Bessa R or T... which one??

bellyface

bellyface

Registered Nice Guy
Local time
11:05 PM
Joined
Aug 25, 2005
Messages
243
Ahh decisions, decisions.... which one of these bessas would be better for the value, the T or the R... don't have either batch of lenses, M or LTM's... I hear the viewfinder is really bright on the R...

anybody have experience with both?
 
Last edited:
The advantage the T has over the R is the M-mount. With the use of an adapter, you can use an LTM or M lens. The disadvantage is that it doesn't have a VF, which means you have either have a separate one for each focal length or get a universal one.

The R has a wonderfully bright VF, but only takes LTM lenses.

Both are discontinued and can be gotten new from CQ for bargain prices.
 
It seems to be like this:
LTM lenses can be used on an M body with an adapter,
but NOT the other way around. Please confirm. mike
 
or you could run down an R2 that has the viewfinder AND the bayonet mount

Stephen has some olive colored ones for $459, the silver T for $199 and the R in silver for $249, black for $299

I do believe there are some R2s in the classifieds here
 
Ivan, I'd second the recommendation to hold out for an R2. Not only do you get an M mount, but reviewers universally praise the sturdier construction of the R2 vs. the R.

I have a T, but I got it to use with my 21mm lens, for which no rangefinder had framelines at that point (though the R4A will). I use "universal" finders with cameras that don't have framelines, but things are a lot easier with a combination viewfinder-rangefinder.

The only other consideration is the longer rangefinder base of the T, but unless you plan to use a 135mm lens or a fast 90-100mm a lot you should be OK with the R or R2. (For my 40/2 and 90/2.8 lenses I use my CL; usually I keep the 21 on the T, but if I need to, I can always put a 135 on the T and use my Soviet "turret" finder. It's a stopgap, though.)

There have been several R2's in the classifieds lately... There was even a "user" one a while ago, I think.

-- Michael
 
in my point of view, the hand feeling of R is not good as the plastic exterior body.
i don't know what's the material of T, but it doesn't have VF...not convenient.
that's why i choose R2
 
The merits of the T include:

It's an M-mount camera, but still with a sleek profile. The RF magnification is 1.5x, which means that even the fastest lenses can be focussed accurately and effortlessly. Viewfinders you can choose yourself to match your taste and preference. And (for some most importantly) it looks different from the rest of the bunch..

It's demerits are plentiful too of course..

It's an M-Mount camera, which means that for LTM lenses you need to factor in the cost of adapters. It requires separate viewfinders, also to be factored in the cost. The RF/VF isn't combined, so it may slow you down..

But in the end, it's still dead sexy..
 

Attachments

  • GoodLooking.jpg
    GoodLooking.jpg
    15 KB · Views: 0
T: great for long lenses and adaptability. Main reason I bought mine was to accurately focus the 75mm f/2.5 and still be able to use my Nokton 40mm.

Its also quadruple-X rated camera pron in black :D

Unfortunately though mine broke :(

If I buy another Bessa body now it will be the R4A, although tbh I'm loving my Canon P far too much to be interested...
 
For what it's worth, I just got the R (used) with an Industar 61, then picked up the CV 35 Classic. For under $400 I got a great manual camera with 2 great lenses, no adapter needed, a body that's at least as good as my Canon S3 digicam, not heavy, and gives me experience with interchasngable lens rangefinders. I MAY pick up a Jupiter 9 some time in the future, but I'm good right now. YMMV.
 
A R2 would serve you well in the following:
  1. Solid built body
  2. A viewfinder
  3. Reasonable price
  4. "M" Mount
 
I have both R and T. (also a couple of L's). For me the big plus for the T is the RF, and for three reasons. Firstly, it has the longest EBL of any Bessa, meaning it gives the most accurate focus on large aperture or long lenses. Secondly, it is the only Bessa with an eyepiece corrector for failing eyesight for us old farts. I guess that won't matter if you are young with 20/20 vision. Thirdly, there is no problem lining up your eyeball in the centre of the VF to get the RF patch right. The whole of the round RF window is the "patch" and it is very quick and easy to line up the images. Notwithstanding, I love all my Bessas with the right lenses. The R uses mostly a 35/2.5. The L's have 15 and 25 on them, which are not RF coupled anyway, and the T I keep for longer lenses and the 40/1.4 which should arrive this week.
 
To me the T felt more robust and quiet than the R. Somehow similar to the R2.

It really depends on which lenses you want to use. Two viewfinders is more difficult for teles and close focus. 50 and below works very well. The T feels like it is built for big wide angles, like the 35/1.7 or the 28/1.9 :)

Roland.
 
I used a T with Triggerwinder for several years and was happy with them. I had two lenses - a 40mm and a 90mm - and it worked well. The T is a good, solid body that seems to not have any chronic problems.
 
I have a new T w/triggerwinder, which I've been using mostly with my new Canon 50mm f1.2 , which is a great combo. You first have adjust the ocular focus for the correct distance, then the rangefinder is IMO the best of my Bessas, easier to view than the view through my two R's. Haven't used any of the other, later VC bodies, but I surmise that the rangefinder is the same length in all models, it's just more magnified and more viewable in the Telemetro body. I don't find seperate viewfinders to be an issue at all with me, I normally have a seperate viewfinder with my R's.

They are all good shooters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom