CDT
Chris
Thanks for the feedback. Think I'll put up a WTB ad.
....as for a favourite bessa it would have to be the r4a, just a solid little machine with a great set of frames.
Thanks for the feedback. Think I'll put up a WTB ad.
If you can afford it, buy one of the later models, if not, the R is still a very good camera.
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.
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 ...
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
Get a meter for your IIIG and use that ....