Anyone prefer the Bessa R to later models?

back alley said:
....as for a favourite bessa it would have to be the r4a, just a solid little machine with a great set of frames.
Click to expand...

I'd certainly love an R4A, but they are still quite pricey and hard to find used. If anyone is selling one for about $200 (or a similarly price .58 M7), I'll take it.
 
CDT said:
Thanks for the feedback. Think I'll put up a WTB ad.
Click to expand...

Funny, I got a WTS ad up already. Think we can work something out?

EDIT: oops, guess not, the color and the currency conversion mess this possible deal up...!
 
Last edited:
[EDITED]
I have owned the R2 and now I own the R. I can't tell any difference between the two if that helps.
 
Last edited:
I own and use both an R and an R2A. I don't really prefer one over the other and mostly grab the one with the film or lens in/on it that I want to use.
The biggest difference, for me, between 'em is the AE on the R2A. The other differences don't affect me too much one way or the other; I have M-adapters but mostly leave one on the R2A and the others I own in the bag (the rear caps I have don't seem as secure as the screw mount rear caps I have). The shape of the R and R2A are a bit different but the controls are in the same place. The meter readouts are different and , for me, the meter in the R is easier to read.
The other difference I note is that the R2A hangs better from its strap than the R. With longer/heavier lenses this is not a problem but with short/light lenses, the R tends to hang leaning backwards more than the R2a does.
I sold the first R I owned and ended up buying another new one. I won't say "never" but I don't think I'll sell the R I now have.
Rob
 
Spyderman said:
It seems most people praise the R, but those who have owned the R and one of the later models still prefer the later model.
. . .

If you can afford it, buy one of the later models, if not, the R is still a very good camera.
Click to expand...

Dear Ondrej,

Precisely my experience and sentiments.

Cheers,

R.
 
Just snapped up a Bessa R from Adorama. Yes, an R4A would have been a little better for more money (an .58 M7 would have been even better) but I think I'm going to like the R.
 
I have an R3A as well as the R... The R3A is heavy, solid and (imo) feels totally cold and impersonal in my hands. We get along great, but I don't know if I'll propose or anything :p
The R, on the otherhand, is a plucky little go-getter. Who cares if it is a plasticky lightweight- my R is always happy to shoot and has never missed a beat no matter what I've done to it.
 
I had an R, and it performed flawlessly. OK, the shutter was loud, but the meter was great, the vf was nice and bright, and I never had an rf alignment problem. I'm sorry I sold it. The later R* series are fine performers, but it's the little R I miss.
 
I ran an M3 with Elmar 50/2.8 collapsible many years ago. Now I run a Bessa R with Canon 50/1.8. The R loads faster, has a wonderful meter, is a little lighter, and is a whole lot less expensive for a pensioner whse pension will not start for another year. Other than those issues, I can't tell much difference - except for the utter tactile pleasure of the M 2-3-4 series ...
 
Last edited:
paulfish4570 said:
I ran an M3 with Elmar 50/2.8 collapsible many years ago. Now I run a Bessa R with Canon 50/1.8. The R loads faster, has a wonderful meter, is a little lighter, and is a whole lot less expensive for a pensioner whse pension will not start for another year. Other than those issues, I can't tell much difference - except for the utter tactile pleasure of the M 2-3-4 series ...
Click to expand...

Yeah... A $400 repair bill from Youxin earlier in the year almost makes me fear my M3. Hell, I nearly could've bought two more R's for that!
 
The R is a very good camera that will meet your needs well. I've owned at least two and never had a problem. They are easy for any tech to fix if you do have one. Highly recommended.
 
The R2, R2M, etc. are made better, but they will require adapters with LTM lenses. Besides, they are not really fully M-Leica compatible, for instance they won't work with the Googled Leica lenses (which are some of their finest) and they won't work with the fabulous DR Summicron, also one of Leica's finest!
 
CDT said:
I'm shopping for a CV rangefinder. I currently only have LTM lenses and my favorite camera is my IIIg. It seems the Bessa R is widely regarded as a lesser model, but I think I might just want one. Based on internet research alone it seems:

The R is cheaper
Uses the same finder as later .7 mag model
Same shutter and internal mechanics as R2 etc
Is a little smaller and quite a bit lighter (good in my eyes)

I would like AE, but I'm not sure it's worth the extra $150 (comparing R rices and R2A prices). I understand the later, metal backed models, have a better feel but does this really translate into better reliability?

Anything else I'm missing?

Thanks,
Chris
Click to expand...

Get a meter for your IIIG and use that :) Seriously I've been wandering around looking at camera shops because I happen to be in big city for a few days and I've had to face the inescapable truth that buying another camera won't address any of my photographic needs (which would be to take photos).

However in response to your question: How important is AE for you? If you really want AE then I'd suggest you get something with AE. Otherwise you'll be happy with the Bessa R. It has a wonderfully bright viewfinder and a very good meter and there's no issue with it that I'm aware of that would make it less reliable than any other Bessa. Besides the Bessa's are probably an excellent example of a 'comodotised' camera - ie a camera made from a parts bin and reusing as much proven tech as possible. In the longer term they will probably be good economic repair prospects if the need arises. However if you really want AE, spend the extra $'s now and get the right camera for you the first time. All things being equal it'll be a lot cheaper than buying a Bessa R and then something else later. Also decide if you want M lens compatibility or not.

Having 'traded up' from my Bessa R to more a expensive modern camera I can't say that I've become any better a photographer or really achieved anything beyond the experience of buying more cameras.

Good luck man.
 
Last edited:
tyrone.s said:
Get a meter for your IIIG and use that ....
Click to expand...

The problem with the IIIg is that it too nice to take everywhere (e.g. saltwater fishing). Also, some sort of internal meter is nice in quick changing light.

And yes, I've been through quite a few RF's (IIIc, IIIf Canon barnack copies, Canon P, Canon 7, Canon 7s, M2, M3, M4, M6, R-D1, FSU copies), and generally found that spending more didn't make me a better photographer (statement not necessarily applicable to lenses) which is one of the reasons I went with the R. That is, if the gear doesn't make you better, might as well go with the cheapest.

Thanks to all for the advice.
 
I think the R2 is probably the better camera. More metal, less plastic and takes both M and LTM (via adapter) lenses.

I don't care for the design of the R3 cameras. In an effort to make it look more like the old Leica screw mounts, they made a handsome camera ugly by chopping off the one side of the top deck. Of course, most people don't share that opinion.
 
Great camera w/ an excellent meter. They should start making them again. Loud shutter, but you can't have everything. Prices are going up on these lil critters too, so I'm not sure what they would be now. I love the old metal cameras like the Feds and screw mount Leicas, but grew tired of the shutter issues. The R is better at consistent exposures, and you can go around all day w/ no lens cap w/o burning a hole in the shutters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom