amateriat
We're all light!
Ellen: I'd also like to offer a warm "welcome" to RFF.
My take: I think going with a Bessa is a good move in terms of cost-effectiveness, but unless you're certain about "going wide" (well beyond 35mm in this case), and never going beyond 50mm, I think going for an R2/R3 would be a good first choice. Not to knock the R4, especially if you are hankering to use 28mm and wider glass, but it's a good idea to have your preferences well sorted out before laying out that kind of money.
And, you won't get too many arguments from many of us about the virtues of rangefinders!
- Barrett
My take: I think going with a Bessa is a good move in terms of cost-effectiveness, but unless you're certain about "going wide" (well beyond 35mm in this case), and never going beyond 50mm, I think going for an R2/R3 would be a good first choice. Not to knock the R4, especially if you are hankering to use 28mm and wider glass, but it's a good idea to have your preferences well sorted out before laying out that kind of money.
And, you won't get too many arguments from many of us about the virtues of rangefinders!
- Barrett
ornate_wrasse
Moderator
I'm certainly open to ideas about what to buy. Which of the cameras (between the R2 and R3) would you recommend and why? I have a feeling that my friend may be suggesting the R4 because he would eventually like to borrow it! But, of course, what works for me is the best decision in the end.
Thanks.
Ellen
amateriat
We're all light!
Ellen: Well, that's always the risk, when an experienced photographer–who happens to e a good friend–makes such a suggestion.
One thing to think about is what you want to do with a rangefinder that you can't, or, more accurately, aren't, doing with the gear you have (presumably SLRs, either film- or digital-based). Do you seek to work more "wide-screen" with RFs, meaning shooting with wider glass than you do with the cameras you've used up until now? Or is the idea to work more intimately, with "less camera" between you and your subject, especially up close? I'm more an up-close-and-personal photographer, and probably always have been, but didn't acknowledge this until perhaps fifteen years ago, when I started to grow a bit tired of bigger and heavier gear, then started to take a closer look at what i'd actually been photographing. It took a while longer until I these ideas and doubts caught traction, and I changed direction. But that's just me.
It's always good, when contemplating something like a change in equipment, to think about what you're doing now, photographically speaking, and what you want to do differently. A change in gear can facilitate that, to a degree, but it's important to know just how it can do that.
Switching (back) to RFs certainly did the trick for me. For you? Possibly.
- Barrett
Ken Ford
Refuses to suffer fools
Ellen, are you wedded to the idea of a metered body? If you're willing to consider unmetered, that $700 will get you into a Leica body. For lenses, it's really hard to beat a Leica 40mm f/2.0 Summicron for economy and performance.
I had an M3 body for a few years - it made an excellent kit with my 40mm. I would have kept it but the combination of bills and a preference for my metered M6 body caused me to sell it a few months back. An M3 isn't of much use if you want to go wider without an auxiliary viewfinder or a specialty ("goggled") lens, but you have other options in Leica - an M2, M4-2 or M4-P is likely within your budget if you shop.
There is nothing wrong with Voigtlander, but you may want to look at Leica, too!
I had an M3 body for a few years - it made an excellent kit with my 40mm. I would have kept it but the combination of bills and a preference for my metered M6 body caused me to sell it a few months back. An M3 isn't of much use if you want to go wider without an auxiliary viewfinder or a specialty ("goggled") lens, but you have other options in Leica - an M2, M4-2 or M4-P is likely within your budget if you shop.
There is nothing wrong with Voigtlander, but you may want to look at Leica, too!
Last edited:
ornate_wrasse
Moderator
No, I'm not wedded to the idea of a metered body, although I do think it would be much easier to use. I don't own a meter so I would definitely have to get one. My friend did tell me that the Leica meters that fit on the top shoe of the camera are not very good.
I did not realize that. Another thing I heard from my friend is that the older Leicas have rangefinders that, shall we say, are not clear and bright. I would be somewhat worried about getting an older Leica that has one of those "hard to use" rangefinders.
I did want to ask you where you thought was the best place to acquire a used Leica. I'm somewhat fearful of buying one on Ebay, because you just don't know what's out there. OTOH, I've had good luck purchasing cameras/lenses from places like Nikonians and Fred Miranda.
My mind is wide open at this point!
Thanks.
Ellen
Ken Ford
Refuses to suffer fools
The Leica meters are a bit out of date and often require repair due to age. However, there is a gentleman in LA (IIRC) that services them for a reasonable fee. Voigtlander also makes a modern shoemount meter that many use. Would you consider using a hand-held meter? I think they're much more common then a clip on and is my preference.
Some of the oldest M mount cameras like the M3 and M2 may have dim rangefinders due to dirt or degradation of the mirrored surfaces, but it's by no means typical and is usually resolved by a service. And if you looked at M4-2 and M4-P bodies, it would be almost unheard of.
The classifieds here is one of the best places you'll find for buying and selling RF gear. I've personally also had great luck from KEH, as have many others - especially with their "bargain" grade gear.
The best way to be!
You're very welcome!
As an aside, you may want to consider adding a few hundred dollars to your budget and go with an M6 body - they are newer and have a built-in meter. Keep an eye on the classifieds and see what they sell for - I don't think you'd have a problem finding one for $1000 if you're patient - in fact, there's a "bargain" condition one now at KEH for $1035, so I'm sure you can find one for a reasonable amount. In the interest of equality, I think that same $1000 would put you in range for a Zeiss Ikon, another well respected metered body.
ornate_wrasse
Moderator
Absolutely I would consider using a hand-held meter.
Which one(s) do most users of non-metered cameras use?
Code:
The classifieds here is one of the best places you'll find for buying and selling RF gear. I've personally also had great luck from KEH, as have many others - especially with their "bargain" grade gear.Yes, I've acquired some nice lenses from KEH. I have heard that their bargain grade gear is often quite decent and is a great way to acquire cameras and lenses for excellent prices.
Code:
As an aside, you may want to consider adding a few hundred dollars to your budget and go with an M6 body - they are newer and have a built-in meter. Keep an eye on the classifieds and see what they sell for - I don't think you'd have a problem finding one for $1000 if you're patient - in fact, there's a "bargain" condition one now at KEH for $1035, so I'm sure you can find one for a reasonable amount. In the interest of equality, I think that same $1000 would put you in range for a Zeiss Ikon, another well respected metered bodyI've actually given the Zeiss Ikon some serious consideration due in part to being quite impressed by the Zeiss lenses. I just bought a 25mm f/2.8 lens for my Nikon manual focus camera and was very impresed with the quality of the lens. It was my most-used lens on my recent trip to Argentina. The reviews of the Zeiss Ikon rangefinder that I've seen seem to be excellent.
I can expand my budget to include an M6 and/or a Zeiss Ikon. I'm very interested in resale value and I can see that purchasing one of these rnagefinders doesn't lead to the syndrome that seems to happen when you acquire a digital camera nowadays. The value seems to drop steadily shortly after purchase. Do you know if the values of the Voigtlander and the Zeiss Ikon hold up as well as the Leicas?
As usual, thanks for your insightful comments.
Ellen
Ken Ford
Refuses to suffer fools
Meters: lots of variety here, but I'd guess most use either Gossen or Sekonic with a smattering of other brands. I still use the first Luna Pro I bought in 1977 plus a little Gossen Digiflash.
I would think the major value hit on Voigtlander and Zeiss gear happens to the first owner, and the values would stay reasonably stable from there on out.
I think going for a metered body would be a good decision!
I would think the major value hit on Voigtlander and Zeiss gear happens to the first owner, and the values would stay reasonably stable from there on out.
I think going for a metered body would be a good decision!
jtm
not a moose
There must be something crazy about this RF photography stuff, to get someone to move through these stages in just a few weeks:
(1) Learn that there are some nice things about RF cameras;
(2) Decide that an RF camera would be a good thing to have and use;
(3) Try to spend $25 (but not $50) to get started with an old Retina;
(4) Buy an M6 and 35mm Summicron.
Hope you're having fun with it all.
By the way, my first 35mm film RF camera was a Retina IIa (coupled rangefinder, 50mm f/2 lens). It's fun and small. But the M you ended up with is much easier to handle and faster to use. I'd say it's good you waited.
(1) Learn that there are some nice things about RF cameras;
(2) Decide that an RF camera would be a good thing to have and use;
(3) Try to spend $25 (but not $50) to get started with an old Retina;
(4) Buy an M6 and 35mm Summicron.
Hope you're having fun with it all.
By the way, my first 35mm film RF camera was a Retina IIa (coupled rangefinder, 50mm f/2 lens). It's fun and small. But the M you ended up with is much easier to handle and faster to use. I'd say it's good you waited.