightmeters, pretty wel made. No issues so far.

I used them even when I felt uncomfortable bringing my Leicas. Some people get bothered by the shutter noise, but I don't have a problem with that myself. If I want a silent shutter, I use a blade shutter camera, like a Rolleiflex, Yashica or if I need 35mm, a Solinette or Voigtländer Vitessa T or L.

Also, they come in green which I like

Best regards

Marcelo
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-09-2018   #9
BLKRCAT
99% Film
 
BLKRCAT's Avatar
 
BLKRCAT is offline
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,733
being that the bessa cameras are inferior in just about every way to leica with the exception of price maybe.

They still hold up well. I've never had a bessa but I did have an RD1 for a while and it felt solid. Rangefinder was nice but still had the same flaw that bessas and ikons have. You have to have your eye perfectly centered within the frame in order to see the rangefinder patch accurately. Leica's don't have this problem is they are in perfect working order.

Shutter sound on the RD1 was actually better than the M8. No automatic recocking sound, more solid but higher pitched click and the shutter release being mechanical felt better.

Just my observations. But on film the leica shutters blew the bessa ones out of the water for sound. For reliability...
__________________
TumblrYoutube

Last edited by BLKRCAT : 07-10-2018 at 10:29. Reason: spelling
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-09-2018   #10
froyd
Registered User
 
froyd's Avatar
 
froyd is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,055
Loved my R2A...until it got stolen. Very light weight, so easier on my neck than the other camera you asked us not to use a meter of comparison. I had the black paint version that seemed to wear very well in the 3 years I owned it. The viewfinder's size and brightness was a revelation, coming from SLRs. Really top notch and I never experienced the RF patch being misaligned.

I do agree that the rewind crank felt flimsy, but I do prefer it over the slanted M4-style rewind. My favorite solution here is the Ikon's rewind.

Losing the R2A led me on a Contax G > Zeiss Ikon > Leica M4 journey. I still haev the Leica and the Contax, but to the testament of the quality of the Bessa, the Ikon was sold because in the end I did not find it much better in use than the R2A.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-09-2018   #11
ChrisPlatt
Thread Killer
 
ChrisPlatt's Avatar
 
ChrisPlatt is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Queens NYC
Age: 57
Posts: 2,658
I currently own and use C-V Bessa R and L models.
They are well thought out, well-made and easy to use.
Both have worked flawlessly in normal amateur use.

I wish Kobayashi-san was still making film cameras.

Chris
__________________
Bring back the latent image!
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-09-2018   #12
kxl
Social Documentary
 
kxl's Avatar
 
kxl is offline
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Sunny SoCal
Posts: 2,933
I had the Bessa T but could not get used to the separate RF and VF.

I had the Bessa L, which was fun as a P&S for wide angle lenses (just slap on your favorite WA lens and matching external viewfinder and off you go. I used a CV 15mm).

I had the Bessa R4M, which was nice for wide angle lenses, especially 21mm and 25mm.

I had the Bessa R3A, which was nice for its 1:1 magnification.

In the end, I sold all of them, bought a Zeiss ZI and never looked back. If I were to get another Bessa, it would be the R4A/M to use with a 21mm and 25mm.
__________________
Keith
My website
RFF feedback


"... I thought the only way to give us an incentive, to bring hope, is to show the pictures of the pristine planet - to see the innocence.” ― Sebastiao Salgado
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-09-2018   #13
Mr_Flibble
Registered User
 
Mr_Flibble's Avatar
 
Mr_Flibble is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: The Lowlands
Age: 41
Posts: 3,934
Used the Epson RD1 for over a decade. Loved the ergonomics, which I assume are very similar to the Bessa Rs.
__________________
Rick - In Tabulas Argenteas Refero
Loaded with film: Argus K

Latest Toys: B&H Eyemo Transport Case
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-09-2018   #14
Ko.Fe.
Me. Write ESL. Ko.
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Posts: 6,264
I had numerous Leica LTM, M film rangefinders and I had L, R, T.

R was my first not-FSU rangefinder. It was great step forward from FED-2, Keiv-4AM and Zorki. And from crapped out XA. It was cute, little camera. Feels simple and nice.
It was mint on purchase I used for couple of years issues free. It became trashed on exterior (due to paint over plastic and rubber) and shutter blades were also showing some worn. Sold it for twice less on RFF.

L has very loud and jamming shutter. Was also purchased as mint.

T was LNIB and on second roll VF holder became loose. Googled it and it was known issue and how to fix it.

Now I have R2M simply as backup for M4-2. This R2M was purchased new.
It needs to have half-case to avoid exterior to be worn out. With half-case it is even more tall. It has annoying tendency to turn around and have lens up to the sky, strap lugs are simply in the wrong place, if you like small and medium RF lenses. But should be great with big lenses and external viewfinders.
Speed dial is rough and film advance is just like in cheap SLRs.
And then you google why frames spacing is uneven it brings RFF thread with how gente you need to be on advancing.
Rewind back is not so easy, if you lose it, it rewinds film back.
Loading film is not just drop in, close and rewind.
Exposure meter is finicky, you need to guess it and have shutter speed, aperture close.
If it not close - exposure meter just keeps flashing.
For some reason some of my LTM to M adapters then in R2M lens mount are loose comparing to another cameras.
It is great with fast lenses, wide open and on sunny day. No clothes to burn.
After getting familiar with it you are realising what it is Cosina made SLR (economy, entry level) with RF added to it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-09-2018   #15
johannielscom
Leica II is The One
 
johannielscom's Avatar
 
johannielscom is offline
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Universitas Terre Threntiae
Posts: 7,256
picked an LTM model with lenses up for sale six or seven years ago. I sold it on quickly, the plastic feel of it didn't entice me to keep and use it. The viewfinder was nice to look through but it still went out the door asap
__________________
www.johanniels.com | flickr | instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-09-2018   #16
Bingley
Registered User
 
Bingley's Avatar
 
Bingley is offline
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sacramento, California
Posts: 5,482
I had the Bessa R and sold it. Nice camera, bright vf, but loud shutter and felt a little flimsy.

I had the Bessa R3A and sold it. Mine was one of the ones that had rf alignment issues, and it was difficult to fix. Also, the 40mm framelines were hard to see for someone like me who wears glasses. The camera otherwise felt very solid and the metering in A mode was excellent.

I have the Bessa T and love it. I've had this camera now for almost ten years. It's like a Barnack with mod cons. A great vacation travel and second camera body.

I have the Bessa R2A and love it. I bought this new, just after the announcement that production would cease. I think of it as a poor man's M7. The A priority mode is very good, the camera feels solid w/out being overly heavy, and I have had no rf alignment issues. It's also really nice to have a camera body with dedicated 75mm framelines.
__________________
Steve

M3, M2, R2A, IIIc, IVSB2, & T, and assorted LTM & M lenses
Minolta XD11, Pentax ME Super, and assorted MD Rokkor and Takumar lenses, Rolleicord III, Rolleicord Vb, Rolleiflex Automat MX-EVS

My Flickr
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-09-2018   #17
filmtwit
Desperate but not serious
 
filmtwit's Avatar
 
filmtwit is offline
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: West Coast
Posts: 2,852
I've owned an R2, had it for about a year and then sold it as I found the shutter fairly loud. I also later picked up a R2s and have been prety happy with it over using my Nikon S3 as they are just about as loud and R2s has a meter.
__________________
Instgram
https://www.instagram.com/filmtwit/

The Flickr Stream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/filmtwit/

The Blog (Boring Sidney, Boring)
http://jeffthomasallen.blogspot.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-09-2018   #18
tbhv55
Registered User
 
tbhv55 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Devon, UK
Age: 62
Posts: 539
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kumachrome View Post
without comparing the Bessas to a Leica (because the Bessas AREN'T Leicas, nor trying to be) what is your experience with them?
I don't have a Leica (never even handled one) so I can easily avoid making a comparison! However, I have owned a Bessa R for about a year and a half, and I find it excellent, in use. I haven't had any problems with it, although I should mention that I don't use it a great deal - not because I don't like it, but because I have so many other cameras also demanding to be used.

The Bessa R is, IMO, a rather pleasing camera to use. I can't explain this........ it just is.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-09-2018   #19
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
 
Rob-F's Avatar
 
Rob-F is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The Show Me state
Age: 77
Posts: 5,589
I sometimes think of getting an R4A or an R4M. I like wide angle lenses, and it would be nice to shoot with the built-in wide angle finder.
__________________
May the light be with you.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-09-2018   #20
Doug
Moderator
 
Doug's Avatar
 
Doug is offline
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Pacific NW, USA
Posts: 12,633
Yes, the R4A/R4M is unique in the RF world, as are several other Bessas... Cosina has had a very good run with these.
__________________
Doug’s Gallery
RFF on Facebook
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-09-2018   #21
jamin-b
Registered User
 
jamin-b is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 411
I have a R3a and an R4a, both bought in excellent used condition. Both are really special in their own way. In handling them I always feel that they seem a bit flimsier than I would like, but in real life use I have never had issues. I really like their light weight and compactness, accurate center meter and automatic modes + AE lock, and that they share the same add on grip (also with my Bessamatic SLR).
I also picked up a new old stock Bessa L for around $100. A fun, light camera.
My main issue with these cameras is that I don't seem to use them enough .
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-09-2018   #22
jamin-b
Registered User
 
jamin-b is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 411
Forgot to mention - I view the fact that you need to dial in the correct viewfinder lines for the lens as a plus. That way it doesn't matter which LTM to M adapter you are using, since it won't automatically bring up a certain set of lines.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-09-2018   #23
nukecoke
⚛Yashica
 
nukecoke's Avatar
 
nukecoke is offline
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Sweden/China
Posts: 994
I have an R, bought second hand.

RF patch came misaligned, adjusted at home and it's spot on. Never ran out of whack even though the camera was bumped and vibrated a lot. I have traveled with it a lot and appreciate the light weight of it.

Once I bumped the camera into a marble platform and it left a dent on the bottom plate instead of cracking. After two years of moderately rough using I dont mind its plastic shell anymore But I did wish it could have a metal door like Olympus XA's plastic shell+metal door combination. I now use a half case for it.

Viewfinder is very bright. RF patch is contrasty so it is fast to focus with R. Light meter is handy and accurate.

Strap lug location is as strange as Canon V, VI, 7 series of cameras. It makes the camera face the sky and top plate jab your chest when mounted with most of the lenses.

Film.counter window has fallen inside the camera once. Reglued it at home.

I think the excellent viewfinder alone makes R the best bang for the buck among interchangeable-lens rangefinders.
__________________
tumblr

flickr(abandoned)

About Film Cameras
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-10-2018   #24
Sumarongi
Registered User
 
Sumarongi's Avatar
 
Sumarongi is offline
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 331
Quote:
Originally Posted by kxl View Post
...the Bessa L, which was fun as a P&S for wide angle lenses (just slap on your favorite WA lens and matching external viewfinder and off you go. I used a CV 15mm).
Yes, I also use the Bessa L as a super wide angle snapshot tool

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisPlatt View Post
I currently own and use C-V Bessa R and L models.
They are well thought out, well-made and easy to use.
Both have worked flawlessly in normal amateur use.

I wish Kobayashi-san was still making film cameras.

Chris
I agree. My other Bessa is a Bessa R2, again, no complaints, except the rubber grips thing
__________________
**Any feature is a bug unless it can be turned off.** (Daniel Bell Heuer's Law.)
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-10-2018   #25
retinax
Registered User
 
retinax is offline
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 560
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLKRCAT View Post

snip...
Rangefinder was nice but still had the same flaw that bessas and ikons have. You have to have your eye perfectly centered within the frame in order to see the rangefinder patch accurately.

snip

This, together with the flimsy feel and too light weight, was what made me sell the Bessa R I once bought before even running a roll of film through it. I wonder why so few other people complain about it? Maybe they don't all do this?
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-10-2018   #26
JP Owens
Registered User
 
JP Owens is offline
Join Date: Dec 2014
Age: 68
Posts: 348
I've had both the R and the R2A. The R worked fine; but, was too light for my taste and didn't feel durable. I loved the R2A, though. Shot a lot of film through it, never a problem. Actually a better shooting experience than several M Leica's I owned. If I were still shooting film, I would still have the R2A. Can't say enough good things about that camera.
__________________
_______

"Nothing exists beyond the edges of the frame."
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-10-2018   #27
DMA1965
Registered User
 
DMA1965 is offline
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 41
I have a Bessa R4M I bought brand new from B&H Photo a year ago. I love having native 21 and 25 mm frame lines (I use the 25 mm framelines with my Leica 24 mm lens). If I use the whole viewfinder it also works close enough for my 15mm lens. I love the metal shutter that I don’t have to worry about burning holes into (I did this with a Leica). I love that it is fully mechanical and only needs a battery for the meter. I think I paid around $650 dollars for it brand new. Definitely the best bargain for an M body new.

I also have an R2S, which is super unique. It is a native Nikon rangefinder mount camera, fully mechanical, with a meter. It is the only native Nikon rangefinder mount camera in the world with a built in meter. It works perfectly with my 35mm f1.8 Nikon rangefinder lens (which is a superb lens). I bought the camera used in mint condition from a seller in Japan for around $500. The rangefinder patch is not quite as good as my R4M, but works well enough.

I love both cameras and consider them both well made. They are both lightweight and durable enough for my needs, plus they are inexpensive enough to not worry me as much as some of my other rangefinders.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-10-2018   #28
tonyc
Registered User
 
tonyc is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLKRCAT View Post
being that the bessa cameras are inferior in just about every way to leica with the exception of price maybe.

They still hold up well. I've never had a bessa but I did have an RD1 for a while and it felt solid. Rangefinder was nice but still had the same flaw that bessas and ikons have. You have to have your eye perfectly centered within the frame in order to see the rangefinder patch accurately. Leica's don't have this problem is they are in perfect working order.
The RF patch comment on Bessa and ZI camera is mentioned often, but it does not quite tell the truth.

Leica cameras have a much smaller, squintier exit pupil which restricts one's eye from not be centred on the viewfinder.
This is why you do not notice this issue with Leica cameras, not for any other reason.

This comment about Bessa being inferior is quite subjective:

If you are looking for a bright, uncluttered viewfinder then Bessa or ZI is are the best choices. [ The R and R2 having much nicer
viewfinders than the R2A/M R3A/M etc ]

If you want an expensive cluttered viewfinder then there are other options . . .

-TC
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-10-2018   #29
nukecoke
⚛Yashica
 
nukecoke's Avatar
 
nukecoke is offline
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Sweden/China
Posts: 994
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonyc View Post
The RF patch comment on Bessa and ZI camera is mentioned often, but it does not quite tell the truth.

Leica cameras have a much smaller, squintier exit pupil which restricts one's eye from not be centred on the viewfinder.
This is why you do not notice this issue with Leica cameras, not for any other reason.

-TC
That's true and that is also why it is much easier to see the 35mm frame line on Bessa R/R2* than 0.72x Leica M.

Plus, I've never had a problem of searching the RF patch with my Bessa: when I can't see the patch, I can't see one or more side of the frame line either, even with 50mm, so it's no go. When I could see the whole frame the patch is right there in the center.
__________________
tumblr

flickr(abandoned)

About Film Cameras
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-10-2018   #30
BLKRCAT
99% Film
 
BLKRCAT's Avatar
 
BLKRCAT is offline
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,733
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonyc View Post
The RF patch comment on Bessa and ZI camera is mentioned often, but it does not quite tell the truth.

Leica cameras have a much smaller, squintier exit pupil which restricts one's eye from not be centred on the viewfinder.
This is why you do not notice this issue with Leica cameras, not for any other reason.
But the bessa and ikons still have the problem. It's not a deal breaker for some but it's something worth mentioning.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonyc View Post
Ths comment about Bessa being inferior is quite subjective:

If you are looking for a bright, unclutered viewfinder then Bessa or ZI is are the best choices. [ The R and R2 having much nicer
viewfinders than the R2A/M R3A/M etc ]

If you want an expensive cluttered viewfinder then there are
other options . . .

-TC
It's common for people to say that the digital Ms are overpriced and not much bang for the buck. I can somewhat get behind that argument.

But the film Ms are another story. It's my opinion that the film Ms are superior to the Bessas. If you want to throw the cluttered VF argument out there you can get an M2, M3, M4, M5 which all have nice uncluttered viewfinders. It does appear that the Bessa has a bigger fresnel window so it could have brighter framelines but a clean M will perform just as well.

Maybe it's worth mentioning that the bessa's rangefinder baselength cant match the Ms? You might not notice any focus error with a standard 50/2 or 35/2 but getting into a 50/1.1... with the wonky rangefinder patch... On paper I can't say it's very confidence inspiring.

Don't get me started with the sticky plastics and weight of the bessas...

I will agree with you about the Ikon. It's probably the best viewfinder out there. Decently bright but WIDE.
__________________
TumblrYoutube
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-11-2018   #31
pvdhaar
Zoom with your feet!
 
pvdhaar's Avatar
 
pvdhaar is offline
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 3,174
I had a Bessa-T, but in the end didn't hang on to it. The main problem with the Bessa is lies in the shutter speeds below 1/30. In this range, the slow shutter speed escapement literally kicks in, making the camera jolt. That takes away one of the main advantages rangefinders claim to have over SLRs, namely being able to shoot at slow speeds without camera shake. The M4 that I had definitely didn't do that and ran smooth at every shutter speed.
__________________
Kind regards,

Peter

My Hexländer Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-11-2018   #32
robert blu
quiet photographer
 
robert blu's Avatar
 
robert blu is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Italy
Age: 69
Posts: 5,352
When the Bessa R came to the market I bought it with the 35/1.7 mainly because curiosity.
I soon realized that I liked it, small, light, i could even bring with me during my working trips. And I liked the rangefinder experience. I added a 50 and a 75. Still a small kit.

Later I bought an M7 and recently the M10.

But sometimes I still shoot the Bessa R beside the M7 (iso 100 film in one camera, iso 800 in the other).
Still satisfied without problems.

robert
__________________
Remember: today is the Day !
from Ruth Bernhard recipe for a long and happy life

my quiet photographer's blog

My RFF photos and my albums on RFF
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-11-2018   #33
Benjamin Marks
Registered User
 
Benjamin Marks is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vermont
Posts: 2,539
I have several, but haven't shot with them in years. I like them. Each has its own advantages. For instance, I liked the T's long focus base a lot. It worked really well with my Noctilux -- quite reliablely in focus. I found them adequately built for what they were, and have never had any mechanical problems with mine. I also think they were a great way for folks to experience rangefinder photography without breaking the bank. I wouldn't pound nails with one, but I never gave mine any special treatment.
__________________
Benjamin’s Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-11-2018   #34
rionda
Never Used an SLR
 
rionda is offline
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 22
After my film CL broke (film takeup spool broke), I bought an R3A in January'18 with the idea of using it as a carry-everyday-everywhere-body with the Cron-c 40/2, while keeping my M6TTL for "special occasions" (no idea now what I meant about it at the time) and for other lenses.

Turns out, I am carrying my M6TTL with me more often. Why?

For once, I have had the M6TTL for 9 years now, so it's not a surprise that I'm more familiar with its controls and ergonomics than I am with the R3A's. This aspect is not a defect of the R3A, just lack of experience with this body on my side.

More to the point though, I wear glasses and it is very hard to see the exposure indicators in the R3A's viewfinder, while I have no trouble with the M6TTL's ones. When I manage to see them (by moving my eye and losing track of the subject), it is hard for me to distinguish between the currently set shutter speed versus the speed that the meter suggests (which is supposed to be blinking, but I find it barely noticeable).

The above could be solved by relying on the AE function (one of the reasons why I bought the camera), but I found that the exposure meter is a bit too "spot" (compared to M6TTL's) for me to be relied on without first measuring exposure on a middle gray and then using the AE-lock button (which is not in a great position, IMHO). Doing this takes a bit too much time.

I'm still going to keep it for a while, and try to use it more often to see whether the above issues are just a question of habits.
__________________
Ciao!
Matteo
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-11-2018   #35
LukeBanks
Registered User
 
LukeBanks's Avatar
 
LukeBanks is offline
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: London
Posts: 81
I am more than happy with my R3A, and will happily use it as my primary 35mm / RF body for the rest of my days.

Yes, the exposure read outs can be awkward to see if you're not perfectly straight on to the VF but I bought the R3A over the R3M for one particular reason. Go figure... however I could easily see the annoyance for those using the bodies manually.

My 2 focal lengths are 50mm / 35mm. The 1:1 VF is ideal for both in my book. I know some will say the window is not suited to anything beyond 40mm (because that's what it says on the body) but I find the full VF window to almost perfectly match the 35mm frame when ignoring the frame lines. I've never once had an issue with framing or perspective. It seems perfectly intuitive for me.

Reliability has not been an issue. At all. Nothing has broken or failed to this day and the RF is bang on. That is with regular use. I'm an every day professional photographer who can dish out a fair bit of abuse in some scenarios but I've found the Bessa to fair admirably with straight forward good care practices.

Voigtlander glass is stunning.

Voigtlander prices are realistic.

Mr. K is a traditionalist. That counts for an awful lot in my mind. Just a personal taste kind of thing. It makes me like and trust the guy, and CV by extension. Call me fickle.

The best image I've ever taken was on my R3A.

