stillshunter
unlearning digital habits
I know there's a lot of love for the Barnack here - great to see. I just wondered whether most have an LTM as a bit of fun or a curiosity that they use occasionally beside their Leica M or if some have both and actually prefer their LTM to their M. I even wonder if anyone here has had both and ditched the M in favour of the Barnack.
I thought a poll might be interesting as a barometer, but am very keen to hear your experiences on were your LTM has landed in your life.
I thought a poll might be interesting as a barometer, but am very keen to hear your experiences on were your LTM has landed in your life.
Robert Lai
Well-known
I had an M7, as well as IIIG, IIIF, and IIF.
Lost job, had to sell things for money. Since the M cameras and lenses fetch the most money, they had to go.
I still have the IIIG and IIIF. The IIF also joined the dearly departed, as I like having the slow speeds.
Recently started a new job, so there is income again.
I have added a Bessa R, which is convenient for the built in meter. The short RF base length makes me wonder about the usefulness of the camera. I still prefer my Leica Barnacks. Oh, I almost forgot my Canon 7s, which is still here.
Overall, I like the Barnacks for their smaller size and wonderful esthetics (jewel like finish).
Lost job, had to sell things for money. Since the M cameras and lenses fetch the most money, they had to go.
I still have the IIIG and IIIF. The IIF also joined the dearly departed, as I like having the slow speeds.
Recently started a new job, so there is income again.
I have added a Bessa R, which is convenient for the built in meter. The short RF base length makes me wonder about the usefulness of the camera. I still prefer my Leica Barnacks. Oh, I almost forgot my Canon 7s, which is still here.
Overall, I like the Barnacks for their smaller size and wonderful esthetics (jewel like finish).
anjoca76
Well-known
I'd be hard pressed to part with mine. I use my iiic a lot, actually. It's quirky, but truly a pleasure to use for leisurely shooting. Prefer it to an M? Most days, no, I'd rather have an M. But sometimes there is nothing better than those charming little Barnacks.
stillshunter
unlearning digital habits
Thanks Robert and Andy.
I love my IIIf for every reason you both describe. I actually prefer the feel of the IIIf in-hand than the M2 I once owned. However, a recent sale has me wondering whether to bank the proceeds or invest in an M (probably M4 or M6) to complement my IIIf and use (with adapter) the 28 and 50mm LTMs I already have.
I love my IIIf for every reason you both describe. I actually prefer the feel of the IIIf in-hand than the M2 I once owned. However, a recent sale has me wondering whether to bank the proceeds or invest in an M (probably M4 or M6) to complement my IIIf and use (with adapter) the 28 and 50mm LTMs I already have.
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
I haven't enjoyed my Leica IIIF as much as I thought I would before buying it... But it's beautiful, and it does the job too, so I kept it.
I enjoy a lot my Bessa T, a better IIIF, with higher magnification than M's, easy back door loading, external finders, meter with external reading, 1/2000th, and black.
About M's, I have used an M3, but although it's nice for 50's, I prefer the 35/28mm field of view, and I like back door loading for sure, so I find "M" Bessas more comfortable to work with... So in my case the honest answer is, I like Barnacks and M's as long as they're Voigtlander Bessas, because I consider them better tools, with different, specialized models instead of one model for everything... When you own several of them, you enjoy the design concept...
And yes, a lot of times I find myself shooting with my T instead of my R3A or R4M: the separated focusing window and external finder make me feel different, think differently, take time, or I use prefocus and just compose with a view that's way bettter than any in camera window of any brand, and I enjoy so much the moment of shooting... I guess that's the way old Barnacks worked...
Cheers,
Juan
I enjoy a lot my Bessa T, a better IIIF, with higher magnification than M's, easy back door loading, external finders, meter with external reading, 1/2000th, and black.
About M's, I have used an M3, but although it's nice for 50's, I prefer the 35/28mm field of view, and I like back door loading for sure, so I find "M" Bessas more comfortable to work with... So in my case the honest answer is, I like Barnacks and M's as long as they're Voigtlander Bessas, because I consider them better tools, with different, specialized models instead of one model for everything... When you own several of them, you enjoy the design concept...
And yes, a lot of times I find myself shooting with my T instead of my R3A or R4M: the separated focusing window and external finder make me feel different, think differently, take time, or I use prefocus and just compose with a view that's way bettter than any in camera window of any brand, and I enjoy so much the moment of shooting... I guess that's the way old Barnacks worked...
Cheers,
Juan
stillshunter
unlearning digital habits
G'day Juan,
This is such an excellent reply. Thank you so much for taking the time to post!
I, too, have thought of the Bessa. Maybe an R2M or R2A to complement the IIIf. Or maybe even the straight R…as I'd not need any adapters…..though I fear the build quality could be a let down.
Cheers,
Mark
This is such an excellent reply. Thank you so much for taking the time to post!
I, too, have thought of the Bessa. Maybe an R2M or R2A to complement the IIIf. Or maybe even the straight R…as I'd not need any adapters…..though I fear the build quality could be a let down.
Cheers,
Mark
Pioneer
Veteran
You are right in believing that there is absolutely no comparison possible between a Leica Barnack and any Bessa camera. But I still enjoy shooting the R in spite of that.
stillshunter
unlearning digital habits
Pioneer, are you referring to the original LTM-version 'R 'or the Bessa R range more generally?
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
Hi Mark,
All Bessas are great, and well built... All brands can give problems...
Once I made a poll here on RFF about forum members that required repairs for autoexposure "M" cameras, including Bessa R3A, Zeiss Ikon and Leica M7... Guess which one was the less problematic? The Bessa!
And the service at cameraquest is great: I bought my R3A used from them, and it's been absolutely perfect for several years including beach and trips...
If I were you, I would consider very seriously the R3M: the 1:1 view in my R3A is a joy, but I never use autoexposure because nothing's really medium gray, so it isn't something we can really trust or use without worries...
A perfect, durable, enjoyable camera for 40mm and 50mm lenses, and longer ones, and even 35mm with the whole window... The R2M/A has lower magnification and no life size view... Not a problem at all, anyway: my R4M has even lower maginification, and I use it a lot and I enjoy it too... It's only that the 1:1 window is cool...
Another superb specification about the R3M vs. the R3A is that the mechanical camera shows you a light reading in half stops instead of whole stops, so you're sure about the precise aperture setting / speed you should use, and that's not too important if you shoot at box speed, but it really is when there's little light and you push film...
Happy shooting!
Cheers,
Juan
Scrambler
Well-known
I'm glad you put your cards on the table, Mark. I was wondering where you might be going with this poll.
I haven't owned a Leica M, just a Minolta CLE and Hexar RF. The Hexar in particular I like a lot ... but it's such a different beast to the IIIc that I can't really say LIKE one more than the other.
The Barnack has that mechanical-jewel feeling that neither the plastic CLE or the techno-wizard Hexar have. The shooting style is much more slow and deliberate, which is no bad thing. You don't want to change lenses with a screw-mount Leica - or Bessa R. M-mounts tempt you with quick swaps, which can be good or bad depending on the circumstances.
I'm preparing to do some photography at a friend's wedding: I'll use the Hexar because it handles so much faster. But a few weeks ago I went around and photographed a street art festival here in Toowoomba, and for that I took the IIIc and a MF RF.
I do think it's worth posing the question as you have: either/or. I am happy with an uber-modern M (compatible) and a Barnack because they are so different. A mechanical Leica M and an Barnack wouldn't differentiate enough for me to keep both. But I don't know which one I would keep. I can tell you that I kept the IIIc and gave away the Bessa R. I didn't mind the plastic body, but the Hexar was all the bessa was and more so I wasn't using the Bessa.
I could be talked into letting the CLE go but it has it's place in the ecosystem: my 40mm lens lives on it.
I haven't owned a Leica M, just a Minolta CLE and Hexar RF. The Hexar in particular I like a lot ... but it's such a different beast to the IIIc that I can't really say LIKE one more than the other.
The Barnack has that mechanical-jewel feeling that neither the plastic CLE or the techno-wizard Hexar have. The shooting style is much more slow and deliberate, which is no bad thing. You don't want to change lenses with a screw-mount Leica - or Bessa R. M-mounts tempt you with quick swaps, which can be good or bad depending on the circumstances.
I'm preparing to do some photography at a friend's wedding: I'll use the Hexar because it handles so much faster. But a few weeks ago I went around and photographed a street art festival here in Toowoomba, and for that I took the IIIc and a MF RF.
I do think it's worth posing the question as you have: either/or. I am happy with an uber-modern M (compatible) and a Barnack because they are so different. A mechanical Leica M and an Barnack wouldn't differentiate enough for me to keep both. But I don't know which one I would keep. I can tell you that I kept the IIIc and gave away the Bessa R. I didn't mind the plastic body, but the Hexar was all the bessa was and more so I wasn't using the Bessa.
I could be talked into letting the CLE go but it has it's place in the ecosystem: my 40mm lens lives on it.
stillshunter
unlearning digital habits
Thank you Juan.
There is actually an opportunity for me to buy a local R3A in great condition for a very nice price. Suit my 50' Cron nicely, but my only hesitation is its utility with my other love the CV 28/3.5. Obviously the R4 is a good match but I also hear the edge of the R2 window can be used for framing….I don't wear glasses when shooting.
Thanks again Juan. So refreshing to not hear I need to buy an MP with Noctilux to shoot anything of value.
stillshunter
unlearning digital habits
Thanks Scrambler. My main concern with the Hexar RF - much like the CLE I had for a time - is serviceability. I hear horror stories of folks who bond with their camera only to find that not for love or money can they be fixed if tragedy befalls them.
Meanwhile any and every ZM I have seen sits well outside of my price-range.
Pioneer
Veteran
I have the R, the R2C (Contax) and the R3A so it is obvious I have no problem using the Voigtlander Bessa cameras. That being said however, the Leica Barnack cameras are in a league of their own regarding build.
But the newest Barnack, the IIIg, is fast approaching 60 now, and they were built for a completely different generation. Most people appreciate the modern amenities provided by the Bessa cameras. As Juan says, they are very reliable cameras so I doubt you will be disappointed with the R3A.
maddoc
... likes film again.
If money is a concern then also the Jupiter and Industar lenses are no bad choice at all. Considering that I paid about US$100 for my IIIb and US$40 for either Industar-50 or J-8 (both 50mm) I would say it is the camera with the best performance/price ratio I have.
The only thing I do not like about the little Barnacks is the necessary external VF for any focal length other than 50mm. The lack of frame-lines and parallax compensation is nothing to worry about (for me at least ....)
The only thing I do not like about the little Barnacks is the necessary external VF for any focal length other than 50mm. The lack of frame-lines and parallax compensation is nothing to worry about (for me at least ....)
Bingley
Veteran
I love shooting with my IIIc and Canon IVSB2. They're beautiful robust works of mechanical art, and they can easily slip into a coat pocket. I find that one or the other is my preferred carry when I want a compact shooter, such as on a long walk or a backpack trip. I can't say that I enjoy shooting them more than my M2 or M4-2, but I enjoy them as much. Shooting a Barnack is a slower process for me than shooting with an M. I prefer an M for street photography, and a Barnack for landscape work.
thegman
Veteran
My IIIf was very small and portable compared to the M3, but all round, much preferred the M. Film loading and general use of shutter speed dial, finder, etc.
Scrambler
Well-known
I understand, Mark. I very nearly hit the go-no-further wall with my CLE but advice from this forum got it moving again. The Hexar gives a much better impression of solidity, and I understand they are still serviceable, but like any electronic device that has limits. And there are no shortage of them - and for the price of a ZM you could buy two. Or buy a replacement for not much more than the price of a quality CLA on a Leica.
I could give the standard RFF advice - you won't lose (much) money on buying and selling so you could buy, try, and sell what you don't use. But I'm useless at selling stuff so that advice doesn't work for me!
I could give the standard RFF advice - you won't lose (much) money on buying and selling so you could buy, try, and sell what you don't use. But I'm useless at selling stuff so that advice doesn't work for me!
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
The R4 is nice for the 28 bacause in a frame selector position you see the 28 lines and nothing else... But I have stopped using my 28 on my R4M, because of the very light weight of my T's... I use the 28 3.5 as my main lens, and as I keep it prefocused and at f8, I don't need looking through a focusing window, and lately I use my tiny 28 everywhere with the CV 28 brightline finder: a truly magic view!
So maybe an R3 and the external 28 finder for your Skopar can give you the very best that's available...
Cheers,
Juan
stillshunter
unlearning digital habits
Oh Juan this doesn't help me at all, as I already have the CV Brightline 28mm finder for my CV28/3.5 and IIIf. Oh goodness me…..this might hurt financially as I do love the 1:1 view through my SBOOI.
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
Well, if you already got that 28 3.5 and that 28 external finder, all you really need is the R3... A or M, both will do it!
Or get an MP or a black M2 instead: you choose!
That's what I've told myself for years, and I got no MP nor black M2...
Good luck to your wallet!
Cheers,
Juan