Convince me to buy a Bessa w/ 40mm ƒ1.4

F

foges

Newbie
Local time
12:09 PM
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
7
I currently have a canon 20D with a 17-40mm ƒ4 L lens, but its quite big, heavy and not descrete, so i find myself bringing it around with me less and less. Recently i have however become fascinated by rangefinders and the only affordable ones with some quality and propper metering seem to be the Bessa R3A/R2A. I originally wanted a 35mm ƒ1.4 lens, but think that the 40mm ƒ1.4 should prety much be able to do the job. So my questions to you guys are: does it sound like i should be buying this camera? how big is it actually (it would be great with a picture of someone holding this camera)? what are the major differences in picture taking with a RF in comparison to an SLR and is it something i could get easily used to?

Thanks
 
Biggest difference in shooting: no automation (except aperture priority) and being able to see outside the frame that you're shooting. No through the lens view. Very, very different but easy to get used to in my experience coming from a Nikon D70. In comparison all but the best film SLRs give me tunnel vision and a feeling of claustrophobia when I look through their finders.

The 40 really is compact. Can't link direct to the shot I have of it on an Epson R-D1 but here is a link:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/hitkaiser/1030509716/in/datetaken/

The R-D1 is in a Luigi case so is bulky, and is already bulkier than a Bessa, 40 also has the optional vented hood fitted

The 40 looks huge in most photos of it, its a real surprise when you open the box

I'm with the people who don't like the bokeh of the lens but it really is a fantastic general purpose workhorse on a film body - the equivalent (well, superior) of all the classic fixed-lens rangefinders of the late 60s/early 70s

I use it extensively, I think this is my favourite shot - f/1.4 ISO1600, 1/30th

313322158_447a3e2d85.jpg
 
R3A and the 40mm is a great combo!! I owned this rig for over a year. I then moved up to the Zeiss world. You will really enjoy the Bessa rig. Super sharp pictures and color rendition plus 1:1 VF! Enjoy!
 
payasam: Yeah ive read through those pages quite a bit, but really the only thing it tells me is that its a good camera, but seeing as that website sells that camera im taking it with a pinch of salt.

One more question: if i buy this combo, is it likely to drop a lot in price in the next couple of years?
 
foges said:
payasam: Yeah ive read through those pages quite a bit, but really the only thing it tells me is that its a good camera, but seeing as that website sells that camera im taking it with a pinch of salt.

One more question: if i buy this combo, is it likely to drop a lot in price in the next couple of years?
Click to expand...
No pinch of salt needed. Everything at Cameraquest's site is on the money. Prices seem to be holding up well. But ....two years who knows.
 
foges said:
I currently have a canon 20D with a 17-40mm ƒ4 L lens, but its quite big, heavy and not descrete, so i find myself bringing it around with me less and less. Recently i have however become fascinated by rangefinders and the only affordable ones with some quality and propper metering seem to be the Bessa R3A/R2A. I originally wanted a 35mm ƒ1.4 lens, but think that the 40mm ƒ1.4 should prety much be able to do the job. So my questions to you guys are: does it sound like i should be buying this camera? how big is it actually (it would be great with a picture of someone holding this camera)? what are the major differences in picture taking with a RF in comparison to an SLR and is it something i could get easily used to?

Thanks
Click to expand...

Don't even think about buying it!


(reverse psychology sometimes works ;- D )
 
Been looking at the G2 and it seems a bit too automatic for my liking it also looks bigger.

How silent is the shutter on the Bessa? my 20D is horrible
 
Bessa R3A is much quieter but it is not a Leica. A $12 mini soft release helps alot. With that it is tons quieter than a 20D.
 
You might want to start off with a fixed lens rangefinder (like the Canonet QL17) before dropping a wad of C-notes on the Bessa... I always assumed I'd get a Bessa w/ 40 f1.4 at some point, but having a couple FLRs has (luckily) quenched my thirst.

Pros and cons?

Bessa:
+ Faster, better lens
+ Newer, sturdier build
+ better rangefinder baselength
+ interchangeable lens (woo hoo!)
- interchangeable lens (look out bank account!)
- heavier
- louder
- focal plane shutter
- way more expensive


Compact 1970s FLR
+ Compact and very light weight
+ very quiet
+ leaf shutter
+ great lenses
+ Can be very inexpensive!
+ fixed lens (your wallet thanks you)
- fixed lens
- most are shutter priority, many prefer AP
- some have no manual setting (avoid these)
- you lose about a half stop -- f1.7 vs f1.4. A big deal? Maybe, maybe not

I've found the metering on my FLRs to be extremely good, but your milage may vary. In auto mode, my shutter priority FLRs seem to be stepless when selecting an aperture (ie, the aperture doesn't lock to full f-stops). My aperture priority FLRs (Yashica CC, XA) also seem to be stepless in selecting shutter speeds.

Just a thought!
 
Canonet QL-17!

Canonet QL-17!

foges said:
I currently have a canon 20D with a 17-40mm ƒ4 L lens, but its quite big, heavy and not descrete, so i find myself bringing it around with me less and less. Recently i have however become fascinated by rangefinders and the only affordable ones with some quality and propper metering seem to be the Bessa R3A/R2A. I originally wanted a 35mm ƒ1.4 lens, but think that the 40mm ƒ1.4 should prety much be able to do the job. So my questions to you guys are: does it sound like i should be buying this camera? how big is it actually (it would be great with a picture of someone holding this camera)? what are the major differences in picture taking with a RF in comparison to an SLR and is it something i could get easily used to?

Thanks
Click to expand...

I have 20D as well. The Internet can be a bad place in that with the info out there you'll be tempted to buy many, many things. I bought I Canon Canonet QL-17 on ebay to get the "rangefinder experience". Thought it was broken so I fit of Internet induced madness bought one of those Bessa R/CV 2.5 kits. Found out later the Canonet wasn't broken.

I'm sure the R2a/R3a has a better sounding shutter "clack", but the Bessa R is in the range of loudness of the 20D. Softer, but still not stealthly. The Canonet is another story .. just a small soft click. [sigh .. the way it should be] The Canonet has a 40mm 1.7 lens with TV (Canon 20D lingo) priority, need a special battery or adapter for it.

If you haven't used a rangefinder I'd say get a Canonet on ebay. If the cost of the r2a/CV 40mm is okay with you buy it, you could probably re-coop a fair price if you resell. If you use AV mode on your 20D, the r2A/r3a has it.

I don't know if you used film very much in the past, but if you are going to shoot color .. be aware there are no things like auto white balance. :)

Also if your style is close focusing on your 20D, say with a prime .. Most rangefinder lens start focusing at 2.6/3 feet. "If the picture is not good you're not close enough .. well 3 feet is as close as you can get .. " just kidding. :)

----
Of course I should have read the previous post before writing ..
 
I started with the QL17, refurbed by ebay ID hink2u, and it has helped me squeeze the best images I've probably EVER made out of film....until I got my R3M!

100$+ as an experiment...I love my QL and won't sell it.

I love the simplicity of the R3M+21...HF scale on lens, brilliant!

Gotta get the 40 soon.

G.
 
bensyverson said:
You might want to start off with a fixed lens rangefinder (like the Canonet QL17) before dropping a wad of C-notes on the Bessa... I always assumed I'd get a Bessa w/ 40 f1.4 at some point, but having a couple FLRs has (luckily) quenched my thirst.

Pros and cons?

Bessa:
+ Faster, better lens
+ Newer, sturdier build
+ better rangefinder baselength
+ interchangeable lens (woo hoo!)
- interchangeable lens (look out bank account!)
- heavier
- louder
- focal plane shutter
- way more expensive


Compact 1970s FLR
+ Compact and very light weight
+ very quiet
+ leaf shutter
+ great lenses
+ Can be very inexpensive!
+ fixed lens (your wallet thanks you)
- fixed lens
- most are shutter priority, many prefer AP
- some have no manual setting (avoid these)
- you lose about a half stop -- f1.7 vs f1.4. A big deal? Maybe, maybe not

I've found the metering on my FLRs to be extremely good, but your milage may vary. In auto mode, my shutter priority FLRs seem to be stepless when selecting an aperture (ie, the aperture doesn't lock to full f-stops). My aperture priority FLRs (Yashica CC, XA) also seem to be stepless in selecting shutter speeds.

Just a thought!
Click to expand...

Not a bad idea if someone hasn't shot a rangefinder at all. And for 'normal' range lens a fixed lens RF will be ok. My recomendations though as I've shot them and liked them from most favorite first. Olympus 35RC, Canon QL17 G-III, Olympus XA. Some other good ones were some Yashica Lynx, Konica A35 (Automatic), and so forth. The main thing about Fixed lens Rangefinders is some of them typically offer more automatic and compact size than the interchangible ones at a much lower price (epesially something like a Oly 35RC).