If for any reason it ever becomes a paperweight then I will be heart broken and seek to replace it like-for-like immediately.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-11-2018   #36
Ko.Fe.
Me. Write ESL. Ko.
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Posts: 6,264
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLKRCAT View Post
...
Maybe it's worth mentioning that the bessa's rangefinder baselength cant match the Ms? You might not notice any focus error with a standard 50/2 or 35/2 but getting into a 50/1.1... with the wonky rangefinder patch... On paper I can't say it's very confidence inspiring.
...
Are you saying Nokton 35 1.4 is no go on R2M as well? And Jupiter-3? Or just 7Artisans 50 1.1?
I have expired Kodak 50D (something like 400+ feet bulk from late nineties) and my idea was to get it all exposed by fast lens on Bessa.

Bessa R2M with Canon 50 1.8 cap and neck strap is 680 gm.
M4-2 with 50 Cron, hood and and cup, plus neck strap is 770 gm.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-11-2018   #37
nukecoke
⚛Yashica
 
nukecoke's Avatar
 
nukecoke is offline
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Sweden/China
Posts: 994
Quote:
Originally Posted by LukeBanks View Post
I know some will say the window is not suited to anything beyond 40mm (because that's what it says on the body) but I find the full VF window to almost perfectly match the 35mm frame when ignoring the frame lines. I've never once had an issue with framing or perspective. It seems perfectly intuitive for me.
That is a useful trick. I put a sticker on my R's frame illuminating window and use the whole frame as a 28mm frame when shooting with my Orion-15 28/6.
__________________
tumblr

flickr(abandoned)

About Film Cameras
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-11-2018   #38
BLKRCAT
99% Film
 
BLKRCAT's Avatar
 
BLKRCAT is offline
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,733
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ko.Fe. View Post
Are you saying Nokton 35 1.4 is no go on R2M as well? And Jupiter-3? Or just 7Artisans 50 1.1?
I have expired Kodak 50D (something like 400+ feet bulk from late nineties) and my idea was to get it all exposed by fast lens on Bessa.

Bessa R2M with Canon 50 1.8 cap and neck strap is 680 gm.
M4-2 with 50 Cron, hood and and cup, plus neck strap is 770 gm.
You'd be fine with the 35 1.4. Really you should be fine with all lenses. I think it's safe to say that anything past 1.4 would be considered extreme and when you are pushing the limits, for me I would prefer to have the M. I shot my 50 F1.1 with my M5 and had consistent results from it. I've never shot a Bessa with that lens but I could see it being difficult with the rangefinder setup in extreme low light conditions even with the bright clear viewfinder.
__________________
TumblrYoutube
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-11-2018   #39
rfaspen
Registered User
 
rfaspen's Avatar
 
rfaspen is offline
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Corvallis, OR
Posts: 1,547
Compared to my Leicas, the Bessa R is a decent camera (sorry, couldn't help myself -- compared with Leica)

Seriously, the only Bessa I own is the R. It really is a unique animal in this world -- native LTM body with built in meter, hinge-back loading, framelines for different focal lengths, etc.

It is worth a slight comparison to other LTM cameras (in my case Barnack Leicas and Canon RFs). The R is very nice and light weight. The meter is quite accurate and useful for folks who know how to properly use meters. Native LTM mount is kind of neat, but yeah I can use LTM lenses on the M6 to get the same experience. The R is sized well and handles easily. The batteries only power the meter, so its always ready to take photos even if the batteries die. The R has a hotshoe, something not found on any of my other LTM cameras (are there any other LTM bodies out there that have a hot shoe?)

The meter layout of the R is the same as the M6TTL. Its because of my experience with the R that I desire an M6TTL today (as opposed to classic M6). That central led dot makes metering easier for me.

One thing about my Bessa R: Viewing through the viewfinder is persnickity. It might just be my camera, but I have to look through the viewfinder precisely dead on to get the entire RF patch and frameline to show. Any tiny deviation right or left and I don't see all of those. I don't notice such pickyness with any of my Leica M cameras (sorry, another comparison but it makes a point). While this is not a horrible detraction, it is one reason why I don't use my R very often. However, the main reason is that I just really prefer to use my M cameras because my brain likes their size, shape, layout, etc. more than most any other camera.

Oh, and the back door on my R is just now getting sticky/tacky.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-11-2018   #40
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 23,939
Not comparing is impossible, but put it this way: at the 2018 Arles Rencontres, Frances carried her olive-green R2 instead of her black MP. Smaller, lighter, and the battery had gone flat in the MP. She did not miss the MP.

Cheers,

R.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 21:27.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.