Beginner looking for Friendly Advice: Leica M6 TTL or Bessa R3A?

[bobby_novatron]

Hello everyone! I am an "amateur enthusiast" / "prosumer" that is relatively new to rangefinder cameras. I have been a digital shooter on Canon SLR's for many years, but have recently fled the digital world to re-embrace film.

I have been sharpening my skills on inexpensive (but fun) rangefinders, such as Canon QL-17, Konica Super S1.6, Kiev 4a, and the like. I find I'm really enjoying the rangefinder experience and am wanting to move into a more "serious" camera.

I've read lots of forums, postings, etc., and seem to be gravitating towards either a Bessa R3A, or a Leica M6 TTL. I would like to have the option of metering for tricky lighting situations.

I know it's not a 100% fair comparison between these two cameras -- different engineering, different lineages etc., but there's a similar functionality to both, I think.

I'm going on a trip to Italy this summer and wanted to take a nice rangefinder instead of lugging around a digital SLR, so there's some serious motivation to getting a nice camera for this trip.

One the one hand, I've read good things about the Bessa. Plus, it's a new, 21st-century rangefinder. To me this means that there's no "CLA" issues, no adjustments needed, etc. Fresh out of the box, ready-to-roll.

On the other hand, there's the Leica M6. I keep reading about the sublime engineering of this camera. People write about it with glowing reverence and hushed tones. I keep reading that it's a "legendary camera", a "pinnacle of design". There must be something magical about this machine that makes grown men grow misty-eyed...

BTW budget is a minor issue. I would prefer to spend less $$$ (wouldn't we all?) but I am familiar with old axiom "you get what you pay for".

Any friendly input on this issue would be appreciated! Thanks in advance for your help! 🙂

 

[gliderbee]

I have both, and both are excellent cameras, but different (predictable answer, this is ...)

If you take the M6TTL with 0.85 viewfinder, it comes closest to the R3A, but the R3A is indeed a more modern camera, and I prefer it's 1:1 viewfinder. It has faster top-shutter speed, metal shutter, costs new half of a M6 S/H, and you can use it in AE or manual. The M6 is more quite and has a more solid feel, but the R3A is a very sturdy camera too.

Some then will say it's battery dependant, and it is, but a set of batteries 1) goes a very long time and 2) weights next to nothing, so you can easily have a spare with you.

So, from the utilitarian viewpoint, take the R3A and have lots of fun. If you find yourself still wanting a Leica afterwards, you can buy it later (they will still be around) and you will still keep using the R3A often.

Just my 2 cents, and probably this will not pass undisputed 😛

 

[bobby_novatron]

Thank you, Gliderbee ... I appreciate your answer, especially considering the fact that you own both cameras. Very insightful.

 

[ferider]

The biggest user differences are

.) shutter noise
.) frame-lines: clearly for wide angles (35 and 28) the M6 is better. Also, due to longer effective base length, it's easier to focus a fast tele (like a 90/2). On the other hand, the R3a has nice 1:1 view.
.) I have found the Bessa R3* viewfinder to go much easier out of alignment than the Leica's.
.) AE on the bessa, fully manual exposure on the M6. I prefer manual, but many prefer AE.

They are both great cameras. The most important user difference is suitability for different lenses, so pick your lenses first, I suggest.

I've owned R3a and M6 (classic). And, BTW, it's totally OK to use Cosina/Voigtlander lenses on an M6 🙂

Best,

Roland.

 

[SolaresLarrave]

I agree with Gliderbee. For a while, I did what you did: use my Canonet all the time (highly addictive camera) and then a Contax G. Not until after I had burned A BIG LOT OF FILM (and earned some spousal approval of my shots) did I buy into Leica ownership.

Not to burst your bubble... but they're not perfect. For an expensive camera, they may fail too. More often than not, they don't, but then, these cameras are not exempt from defects. My first had leaks, my second and third and fourth didn't. I was pretty upset (down the drain went several months of search, not to mention the money). However, selling it would have been even more frustrating, so I kept it... and eventually got it repaired.

I think you'd do well by buying the Bessa right now, new, learn how to use it blindfolded, and then, with a little more time, get yourself a Leica. Anything purchased shortly before a trip will play a practical joke on you... especially a Leica.

In any case, have fun shopping!

 

[Roger Hicks]

A review in the British Journal of Photography summed it up well: if Voigtländers, ZIs and Leicas were all made by the same company, the price differentials would still be similar...

If you want to shoot fast lenses, especially close up, the longer effective base of the M is easier and more accurate, and you can't use the classic 35 focal length (though may are perfectly happy with 40mm). The 1:1 finder of the R3 makes it easier to keep both eyes open, but equally, you can learn to do that (if it's important to you) with other magnifications too.

Leica meters are easier to read than some Bessas or ZIs: the 'traffic-light' system is a LOT easier than other systems.

An M6 ttl is sufficiently recent that it shouldn't need a CLA unless it's sat unused for most of its life.

Although I'd probably choose a metered Bessa over an unmetered Leica -- I'm not that sentimental -- I think I'd go for a second-hand metered Leica rather than a new Bessa. I've used most Leicas and most Bessas, by the way, so this in not empty theory.

Cheers,

R.

 

[kshapero]

That meter on the Bessa R3M is about as easy to read as anything I've seen. Just my 2 cents.

 

[payasam]

I'd say that a Bessa R*A should be seen together with the M7.

 

[ashrafazlan]

I went through the same dilemma just a week ago. On paper, the bessa seems far superior feature wise compared to the M6. However, I knew that I wanted a camera that would last me a solid 10 years or so..and the Leica felt so solidly built that I decided to go with it anyway 🙂

 

[umcelinho]

As someone who had a similar dilemma, I'd say go with the M6. I was torn between an M6 (classic, not TTL. I never ever use flash, so why pay more?) and a R2A.

Yes, the Bessas have a modern design, the 1/2000 top speed and AE, but I don't think it's a CLA-free choice. I've read about many shutter failures and rangefinder coming off alignment, which of course also happen with M6s, but might be a much lower rate.

AE can be great or terrible. great in the sense you can get faster shots if lighting changed a lot and quickly. but terrible in the sense it's too easy to just leave it on AE all the time. I feel that with my R-D1, I feel a bit lazy to use manual exposure, also because of the way the camera shows me the metering inside the viewfinder. Sometimes I can't really see it well, so AE ends up being the way to go.

The M6 feels much more solid, robust, the rangefinder patch is more accurate due to the bigger rf baselength (I can't focus a 90mm at f2 in my R-D1, I assume it might be tricky in a R3A as well), and I personally prefer the film loading system of the M6, it's too easy once you get the hand of it (after 3 rolls the latest)... Also, I got my 1995 M6 last year from a shop in London and it works perfectly, no CLA needed so far.

I disagree that buying a Bessa first and then getting an M6 later if you feel the need for it is a good idea, unless you buy a used R3A. This way you wouldn't lose (much) money.

The M6 is also more silent and vibrates a bit less, but that is only an issue if you are picky.

The R3A viewfinder is interesting, 1:1 is a different shooting experience but I find it too limiting, as you'd need an external VF for wide angles. The R-D1's is also 1:1, but still I end up closing my left eye when shooting, because it feels better. So the 1:1 vf doesn't end up giving me such a benefit.

The best would be to go to a camera shop and hold both in your hands, feel them, it helps a lot when deciding.

And as ferider said, have in mind which lenses you want to have first, it will help you make the decision.

 

[Steve Bellayr]

The Leica M6 & an extra battery. If you are planning to shoot landscapes you will need the 35mm lens. Many people consider the 50mm a mini telephoto. Take that into consideration when picking a viewfinder. The M6 has framelines for 28/35/50/75/90/135. (M6 Classic B turns off battery & should the battery go dead the camera is fully functional less the meter.)

On all trips with all cameras extra batteries should be standard.

 

[hellomikmik]

no experience with m6 or bessa.
i went instinctively with zeiss ikon (AE, viewfinder, weight...).

 

[Dave Wilkinson]

At times like this, I always think back in amusement to about four years ago, when I visited a camera shop - about five minutes walk from Amsterdam rail station. Looking around the cases of Leica, Hassleblad etc., I said to the young assistant (he may have been the proprietor) - 'do you sell the Voigtlanders'?, well...I thought he was gong to spit! - as he said "NO! - the Voigtlanders are cheap, plasticy junk! - compared to Leica M". This is not my view ( at least not in such strong terms! )....but to a certain extent he did have a point! 😉
Dave.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

The M6 (Classic... Leave flash for Ken Rockwell...🙂)

 

[John Lawrence]

I said to the young assistant (he may have been the proprietor) - 'do you sell the Voigtlanders'?, well...I thought he was gong to spit! - as he said "NO! - the Voigtlanders are cheap, plasticy junk! - compared to Leica M". 😉
Dave.

...so I wouldn't be able to buy a Holga from him?

John

 

[J. Borger]

Nothing against Bessas but the M6 feels so solid and nice and is so (relatively) cheap at this moment i's almost a crime not to buy one. It's a classic camera you will enjoy for the rest of your life!

 

[djonesii]

I have had both a Bessa R, the older LTM version, and an M6. The M6 is a much nicer machine. Is it twice as as nice ...... There is a reason that there is Leica mystique, it's hard to explain until you pick up the camera.

However, the proof is in the pudding, and at the end of the day, I could tell no diffirence in IQ between them, it's only down to ergonomics. If at all possible I would suggest you go try to hold both camearas!

I shot about 100 rolls or so through the bessa, decided the RF was not for me sold it; changed my mind, got the M6, redecided that FILM was not for me and that I really liked rangefinders, now have an RD-1 ( essentially a Bessa R body ), and like it loads.

Best;

Dave

 

[Tim Gray]

I'd look at an M6 classic or a Zeiss Ikon. Both are great cameras.

If you buy used, make sure you get one in good shape from a trusted seller. I know some who have bought used 20-year old cameras and had problems with them immediately, and condemned the whole camera brand.

 

[rya]

I have made this decision before. My winner was the M6TTL. (If you decide to ever go digital with Leica, the shutter speed dial will be familiar). The Bessa will be good so long as you don't get a taste for Leica while using it.

 

[soccerrick10]

My experience (YMMV)

My experience (YMMV)

I have a bad taste in my mouth over the Bessa R2A I bought my son. It had less than 10 rolls of film through it when the shutter failed. The cost to repair was over $200. It also was notorious for the viewfinder becoming mis-aligned. Since My M6 and MP have run years without any problems, I put the $200 toward a nice used M6 for him as a replaacement. I should have bought the M6 to begin with.