The only interchangible rangefinders I've owned was a Canon P, Fed-2A and Fed-2A Type 2C, then now (as of today) a Bessa T. And I've used the Jupiter-3 (50/1.5), Jupiter-12 (35/2.8), Canon 50/1.8, Jupiter-11 (135/4), CV 21/4 on almost all of them (I haven't dare tried putting the J-12 on the Bessa, besides sold it with the P).

I looked at the 40/1.4, but already having a Canon 50/1.8 that I really like I did not see much sense in getting a 40 Nokton aside from ligther weight, compact design, slightly faster lens, and just a tad wider (the Canon 50/1.8 is made of brass and is a heavy peice of material). Also my personal preference has generally been that of Wide-to-Normal. But I could see something like a 21/4 or 25mm , then 40/1.4, and then maybe the 75mm or 90/3.5 voigtlander lens to be a nice setup to have.

But yes before you drop few hundred, plus more on a lens, why not give a compact RF such as the Oly 35RC (which I currently have but rarely use), for under a 100$ a go.
 
don't discount the g2 quite yet! the big wheel on the front is for MANUAL focusing and it can be used fully manual. they are unbeatable for the money. tough as nails, amazing lens performance (as well as camera body), and relatively cheap these days.
they're a bit of bear to get used to (focusing wise) but man they really produce some amazing images!
 
In my avatar I am holding a R3A, so you can see the relative size. There was a guy selling new R2A's on eBay for $419, I believe he still has some. A 40/1.4 will set you back another $300-$350 depending if you go for new or used. But the R2A does not have framelines for 40mm, I don't know how close the 35mm framelines are. Shutter sound is more high-pitched than a Canon SLR, but it's not loud. Well, the last advice I can give you is that if you want to keep the budget low then don't ever, ever, ever handle a Leica body. If somehow you handle one then please don't press the shutter. If you do press the shutter try to keep from turning the advance lever. :)
 
Since the Contax G1 & G2 have been mentioned, let me give you my analysis having used both for quite a bit over the last 5-6 years.

1) the Zeiss optics are second to none. The 35mm is very good. The 21mm Biogon, the 28mm Biogon, the 45mm Planar and 90mm Sonnar are about as good as anything gets at any price.

2) The Contax G prices are dirt cheap.

3) the autofocus works 99% of the time for me. That's a much higher rate than a manual focus camera for my type of shooting. You can lock in the focus on a G but it's really not a true manual focus camera

4) there is no rangefinder to become misaligned. My Zeiss Ikon is back having the RF realigned.

5) It is AE. But then some of the newer other models are as well. Of course you can set the shutter and aperture manually just like any other RF.

6) I've come to like the auto film advance in my type of shooting. Others prefer to crank themselves.

7) film loading is about as fast as it ever gets. Important to me, not so to others.

8) auto rewind is fast for me as well. Others prefer the manual crank.

9) It does require you carry spare batteries. No big deal to me. You learn to replace them before they let you down for 60 seconds. I think that's a fair trade for a very accurate shutter.

FWIW, I have both G1 and G2 bodies. I use the G1 almost all the time now as it does everything I need but is lighter. (and cheaper) If I had to replace my G2, it would be with another G1.

Different people want different things. But my only objective is to make good photos. And the Contax G is the best tool for me in that regard. YMMV.
 
What do yall think about adding a R3M to my kit? I want to have a 21, 28, 35, 50 and maybe a 40 along with 2-3 bodies. I was going to add a M3 and a M6 to my M2 but the R3M with a 40mm 1.4 sounds like a viable solution? It takes up the 1:1 VF so bye bye to the need for a- M3, and its metered, so bye bye to the need for a M6. What do ya'll think?
 
phatnev said:
What do yall think about adding a R3M to my kit? I want to have a 21, 28, 35, 50 and maybe a 40 along with 2-3 bodies. I was going to add a M3 and a M6 to my M2 but the R3M with a 40mm 1.4 sounds like a viable solution? It takes up the 1:1 VF so bye bye to the need for a- M3, and its metered, so bye bye to the need for a M6. What do ya'll think?
Click to expand...

If you have a 21, 28, 35 and 50, sounds like your ideal Bessa is the newer R4M/R4A since it's designed specifically for 50 and wider, with frame lines from 21mm to 50mm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom