mfogiel
Veteran
If you want something with AE and cheaper to start with, get the Bessa R4A, which is wonderful for the 21-28mm lenses, and still acceptable with the 35mm. You could then get a Leica for the longer lenses if you will like this style of shooting. Otherwise, get the Leica, but as Roland said, ask yourself what is your preferred FL to choose the magnification. Seeing that you are not on a stringent budget, the ideal solution would be an M7.
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
...but instead of the M6, you'd get better photographs / enjoy your photography more with two different bodies: a new R4M and a new R3M for the same price of a used M6 without warranty...
Cheers,
Juan
Cheers,
Juan
MCTuomey
Veteran
the problem is that you can't make the best decision without direct experience and you can't gain experience without making a decision ...
if you have the kind of personality that holds that it's better to buy well and only once, then maybe pass go and head straight for a leica on the theory that you would get there anyway.
not that leica is necessarily best, but that it has the legacy.
at any rate try to match the camera both to particular focal lengths and to your style of shooting. E.g if you need auto exposure, an M6 ttl won't help you, while a Bessa, M7, or Zeiss Ikon will.
if you have the kind of personality that holds that it's better to buy well and only once, then maybe pass go and head straight for a leica on the theory that you would get there anyway.
not that leica is necessarily best, but that it has the legacy.
at any rate try to match the camera both to particular focal lengths and to your style of shooting. E.g if you need auto exposure, an M6 ttl won't help you, while a Bessa, M7, or Zeiss Ikon will.
bobby_novatron
Photon Collector
Wow, thanks to everyone for their input -- I sincerely do appreciate all the different perspectives. I know many of you have years of experience at rangefinder photography so I am happy that you took a minute to contribute your thoughts.
It's still a battle in my mind between the two. I'm struggling to justify the extra money for a basic Leica M6, when I could get a R3A or R4A with a couple Nokton lenses and still have money left over.
On the other hand, like many people have said, buying into the Leica brand means owning something legendary, something that will (more or less) keep its value ... not to mention the pleasure in using such a finely-crafted machine.
BTW -- I know the Bessa R-series are available through Cameraquest -- but I'm not so sure about where to source a decent M6. Can anyone point me in the direction of a reputable Leica M6 dealer? I assume that going to good old whee*bay for an auction is probably not the best strategy.
It's still a battle in my mind between the two. I'm struggling to justify the extra money for a basic Leica M6, when I could get a R3A or R4A with a couple Nokton lenses and still have money left over.
On the other hand, like many people have said, buying into the Leica brand means owning something legendary, something that will (more or less) keep its value ... not to mention the pleasure in using such a finely-crafted machine.
BTW -- I know the Bessa R-series are available through Cameraquest -- but I'm not so sure about where to source a decent M6. Can anyone point me in the direction of a reputable Leica M6 dealer? I assume that going to good old whee*bay for an auction is probably not the best strategy.
back alley
IMAGES
wait till one comes up in the classifieds here, from a known buyer.
i second the nod towards the r4a, it's a great camera for wides, cannot be beat.
and if the rf bug continues then get a second (leica) body as suggested above.
joe
i second the nod towards the r4a, it's a great camera for wides, cannot be beat.
and if the rf bug continues then get a second (leica) body as suggested above.
joe
kehng
Established
i went through the same process as you Bobby and bought an R3A for an artist residency in Beijing. Got many great photos out of it and loved using it while I was travelling in sometimes harsh conditions. While I had it I thought it was the perfect camera with the 40mm Nokton. I eventually succumbed and got myself a Leica and have never looked back. The differences are subtle but if you think you'll use a camera more if you enjoy using your equipment, I would humbly suggest getting a user Leica M2, MR meter and a 50mm Elmar collapsible, as you would probably have the full Leica experience while spending less than what it costs to get a new Bessa and Nokton. New kit is overrated as long as the second hand kit you get is working and in good condition. Prowl the classifieds here and other forums. Use Ebay with care.
Good luck!
Good luck!
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
There's an M6 for near $1500 + shipping at KEH.com now...
For that price cameraquest.com can ship (for free and with camera cases free too) one lens and two bodies, new and untouched... Bessa M cameras are very well made (R3M and R4M) and all their speeds work without batteries... Their meter is the most accurate I have used on any camera of any brand...
Cheers,
Juan
For that price cameraquest.com can ship (for free and with camera cases free too) one lens and two bodies, new and untouched... Bessa M cameras are very well made (R3M and R4M) and all their speeds work without batteries... Their meter is the most accurate I have used on any camera of any brand...
