cheapest m-mount RF???

Apart from being cheap, Bessa T has longer EBL than almost every Leica M.

Get a T if you want to experiment shooting in a similar way a Barnack is shot, but with easy loading, faster shutter, and a meter in camera. For me it's been a discovery what happens when I focus with one device and compose with another one... Sounds easy to imagine, or slow... None of them!

Cheers,

Juan
 
Juan Valdenebro said:
Apart from being cheap, Bessa T has longer EBL than almost every Leica M.

Get a T if you want to experiment shooting in a similar way a Barnack is shot, but with easy loading, faster shutter, and a meter in camera. For me it's been a discovery what happens when I focus with one device and compose with another one... Sounds easy to imagine, or slow... None of them!

Cheers,

Juan
Click to expand...

Dear Juan,

Except, of course, that mechanical errors are magnified with the T, whereas with an M, they are reduced. Absolute base length is very nearly as important as EBL (absolute length x magnification). But I fully take your point. The T is one of Frances's favourite cameras.

Cheers,

R.
 
It has a rangefinder (circle) for very easy focusing, equivalent to seeing through a 300mm lens in 35mm, but no rectangle to see the whole frame, so you use external finders just for framing...

Cheers,

Juan
 
abumac said:
and expensiv. You must buy a external viewfinder for each lens.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily... Just buy external ones for the lenses you want to shoot on that camera... In my case, just one lens... Apart, there are external finders for more than one focal length...

Cheers,

Juan
 
I've got to say: I love the Bessa-T. Highly underrated. They are light, tiny and have a light meter -- like a modern IIIa. Mine accurately focuses a 50/f:1 lens wide open. . . no mean feat.


EDIT: I use mine without an accessory finder. I have a pretty good idea at what a 50 or 35mm lens sees these days. NOT expensive. Just shoot.
 
Last edited:
I liked mine so much that a few days after trying it I bought another one... Now I carry my R4M and both T's with the very small 15 Heliar, 28 3.5 and 40 1.4 and it all weighs nothing!

Cheers,

Juan
 
A user M2 can be had for close to $400USD and will work. Then when it needs servicing, a CLA will put one back less than $200 and, barring any catastrophic failures or rapid decelleration, the next time it will need servicing 35mm film will be more difficult to find.
 
The cheapest, and most reliable M mount camera is probably a Bessa R2/3. May as well pay a little more and get the R2/3A for the AE. I had one for years and the worst thing you could say about it was that the shutter wasn't as quiet as a Leica M, and the shutter speed readout would flare out easily in the viewfinder. Other than that it had an accurate meter, great viewfinder, and mine was dead reliable. The next cheapest way to go would probably be a Konica Hexar RF. I see them at the KEH website occasionally for $495 in BGN condition.

The other suggestions are for cameras that are cheaper, but have potential (or known) problems. The CL has meter and slow speed shutter issues so the cheap purchase price is defeated because you really need a CLA on it. Ditto for the early Leica M cameras. These cameras are old, and unless you are lucky and get a good shooter right at purchase, you should factor in a CLA. The CLE has potential issues w/ the electronics, and the Bessa T is more for specialized use. No rangefinder, no viewfinder, and not the most sturdy construction.
 
Last edited:
Steve M. said:
The cheapest, and most reliable M mount camera is probably a Bessa R2/3. May as well pay a little more and get the R2/3A for the AE. I had one for years and the worst thing you could say about it is that the shutter isn't as quiet as a Leica M, and the shutter speed readout would flare out easily in the viewfinder. Other than that it has an accurate meter, great viewfinder, and mine was dead reliable. The next cheapest way to go would be w/ a Konica Hexar RF.

The other suggestions are for cameras that are cheaper, but have potential (or known) problems. The CL has meter and slow speed shutter issues so the cheap purchase price is defeated because you really need a CLA on it. Ditto for the early Leica M cameras. These cameras are old, and unless you are lucky and get a good shooter right at purchase, you should factor in a CLA. The CLE has potential issues w/ the electronics, and the Bessa T is more for specialized use. No rangefinder, no viewfinder, and not the most sturdy construction.
Click to expand...

No rangefinder? The best one, you mean...
 
I handled both a CL and a Bessa-L at a camera show recently. Now I know which one I'll be saving for :)

I'm trying to like the L and T, since they're certainly budget-friendly, but I just can't. To me, they're amputated plastic SLRs with the true sign of the devil (i.e., the Phillips-head screw) staring me in the face everywhere I look and a double shutter* that sounds like an SLR, too.

I'm sorry, I already have a camera like that, made by Cosina in circa 1984. It's called a Konica TC-X, it's the ugliest thing you've ever seen, but it's small, light, fully mechanical, takes a single AAA battery for the meter, carries a 40/1.8 Hexanon pancake lens most of the time, works like a charm and cost 20 bucks, shipped, with the lens. Which is exactly what it's worth.

I better put on my flame-proof suit now, but as the weather guy on Maine public radio is wont to say, "that's the way it looks from here."

*(Can somebody explain to me why Copal shutters were perfectly light tight in all those fixed-lens RFs of the seventies, but not in Bessas? Cost-cutting? Or is it during lens changes that a single one is not enough?)
 
Having two counter-running shutters in the Bessa reduces vibrations. By a lot.

Which fixed lens RF of a seventies has a single vertical, film plane metal shutter ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top