kshapero
South Florida Man
Yesterday I was at a camera store (Delray Cameras) with my ZI and a young fellow asked me which is better to own an R3A and a R4A or one ZI? I thought that was a pretty darn interesting question. First I was amazed he even knew about that stuff and second cause it was just a really interesting question ( I said that).
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
I agree... The use of one camera only, or more than one, is a very interesting subject... It all depends on how many different situations we want to be prepared for...
To me it's related to light: if there's sun, I'll be shooting sunny AND soft scenes, so I tend to use two bodies, one of them set for sun... I really like to have open, clean shadows on sunny scenes, so I stopped developing harsh and soft light scenes for the same amount of time more than a decade ago. I use the R3A and R4M usually, but sometimes I carry two Ts instead, with the 28 3.5 and the 40 1.4... It's amazing how light Ts are: with those two lenses I just don't feel I'm carrying anything at all... And that set is ready for whatever wherever...
If it's an overcast day and my shooting won't be many hours long, I carry just one body sometimes, and some other times two with the same film, to avoid changing lenses...
Cheers,
Juan
To me it's related to light: if there's sun, I'll be shooting sunny AND soft scenes, so I tend to use two bodies, one of them set for sun... I really like to have open, clean shadows on sunny scenes, so I stopped developing harsh and soft light scenes for the same amount of time more than a decade ago. I use the R3A and R4M usually, but sometimes I carry two Ts instead, with the 28 3.5 and the 40 1.4... It's amazing how light Ts are: with those two lenses I just don't feel I'm carrying anything at all... And that set is ready for whatever wherever...
If it's an overcast day and my shooting won't be many hours long, I carry just one body sometimes, and some other times two with the same film, to avoid changing lenses...
Cheers,
Juan
kshapero
South Florida Man
Maybe 2 is better than one, eh?
kshapero
South Florida Man
Another question: Which Bessa mates the best with a #5mm lens? The 35mm frame often seems to fall in no mans land on the Bessa's.
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
I use my 28 on my R4M when I have time for metering and settings and when I want real space outside the dedicated framelines, but for real fast street shooting lately I use the 28 on my R3 more than on my R4: for AE, no focusing (f/8, 8 feet) and filling the whole finder... I use no 35 but I guess the R3 can be used for it the same way I use the 28...
Cheers,
Juan
Cheers,
Juan
gliderbee
Well-known
The R2x have 35mm framelines instead of the 40mm framelines on the R3x. The R4x also has 35mm framelines.
Stefan.
Stefan.
presspass
filmshooter
What about the finder? I don't have an R4/3, just an old R2. It's not as bright or easy to focus as my ZI. Do the newer Bessas have brighter finders/easier to focus rangefinder patches (easier than R2)? I have wanted an R4 for some time, but have no way to do a hands-on examination except after purchase.
gliderbee
Well-known
I also have a R2 and compared with a R3M and R4A:
The 35mm framelines of the R2 are much more usable then the R3M 40mm framelines, since the former is not so cramped against the sides of the VF. If you wear glasses, you might have trouble seeing the 40mm framelines, but I don't think it would be a problem with the R2.
There's not much difference re: finders: all are about equally brilliant; the only difference I noticed (but under not so good light) was that the rangefinder patch of the R2 is a rectangle, rounded at the corners, while the one of the R3M and R4A are a plain rectangle, but that's not a relevant difference.
The finder of the ZI (I just compared it again) is unsurpassed. I don't think a better one exists (but I've never seen a Leica MP, only comparing with M2, M5 and M6 and the Bessa's).
Stefan.
The 35mm framelines of the R2 are much more usable then the R3M 40mm framelines, since the former is not so cramped against the sides of the VF. If you wear glasses, you might have trouble seeing the 40mm framelines, but I don't think it would be a problem with the R2.
There's not much difference re: finders: all are about equally brilliant; the only difference I noticed (but under not so good light) was that the rangefinder patch of the R2 is a rectangle, rounded at the corners, while the one of the R3M and R4A are a plain rectangle, but that's not a relevant difference.
The finder of the ZI (I just compared it again) is unsurpassed. I don't think a better one exists (but I've never seen a Leica MP, only comparing with M2, M5 and M6 and the Bessa's).
Stefan.
kshapero
South Florida Man
IMHO the finder in the ZI is brighter than an MP, M7 or M6, although the 0.85 finder is really nice.