Cheers,
Juan
x-ray
Veteran
I purchased two new a la carte MP's. The shutter on one failed and would not cap properly. I also have had three M lenses with problems that should not have happened and one from the factory. I've used M's for more years than many of you have been on earth and own 2 mp's and a 1960 M2 plus a nice R2 and ZI. I do love my M's and understand any camera can fail and equally love the R2 and ZI. Each have +'s and -'s. The M's are nice but have a cloth shutter and are subject to burning from the sun being focused on it by the lens. they sync at 1/50 (very slow) and focus tracking of moving subjects is tough. It's heavier but I would not say weight equates to build quality. I've had RF alignment problems with M's and never with the Voigtlander or ZI. Noise is higher or at least different woth a metal shutter but for my 2 cents I like the modern metal shutter. Repairs are much higher for Leicas than either the R2 or ZI. The ZI beats the M hands down for RF performance and ease of focus. Metering is dead on with all. Flash sync is much higher on the R2 and ZI. Frame lines are very inacurate IMO with the M6. The M and ZI have auto activating frames and the R2 must be selected which has tripped me up a few times but I'm used to auto frames.
My vote is pick the voigtlander and see if it fits your needs and if you like it. You can always sell it later for little to no loss or keep it for a second body. They're great cameras and will make eqally as fine an image as any other camera. I use the R2 and others interchangabley depending on the mood. Remember too that you've asked a bunch of guys that have a mental disorder (just a joke atleast for some) and would rather have a leica than food.
healyzh
Well-known
I recently went through this myself. Though I was looking at the R2A. In the end I decided that a M6 was the camera for me, but ended up with an M6 TTL as I got one for only $75 more than the M6 the shop had, and it was in much nicer condition. I opted for the Leica due to the differences in build quality, and the EBL.
gliderbee
Well-known
I talked about the R3A because you specifically asked for that one or a M6, but I agree that the R4A (I have one) or R4M might be a very good choice if you like wide-angle.
If you buy a Leica later, the R4* will still be the best for wide-angle lenses.
One advantage that I've never seen mentioned about the 1:1 viewfinder of the R3A (and R3M) is this: there are quite some lenses that block part of the viewfinder (right under edge). With the 1:1 viewfinder and keeping both eyes open (I'm supposing you are right-eyed), you can see "through" the blocking part of the lens to see the whole picture, since the image of each eye will overlap in your mind. With magnifications other then 1:1, this doesn't work.
STefan.
If you buy a Leica later, the R4* will still be the best for wide-angle lenses.
One advantage that I've never seen mentioned about the 1:1 viewfinder of the R3A (and R3M) is this: there are quite some lenses that block part of the viewfinder (right under edge). With the 1:1 viewfinder and keeping both eyes open (I'm supposing you are right-eyed), you can see "through" the blocking part of the lens to see the whole picture, since the image of each eye will overlap in your mind. With magnifications other then 1:1, this doesn't work.
STefan.
ferider
Veteran
Actually, the portion of the viewfinder frame (in percent) blocked by a given lens only depends on physical lens to viewfinder distance. It is the same for R2*, R3* or R4*.
It is also the same when comparing M3 and M6.
The camera with least blockage is the ZI.
And, you can get an M6TTL with lower magnification if you are interested in wide angles down to 24mm. For 21, the Bessa R4* is unique.
Roland.
It is also the same when comparing M3 and M6.
The camera with least blockage is the ZI.
And, you can get an M6TTL with lower magnification if you are interested in wide angles down to 24mm. For 21, the Bessa R4* is unique.
Roland.
Last edited:
FrankS
Registered User
Leica or Bessa: You really have to hold and manipulate both cameras to find out for yourself. For some, the image is all that matters and in almost all circumstances a Bessa would be fine and more than adequate. For others, the feel/ergonomics/haptics of a camera is influential, and here the Leica is better FOR ME. Only YOU can make that decision for yourself.
I have owned several Bessa and Leica cameras, still have 2 M2's. FOR ME the feeling is like the difference between a Nikon FE10/FG20 and a Nikon F3. They are built to different price points and you can feel it.
It's like a kitchen knife. Some folks couldn't care less about a knife as long as it cuts. For others, there is a pleasure in using a knife that has superior materials and engineering, one made at a higher pricepoint. I brought some traditional Japanese knives back with me and there is a pleasure just in using them, compared to the plastic-handled Canadian Tire serrated-blade knives available in sets of 8 for $6.99. They cut just fine.
I have owned several Bessa and Leica cameras, still have 2 M2's. FOR ME the feeling is like the difference between a Nikon FE10/FG20 and a Nikon F3. They are built to different price points and you can feel it.
It's like a kitchen knife. Some folks couldn't care less about a knife as long as it cuts. For others, there is a pleasure in using a knife that has superior materials and engineering, one made at a higher pricepoint. I brought some traditional Japanese knives back with me and there is a pleasure just in using them, compared to the plastic-handled Canadian Tire serrated-blade knives available in sets of 8 for $6.99. They cut just fine.
Last edited:
Thardy
Veteran
I bought the Bessa R2A and lens to get into RF photography without spending a lot of money. Funny thing, it was still about $1,000. I used it for a while then really had a BURNING desire for a Leica, so I bought the M6TTL.
The Leica is solid, well made, BEAUTIFUL, rather smooth in function, but a little "dated" as far technology goes. The TTL is a little more advanced and newer than the classic as far as I know.
I seem to use the Bessa all the time now after a brief affair with TTL. I think it is because of the AE, faster high shutter speed, and to me easier film loading.
I use the Bessa more because I have a Bessa. If I didn't, I would use the Leica all the time, except when I'm using the Nikon, Canon, Mamiya ... well you get the picture.
The Leica is solid, well made, BEAUTIFUL, rather smooth in function, but a little "dated" as far technology goes. The TTL is a little more advanced and newer than the classic as far as I know.
I seem to use the Bessa all the time now after a brief affair with TTL. I think it is because of the AE, faster high shutter speed, and to me easier film loading.
I use the Bessa more because I have a Bessa. If I didn't, I would use the Leica all the time, except when I'm using the Nikon, Canon, Mamiya ... well you get the picture.
ulrich.von.lich
Well-known
I think I understand what Stefan was saying. It's not about the portion of the viewfinder blocked by a lens but the possibility to see through the blocked part as if the lens was transparent.
Here's a few things from my own experience:
The 40mm framelines of the R3A are only pieces of lines, which are uncomfortable when it comes to composition, even if you don't wear glasses and you can see them perfectly well. The 50mm framelines are excellent.
The rangefinder patch of the R3A only goes darker in dim lighting condition but it never flares, unlike that of the M6.
It's difficult to do multiple exposures on the R3A, if it's important to you.
You see shutter speeds in the viewfinder of the R3A, although they can be hard to see at times.
The electronic shutter of the R3A is more accurate.
Here's a few things from my own experience:
The 40mm framelines of the R3A are only pieces of lines, which are uncomfortable when it comes to composition, even if you don't wear glasses and you can see them perfectly well. The 50mm framelines are excellent.
The rangefinder patch of the R3A only goes darker in dim lighting condition but it never flares, unlike that of the M6.
It's difficult to do multiple exposures on the R3A, if it's important to you.
You see shutter speeds in the viewfinder of the R3A, although they can be hard to see at times.
The electronic shutter of the R3A is more accurate.
Last edited:
ferider
Veteran
The R3A viewfinder is brighter but flares more than the M6.
But if you have any way to play with the two cameras, as Frank suggests, I will be invaluable to your decision.
Roland.
But if you have any way to play with the two cameras, as Frank suggests, I will be invaluable to your decision.
Roland.
FrankS
Registered User
It's even like motorcycles. It's a personal thing: what feels best to you. Some like torquey twins, others prefer revy fours. I can tell you which one I prefer, but you will have to choose based on your own feeling.
Last edited:
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
Chances are that you'll prefer using 15mm, 21mm or 25mm (real wideangles) without any external finder, so sooner or later you'll buy a Bessa R4 (M or A)...
From this point of view you could easily think of having both a mechanical body and an automatic one as you seem to think of getting AE...
I think you said money is not a problem, so a good option for you to get all you need is:
R4M + M7
If you don't go for AE, R4M + M6.
And if you're not buying a brand, R4M + R3(A or M)
Cheers,
Juan
From this point of view you could easily think of having both a mechanical body and an automatic one as you seem to think of getting AE...
I think you said money is not a problem, so a good option for you to get all you need is:
R4M + M7
If you don't go for AE, R4M + M6.
And if you're not buying a brand, R4M + R3(A or M)
Cheers,
Juan
bobby_novatron
Photon Collector
Once again, I tip my hat to all of you who have contribute to this debate. I have to admit, I'm enjoying reading the humorous, thoughtful intellectual sparring that this thread has generated.
As I mentioned before, I tend to believe in the expression "you get what you pay for" ... another analogy would be cars, wouldn't it? Sure, a tidy little Japanese 4-door will get you from A to B the same as a German 2-door sports coupe, but the experience of the German sports car is just so different, so much more visceral and sublime.
* sigh * I seem to be no further along in my deliberations ...
Many good points raised here in the Bessa vs Leica comparo. If anyone else has anything to add, I'd welcome additional information. Cheers!
p.s. Juan --> thanks for the idea of purchasing two bodies ... however, money is a bit of an object. I don't think I can justify an M7 purchase to my wife at the moment ...
As I mentioned before, I tend to believe in the expression "you get what you pay for" ... another analogy would be cars, wouldn't it? Sure, a tidy little Japanese 4-door will get you from A to B the same as a German 2-door sports coupe, but the experience of the German sports car is just so different, so much more visceral and sublime.
* sigh * I seem to be no further along in my deliberations ...
Many good points raised here in the Bessa vs Leica comparo. If anyone else has anything to add, I'd welcome additional information. Cheers!
p.s. Juan --> thanks for the idea of purchasing two bodies ... however, money is a bit of an object. I don't think I can justify an M7 purchase to my wife at the moment ...
Last edited:
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
Once again, I tip my hat to all of you who have contribute to this debate. I have to admit, I'm enjoying reading the humorous, thoughtful intellectual sparring that this thread has generated.
As I mentioned before, I tend to believe in the expression "you get what you pay for" ... another analogy would be cars, wouldn't it? Sure, a tidy little Japanese 4-door will get you from A to B the same as a German 2-door sports coupe, but the experience of the German sports car is just so different, so much more visceral and sublime.
* sigh * I seem to be no further along in my deliberations ...
Many good points raised here in the Bessa vs Leica comparo. If anyone else has anything to add, I'd welcome additional information. Cheers!
p.s. Juan --> thanks for the idea of purchasing two bodies ... however, money is a bit of an object. I don't think I can justify an M7 purchase to my wife at the moment ...
Well, yes, an M7 is not reason enough for misbehaving or being untrue and a liar and not telling your wife about it...
But two Bessas are reason enough!
Cheers
Last edited:
Leigh Youdale
Well-known
I've owned Leica IIIf's but not any M series. I know what Leica's feel like in the hand and experienced the "glow" of ownership.
But for me the Bessas are a very satisfactory camera. I think too much is made of the alleged quietness of the Leica shutter - 95% of the time it doesn't matter (even if you can detect it) and too much is made of the mystique of Leica ownership and build quality. (It doesn't seem to have evidenced itself in the M8-M9 series if you read these threads). But I still like the idea of having a Leica. What stops me is the price difference and the fact that a Leica really doesn't take any better a photo than the Bessa. It just "feels" nicer.
I have both the R3A and R4A Bessas. Had them for some years without any problems. It'll stay that way because I like using the 25mm FL lens and find the widest FL on the Leica (28mm) doesn't cut it for me. If it did, and I never used wider than 28mm then I'd have to look more seriously at a Leica if I wanted just one camera to carry instead of two. (Not that the weight of the Bessas is any problem). Having two bodies with different film in can be advantageous at times.
But it would definitely have to have inbuilt metering and AE to get my attention. The Bessas satisfy both requirements. An older "better" Leica without these features wouldn't get my wallet open.
But for me the Bessas are a very satisfactory camera. I think too much is made of the alleged quietness of the Leica shutter - 95% of the time it doesn't matter (even if you can detect it) and too much is made of the mystique of Leica ownership and build quality. (It doesn't seem to have evidenced itself in the M8-M9 series if you read these threads). But I still like the idea of having a Leica. What stops me is the price difference and the fact that a Leica really doesn't take any better a photo than the Bessa. It just "feels" nicer.
I have both the R3A and R4A Bessas. Had them for some years without any problems. It'll stay that way because I like using the 25mm FL lens and find the widest FL on the Leica (28mm) doesn't cut it for me. If it did, and I never used wider than 28mm then I'd have to look more seriously at a Leica if I wanted just one camera to carry instead of two. (Not that the weight of the Bessas is any problem). Having two bodies with different film in can be advantageous at times.
But it would definitely have to have inbuilt metering and AE to get my attention. The Bessas satisfy both requirements. An older "better" Leica without these features wouldn't get my wallet open.