Which way bessa? M or LTM? And what about macro?

andreios

andreios

Well-known
Local time
7:58 AM
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
278
Location
Prague, Czech Republic
View My Gallery
Hello,
I've been lurking about this forum lately and I still lack some answer to my questions so I decided to register and ask. (If my questions are too dumb, please, forgive me.)

After few years of shooting with DSLR I am now overcome by weariness and anger of my dependance on batteries, bulkiness of the stuff (although I have "only" two lenses - 50mm and 105macro) and of the terrible prints from whichever lab in my city. So I decided to return to darkroom and shoot film again. And I would like to do this "lightweight" with a rangefinder. I'd prefer interchangeable lenses over a fixed-lens RF and I am very attracted by bessa-s (R or R2), but have rather limited funds and will be mostly limited to buying used equipment (which proved OK in all my previous photog purchases).

So I have these two basic questions: Which way - M-mount or screw mount Bessa might prove easier to build a small system slowly ? Or is the best way to get an M-mount bessa and use screw lenses with adapter? (I already have two russian screw mount lenses for my crappy Zorki.)

And also - is it possible to shoot details and sort-of-macro photography with RF lenses? Are there some extension tubes available? Or is it a complete nonsense shooting details with RF and I shall get myself some old SLR rather than a RF camera?

Many thanks!
andreios
 
If I were you I would get the M mount and an adapter, it's frustrating when you have screwmount and would like to get a lens that is M. I don't see any practical way to do macros with a bessa. SLR's are pretty cheap these days though. I am in a similar state of bothered by all the gear, I bought a Canon 7 which are pretty reasonably priced as well, and metal, though screwmount only of course.
 
Last edited:
I faced a similar dilemma. If you look at my signature you'll see what I ended up with.
I've kept my old Nikon SLR gear bought in 1962 - useful for telephoto and closeups - but can't remember the last time I actually used it and it all weighs a tonne which is why I nearly stopped photography and now I never take it anywhere I can't drive to! (I did try some closeup still life with the Bessa a week ago but the parallax error convinced me to use the SLR next time. I use the Rolleiflex for formal work. Portraits etc, just because the MF neg gives such quality.
I've had, until recently a couple of LTM Leica IIIf's. Beautiful bits of machinery but the modern Bessa is more practical, easier to use and about half of the lenses I have are LTM with adaptors anyway. The rest are M-mount. All are now CV and I find them very good. Actually better in my view than some of the old uncoated Leica glass. Many would disagree with that but I like sharp and I like contrast. Use AE or Manual to taste.
But for general purpose use and for travel the Bessas are tops. Small, light, quick lens change and very good from about 75-80mm to 24-25mm. If you want long telephoto or macro then you'll have to look at something else. I like the R series I have two and don't regret it for a moment.
 
Thank you for your replies. I see there is reason in going the M-mount way with screw mount adapters.. As for telephoto - I do not shoot it much nowadays with my DSLR - I use my 105mm lens mostly for close-ups.
As for film SLR I own one Canon EOS (Rebel in the US I think), but honestly - I hate it because it's all plastics..
I've recently purchased a Rolleiflex, which is great, althoug I haven't yet developed the first two or three rolls taken with it. I enjoy it's "unplugged-ness", but alas, it is quite bulky and heavy to be carried around on daily basis (by which I mean to put it in my briefcase). This is the main reason why I am lurking around Bessa. And also because it seem to be of the rare breed that offers a complete non-electrical shutter and everything (R*M, or elderly models).
 
It's been clearly said by others: evolution aims at M mount (both worlds can be used), and macro is better with SLRs. RFs are nice for quiet shooting, small size and high quality wideangle lenses especially...

Cheers,

Juan
 
You're so right!

Those things (and I have them, because we all need them sometimes) are big and loud, and heavy, and require constant charging, and well, wideangle lenses on them are a shame... At least most of them...

Cheers,

Juan
 
Another vote for a film SLR to cover macro and long tele situations. The gear is ridiculously cheap (or free!) now and gives shockingly good results. Take a look at this thread: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=84406

I refuse to pay any kind of real money for an SLR, so I'm using Pentax K and Konica AR systems. You'll pay more for Olympus or Nikon, but bargains exist even there.
 
batterytypehah! said:
Another vote for a film SLR to cover macro and long tele situations. The gear is ridiculously cheap (or free!) now and gives shockingly good results. Take a look at this thread: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=84406

I refuse to pay any kind of real money for an SLR, so I'm using Pentax K and Konica AR systems. You'll pay more for Olympus or Nikon, but bargains exist even there.
Click to expand...


Concerning Tele and Macro: especially for a spectacles-wearer, I would recommend Minolta SR-T.
 
A Visoflex will fit on a Bessa-T, and 'spider' assembles such as BOOWU and BEHOO are small, weird, and far more effective than you might imagine. You can even use them for insect or flower photography: both the plane of focus and the limts of the field of view are defined by the tips of the legs.

Cheers,

R.
 
I have found that the lighter RF combo that allows close photogrphy (well, up to 0.5m, not really close by SLR standard) is a barnack, a 50 (elmar, summitar) and a close up ring llike the NOOKY/NOOKY-HESUM.
On the other hand, the 90mm at 1m gives about the same FOV than the 50 at .5m...
I really think that I was serious about close ups, I would go with any SLR + macro lens.
 
Also consider that both macro and tele benefit a lot from a good tripod, and that you typically have plenty of light even for a slow lens. So the RF advantages of small and low vibration don't even come to bear because you're lugging a tripod anyway, and you don't need slow shutter speeds.
 
Thanks for all your suggestions. I see now that my guesses were right. Macro and closeup photography is not my only subject, I like shooting landscapes and other larger views and would really appreciate something wider than my 50mm lens on my DSLR. However, I refused to put more money in digital stuff - and what`s more - for less than the price of a decent EOS wide-prime I`ll get myself a bessa and a decent lens..
As for film SLR - I`ve been looking at some nikons (F2, FM2, &c), but they go on ebay for rather big sums of money, so I`ll perhaps get a cheap M42 mount Pentax or Fujica (or an above mentioned minolta) with a macro lens (or a prime and some extension tubes) that won`t be so dependable on charging before each shooting..
 
T or R2

T or R2

Perhaps I'll add one more question here rather than start a new topic - now that I have decided on an M-mount CV Bessa. Is it worth thinking about the Bessa T or shall I be looking only for R2 model (or if luck comes for an R2M)? As I've written above, I'd like to have mechanical shutter and camera that won't be dependable on batteries.
How unpractical (or practical?) is using the added VF on the T? I think there won't be much lens swapping (and VF swapping) in my case. What are other drawbacks of the T-bessa apart of the absence of VF (and plasticky body - as I've read) that I should consider?
Thanks!
 
andreios said:
Hello,
I've been lurking about this forum lately and I still lack some answer to my questions so I decided to register and ask. (If my questions are too dumb, please, forgive me.)

After few years of shooting with DSLR I am now overcome by weariness and anger of my dependance on batteries, bulkiness of the stuff (although I have "only" two lenses - 50mm and 105macro) and of the terrible prints from whichever lab in my city. So I decided to return to darkroom and shoot film again. And I would like to do this "lightweight" with a rangefinder. I'd prefer interchangeable lenses over a fixed-lens RF and I am very attracted by bessa-s (R or R2), but have rather limited funds and will be mostly limited to buying used equipment (which proved OK in all my previous photog purchases).

So I have these two basic questions: Which way - M-mount or screw mount Bessa might prove easier to build a small system slowly ? Or is the best way to get an M-mount bessa and use screw lenses with adapter? (I already have two russian screw mount lenses for my crappy Zorki.)

And also - is it possible to shoot details and sort-of-macro photography with RF lenses? Are there some extension tubes available? Or is it a complete nonsense shooting details with RF and I shall get myself some old SLR rather than a RF camera?

Many thanks!
andreios
Click to expand...
the simplest is to take M mount

for LTM you need only one adaptator as the choise of VF frames is done buy a switch, and is not automatic like on a leica

for macro photo, forget it 😉 a RF is not done for it , some leica lens can do it with adaptators etc, but it is much more simple to use a reflex 😀
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom