david.elliott
Well-known
Hello All-
Just joined the forum. Seems like a great community here.
I am looking to purchase a rangefinder and normal lens for Christmas and I would like your advice and help in making my decision. A bit of a wall of text follows, but I figure that I will get more helpful advice if I provide you with some background information about me and my reasoning thus far.
First, I suppose I should start out with a bit of background about myself. I have only used one camera before - my Nikon D70 which I purchased several years ago. I have never used a film camera and I have never developed any film.
My reasons for wanting to try a rangefinder are as follows. I have wanted to give film a go for some time now. At least to start with, I would not be developing my own film since a local lab, Penn Camera, seems to get pretty good reviews. I think that using film would probably help me slow down a bit and think more carefully about my photography - I certainly wouldnt snap off 100 shots and think nothing of it. Lately, I have grown a little tired of processing raw files and would like to experience what film offers in that respect - less time processing and more time shooting. Finally, high focus accuracy with manual lenses is very attractive to me. With my D70 I shoot in manual mode with old AIS lenses, which requires that I use the not-so-great D70 viewfinder and the electronic rangefinder (green dot) to figure out when things are in focus. Consequently, I often rely on zone focusing or focus bracketing for when I shoot wide open. It would be nicer to be able to get things right from the get-go.
I should note that I do not have a big investment in nikon gear, or at least not as much as others. I am certainly willing and eager to make the jump to a rangefinder system that will complement my D70 and two lenses.
I am not looking for another SLR system, or I would probably just purchase an old Nikon N90. What has attracted me to rangefinders is their size - the bessa seems like it will be somewhat smaller than my D70, the quieter shutter, and hopefully much improved low light shooting over my D70 (which becomes unbearably noisy for me at ISO800 - correctable, but significant loss of sharpness).
With regard to the older rangefinders - canonets, yashica, konica autos, minolta hi-matics, etc - I have again opted not to go that route. I am more comfortable purchasing a new product that will come with a warranty and last for years for higher cost than I am with purchasing an older rangefinder on ebay that may present unknown problems that I am incapable of repairing. I also am concerned about the viewfinders in the older cameras - the D70 viewfinder isnt so great and I am looking forward to something nicer.
Leicas are the other route to take, but they are out of my budget (more on budget below).
That brings me to the Voigtlander Bessa line - the reason why I am posting in these forums.
I have been reading cameraquest.com and looking at the various bessa options. I have decided to pass on the Bessa T because I would prefer not to have a separate rangefinder and viewfinder. This basically leaves the R line.
My budget is ~$1000 total for camera plus lens.
Because I, as mentioned above, am interest only in purchasing a single lens - normal perspective, I have decided that the R4* line probably is not the best fit. The 50 appears to be the smallest frame line, which is something I would like to avoid. More room in the viewfinder, the better for me I think.
This leaves the R2* and R3* lines. I am not really interested in shooting wide, so the R2* line loses out on that point. The R3* line seems more attractive in that it has the longer EBL and 1:1 finder magnification. The prospect of shooting with both eyes open sounds truly awesome.
Therefore, the R3* line decided upon (unless my reasoning somewhere is faulty), I still have to decide between the manual or automatic version. With my D70 I shoot in full manual mode, but with my AI and AIS lenses there is no metering so I tend to chimp a fair bit. With the R3* ability to meter, this shouldnt be a problem and will likely be a welcome change of pace. My understanding is that with the R3M I manually set the aperture and shutter speed to match the meter which is indicated at the bottom of the viewfinder from -2 to +2 in half stops. And with the R3A, I either use aperture priority or set the meter to match the shutter speed (closest available?) shown in the bottom of the viewfinder. And in both models, it appears that I can use exposure compensation.
This brings me to my first question. Ergonomically, is it easy to quickly adjust the aperture and shutter speed on a R3M? I would prefer not to rely on aperture priority if I can avoid it - not because I believe it would make mistakes, but I just like controlling all the settings manually. I much prefer the described layout of the R3M meter to that of the R3A.
Second question. I have read that the shutter on the R3M is quieter than that of the R3A. Is the difference large? I understand that this is subjective. I don't suppose anybody has links to an audio recording of each? I googled around a bit but came up short.
At any rate, assuming I purchase either the R3M or the R3A, that leaves me with $1000 budget - $569 camera body = $431 for a lens. All prices taken from cameraquest.com.
Here, it seems there are several options. Obviously the less money I spend, the better, but I dont mind using up the budget. I cannot go over it though (excluding tax and shipping).
Option 1: 40mm f1.4 Nokton.
-This seems ideal in terms of price ($349), focal length (close to normal), and lens speed (easy to toss the background out of focus, and great for low light shooting). Unfortunately, I wear glasses and the general opinion seems to be that it is difficult to see the entire 40mm frame line on the R3* line while wearing glasses. I suppose that if I were to get this lens, I should go with the R2* line and use the 35mm frame lines as estimates. I would like to avoid that though for the reasons listed above with regard to my preference for the R3* line.
-My understanding is that 50mm frame lines should be easily viewed, even while wearing glasses, with the R3* line. Is this correct?
Option 2: 50mm f2.5 Color Skopar
-I am afraid that I have to pass on this lens, despite the attractive price, since at a minimum I would like a lens f2 or faster.
Option 3: 50mm f2 Collapsible Heliar
-I have to confess here, that I am not altogether clear on what a collapsible lens is - or its advantages. Is the advantage merely the small size? From the photo on cameraquest.com, it appears as though the lens needs to be 'extended' to use? Are there problems with dust getting into the lens while extended?
-At any rate, the lens would seem to fit the bill. It is within budget and I could just purchase the 250th Anniversary set if I went this route.
Option 4: 50mm f1.5 nokton
-Along with the f2 (above, option 3), this appears to be a frontrunner. It is within budget, fast, and unlike the f2, it comes with a lens shade. I would have to purchase a screwmount adapter, but my understanding is that the adapters allow full compatibility - so no big deal.
-How does this lens compare with the 50mm f2 heliar?
Option 5: Other lenses?
-Are there other lenses that I should be looking at? Lenses other than those listed on cameraquest.com?
-I took a look through KEH and all the used M mount lenses are out of my price range. The used screwmount lenses, while in budget, are all bargain grade - so I figure I may as well get a new Voigtlander lens for the money?
-I took a look through ebay but there didnt seem to be anything great going on. And there seemed to be more than a few shady looking auctions where lenses were rated as EXC+ with a crack in the glass or nonsense like that. Certainly makes me raise an eyebrow.
-----
Thank you for taking the time to read what I wrote and to help me out. I hope I did not babble too much.
Please correct me if I am wrong in anything I said. If I was unclear at any point, or if you need more information, please let me know.
I look forward to your recommendations and advice. Thanks again.
-David
Just joined the forum. Seems like a great community here.
I am looking to purchase a rangefinder and normal lens for Christmas and I would like your advice and help in making my decision. A bit of a wall of text follows, but I figure that I will get more helpful advice if I provide you with some background information about me and my reasoning thus far.
First, I suppose I should start out with a bit of background about myself. I have only used one camera before - my Nikon D70 which I purchased several years ago. I have never used a film camera and I have never developed any film.
My reasons for wanting to try a rangefinder are as follows. I have wanted to give film a go for some time now. At least to start with, I would not be developing my own film since a local lab, Penn Camera, seems to get pretty good reviews. I think that using film would probably help me slow down a bit and think more carefully about my photography - I certainly wouldnt snap off 100 shots and think nothing of it. Lately, I have grown a little tired of processing raw files and would like to experience what film offers in that respect - less time processing and more time shooting. Finally, high focus accuracy with manual lenses is very attractive to me. With my D70 I shoot in manual mode with old AIS lenses, which requires that I use the not-so-great D70 viewfinder and the electronic rangefinder (green dot) to figure out when things are in focus. Consequently, I often rely on zone focusing or focus bracketing for when I shoot wide open. It would be nicer to be able to get things right from the get-go.
I should note that I do not have a big investment in nikon gear, or at least not as much as others. I am certainly willing and eager to make the jump to a rangefinder system that will complement my D70 and two lenses.
I am not looking for another SLR system, or I would probably just purchase an old Nikon N90. What has attracted me to rangefinders is their size - the bessa seems like it will be somewhat smaller than my D70, the quieter shutter, and hopefully much improved low light shooting over my D70 (which becomes unbearably noisy for me at ISO800 - correctable, but significant loss of sharpness).
With regard to the older rangefinders - canonets, yashica, konica autos, minolta hi-matics, etc - I have again opted not to go that route. I am more comfortable purchasing a new product that will come with a warranty and last for years for higher cost than I am with purchasing an older rangefinder on ebay that may present unknown problems that I am incapable of repairing. I also am concerned about the viewfinders in the older cameras - the D70 viewfinder isnt so great and I am looking forward to something nicer.
Leicas are the other route to take, but they are out of my budget (more on budget below).
That brings me to the Voigtlander Bessa line - the reason why I am posting in these forums.
I have been reading cameraquest.com and looking at the various bessa options. I have decided to pass on the Bessa T because I would prefer not to have a separate rangefinder and viewfinder. This basically leaves the R line.
My budget is ~$1000 total for camera plus lens.
Because I, as mentioned above, am interest only in purchasing a single lens - normal perspective, I have decided that the R4* line probably is not the best fit. The 50 appears to be the smallest frame line, which is something I would like to avoid. More room in the viewfinder, the better for me I think.
This leaves the R2* and R3* lines. I am not really interested in shooting wide, so the R2* line loses out on that point. The R3* line seems more attractive in that it has the longer EBL and 1:1 finder magnification. The prospect of shooting with both eyes open sounds truly awesome.
Therefore, the R3* line decided upon (unless my reasoning somewhere is faulty), I still have to decide between the manual or automatic version. With my D70 I shoot in full manual mode, but with my AI and AIS lenses there is no metering so I tend to chimp a fair bit. With the R3* ability to meter, this shouldnt be a problem and will likely be a welcome change of pace. My understanding is that with the R3M I manually set the aperture and shutter speed to match the meter which is indicated at the bottom of the viewfinder from -2 to +2 in half stops. And with the R3A, I either use aperture priority or set the meter to match the shutter speed (closest available?) shown in the bottom of the viewfinder. And in both models, it appears that I can use exposure compensation.
This brings me to my first question. Ergonomically, is it easy to quickly adjust the aperture and shutter speed on a R3M? I would prefer not to rely on aperture priority if I can avoid it - not because I believe it would make mistakes, but I just like controlling all the settings manually. I much prefer the described layout of the R3M meter to that of the R3A.
Second question. I have read that the shutter on the R3M is quieter than that of the R3A. Is the difference large? I understand that this is subjective. I don't suppose anybody has links to an audio recording of each? I googled around a bit but came up short.
At any rate, assuming I purchase either the R3M or the R3A, that leaves me with $1000 budget - $569 camera body = $431 for a lens. All prices taken from cameraquest.com.
Here, it seems there are several options. Obviously the less money I spend, the better, but I dont mind using up the budget. I cannot go over it though (excluding tax and shipping).
Option 1: 40mm f1.4 Nokton.
-This seems ideal in terms of price ($349), focal length (close to normal), and lens speed (easy to toss the background out of focus, and great for low light shooting). Unfortunately, I wear glasses and the general opinion seems to be that it is difficult to see the entire 40mm frame line on the R3* line while wearing glasses. I suppose that if I were to get this lens, I should go with the R2* line and use the 35mm frame lines as estimates. I would like to avoid that though for the reasons listed above with regard to my preference for the R3* line.
-My understanding is that 50mm frame lines should be easily viewed, even while wearing glasses, with the R3* line. Is this correct?
Option 2: 50mm f2.5 Color Skopar
-I am afraid that I have to pass on this lens, despite the attractive price, since at a minimum I would like a lens f2 or faster.
Option 3: 50mm f2 Collapsible Heliar
-I have to confess here, that I am not altogether clear on what a collapsible lens is - or its advantages. Is the advantage merely the small size? From the photo on cameraquest.com, it appears as though the lens needs to be 'extended' to use? Are there problems with dust getting into the lens while extended?
-At any rate, the lens would seem to fit the bill. It is within budget and I could just purchase the 250th Anniversary set if I went this route.
Option 4: 50mm f1.5 nokton
-Along with the f2 (above, option 3), this appears to be a frontrunner. It is within budget, fast, and unlike the f2, it comes with a lens shade. I would have to purchase a screwmount adapter, but my understanding is that the adapters allow full compatibility - so no big deal.
-How does this lens compare with the 50mm f2 heliar?
Option 5: Other lenses?
-Are there other lenses that I should be looking at? Lenses other than those listed on cameraquest.com?
-I took a look through KEH and all the used M mount lenses are out of my price range. The used screwmount lenses, while in budget, are all bargain grade - so I figure I may as well get a new Voigtlander lens for the money?
-I took a look through ebay but there didnt seem to be anything great going on. And there seemed to be more than a few shady looking auctions where lenses were rated as EXC+ with a crack in the glass or nonsense like that. Certainly makes me raise an eyebrow.
-----
Thank you for taking the time to read what I wrote and to help me out. I hope I did not babble too much.
Please correct me if I am wrong in anything I said. If I was unclear at any point, or if you need more information, please let me know.
I look forward to your recommendations and advice. Thanks again.
-David
tedwin
Established
The rugby replay is on tv in a minute so just a quick note..
The 40mm framelines aren't all that easy to see in the R3's.
So I think you're on the right track, but should buy an R2A and the 40mm.
They aren't all that quiet, but what choice do you have? So don't worry about it.
For someone who wears glasses, I don't think the R3 finders are a long term proposition. You will end up quickly wishing you had wider finder, no matter the focal length (ok, maybe not with a 75, but you get my meaning)
Good luck.
The 40mm framelines aren't all that easy to see in the R3's.
So I think you're on the right track, but should buy an R2A and the 40mm.
They aren't all that quiet, but what choice do you have? So don't worry about it.
For someone who wears glasses, I don't think the R3 finders are a long term proposition. You will end up quickly wishing you had wider finder, no matter the focal length (ok, maybe not with a 75, but you get my meaning)
Good luck.
kxl
Social Documentary
Either R3A or R3M would be a good choice. Only significant difference is availability of AE on the R3A; sure, the R3A is dead if you don't have batteries, but they're so cheap ad so widely available, there's really no excuse for not having at least a dozen of them in your bag at all times. Don't really recall any difference in shutter sound between the two in everyday use. I've since sold off both to get a Zeiss Ikon, and if you can stretch your budget, that's what I would recommend.
The 40/1.4 MC seems widely acclaimed, but I'm a 50mm shooter, and if you can find a good slightly used one, the Zeiss ZM 50/2 Planar would be a good lens.
Where to buy? My first step would be the classified section here on RFF. Be vigilant -- good deals abound.
Good luck!
Keith
The 40/1.4 MC seems widely acclaimed, but I'm a 50mm shooter, and if you can find a good slightly used one, the Zeiss ZM 50/2 Planar would be a good lens.
Where to buy? My first step would be the classified section here on RFF. Be vigilant -- good deals abound.
Good luck!
Keith
P. Lynn Miller
Well-known
David,
Welcome to the RangeFinder Forum...
First, the Bessa line of cameras are amzing value for money. Sturdy, well designed and very usable. Do not get into the Leica vs Zeiss Ikon vs Bessa R-series debate, while you get what you pay, I own and abuse 2 Bessa bodies, an R2 and T. And I use Leica as well, so moot point to me.
My recommendation would be an R2A with a Nokton 50/1.5. I think you will find that once you start using the Bessa you will want a wide-angle and this will let you use a 35mm easily. And the R2A does have 75 and 90 frame-lines as well. You will have to be careful with your focus with Nokton wide-open and up close with the R2A, but I have shot plenty with my Nokton 50/1.5 and 90/3.5 without any real focusing trouble.
As for lenses, there are plenty of Nokton 50/1.5 detractors and proponents. So just clarify my point of view, I own 2 - Nokton 50/1.5's. For the money, it is a brilliant lens.
The really amazing thing about using a rangefinder compared to a SLR, that there is one standard lens mount, the Leica M-mount. So there a Pandora's box of lens to buy and use, from the really wonderful Soviet lenses like the Jupiter-2, Jupiter-8, and Jupiter-(, which can often be bought from the classifieds on the forum for well under $100 though the great Canon LTM lenses, which have a cult following, not mention the fanatics who insist the Nikon made the best LTM lens ever, Leica, Zeiss, Konica, the list goes on and on. And all these are available in either the LTM(Leica Thread Mount) or the Leica M-mount. Leica in their infinite wisdom designed the M-mount to be full compatible with all LTN lenses with the appropriate adapter. The system works so perfect, the I could hand you a CV Nokton 50/1.5 with an adapter and you would not know it was not a M-mount lens.
So unlike SLR's where every manufacturer has their proprietary mount which is completely incompatible with another brand of SLR, you can use a $20 Jupiter-8 50mm f2.0 on a Leica M7 or you can use a $2000 Leica Summilux 50mm f1.4 on a Bessa R2A. How good is that.
Bad thing about shooting a rangefinder is that buying lenses becomes addictive, while many member of this forum will not admit, most of have lots and lots of lens. You just can't resist the lure of trying some new or old glass on your rangefinder. But then that is half the fun.
Welcome to the RangeFinder Forum...
First, the Bessa line of cameras are amzing value for money. Sturdy, well designed and very usable. Do not get into the Leica vs Zeiss Ikon vs Bessa R-series debate, while you get what you pay, I own and abuse 2 Bessa bodies, an R2 and T. And I use Leica as well, so moot point to me.
My recommendation would be an R2A with a Nokton 50/1.5. I think you will find that once you start using the Bessa you will want a wide-angle and this will let you use a 35mm easily. And the R2A does have 75 and 90 frame-lines as well. You will have to be careful with your focus with Nokton wide-open and up close with the R2A, but I have shot plenty with my Nokton 50/1.5 and 90/3.5 without any real focusing trouble.
As for lenses, there are plenty of Nokton 50/1.5 detractors and proponents. So just clarify my point of view, I own 2 - Nokton 50/1.5's. For the money, it is a brilliant lens.
The really amazing thing about using a rangefinder compared to a SLR, that there is one standard lens mount, the Leica M-mount. So there a Pandora's box of lens to buy and use, from the really wonderful Soviet lenses like the Jupiter-2, Jupiter-8, and Jupiter-(, which can often be bought from the classifieds on the forum for well under $100 though the great Canon LTM lenses, which have a cult following, not mention the fanatics who insist the Nikon made the best LTM lens ever, Leica, Zeiss, Konica, the list goes on and on. And all these are available in either the LTM(Leica Thread Mount) or the Leica M-mount. Leica in their infinite wisdom designed the M-mount to be full compatible with all LTN lenses with the appropriate adapter. The system works so perfect, the I could hand you a CV Nokton 50/1.5 with an adapter and you would not know it was not a M-mount lens.
So unlike SLR's where every manufacturer has their proprietary mount which is completely incompatible with another brand of SLR, you can use a $20 Jupiter-8 50mm f2.0 on a Leica M7 or you can use a $2000 Leica Summilux 50mm f1.4 on a Bessa R2A. How good is that.
Bad thing about shooting a rangefinder is that buying lenses becomes addictive, while many member of this forum will not admit, most of have lots and lots of lens. You just can't resist the lure of trying some new or old glass on your rangefinder. But then that is half the fun.
itf
itchy trigger finger
If you want focus to be as accurate as you can get it and also want a quiet shutter, best get a second hand Leica. You could get one and have it CLA'd for a similar price to a new Bessa, and the CLA should come with a warranty (1 year?). If you want a built in meter, or AE its not such a good option though.
kshapero
South Florida Man
R3A and Nokton 40mm/f1.4. I wear glasses and it works just fine. A great shooter.
david.elliott
Well-known
Thank you for the quick responses.
Tedwin:
If I were to go with the R2A, which has a significantly shorter EBL than the R3*, would I be able to focus the 40/1.4 with relative ease? My additional concern here is that if I use the 40mm lens with the 35mm framelines, I would be cutting off heads and feet accidentally.
kxl:
I am afraid I cannot stretch my budget. Thanks for the heads up re the planar and the classifieds.
P. Lynn Miller:
Thank you for the welcome. It is good to be here.
Good to know that the R2A can focus well with the nokton. And thank you for the lens compatibility explanation. I was aware of the jupiter lens, but not the others. It looks as though I may have some extra reading to do.
I am definitely going to try hard to limit myself to a single normal lens. But as you pointed out, temptation may get the better of me eventually. If that turns out to be the case, I can see how the R2* line would offer more options - after all, the difference between 40mm and 50mm is not huge, at least for me.
itf:
Thank you for the input. I dont see that I can do that at the moment though. I havent come across any leica bodies that I could purchase and have cla'd for ~$500 apart from the older leica thread mount bodies. Maybe I am just missing all the deals though!
kshapero:
Glad to hear it works fine for another bespectacled person! I wish one of the local stores had an R3* in stock so I could try it out.
Thanks again for all the replies so far - I am certainly interested in hearing more.
Tedwin:
If I were to go with the R2A, which has a significantly shorter EBL than the R3*, would I be able to focus the 40/1.4 with relative ease? My additional concern here is that if I use the 40mm lens with the 35mm framelines, I would be cutting off heads and feet accidentally.
kxl:
I am afraid I cannot stretch my budget. Thanks for the heads up re the planar and the classifieds.
P. Lynn Miller:
Thank you for the welcome. It is good to be here.
Good to know that the R2A can focus well with the nokton. And thank you for the lens compatibility explanation. I was aware of the jupiter lens, but not the others. It looks as though I may have some extra reading to do.
I am definitely going to try hard to limit myself to a single normal lens. But as you pointed out, temptation may get the better of me eventually. If that turns out to be the case, I can see how the R2* line would offer more options - after all, the difference between 40mm and 50mm is not huge, at least for me. itf:
Thank you for the input. I dont see that I can do that at the moment though. I havent come across any leica bodies that I could purchase and have cla'd for ~$500 apart from the older leica thread mount bodies. Maybe I am just missing all the deals though!
kshapero:
Glad to hear it works fine for another bespectacled person! I wish one of the local stores had an R3* in stock so I could try it out.
Thanks again for all the replies so far - I am certainly interested in hearing more.
Bingley
Veteran
Welcome to the forum! I think you've gotten some good advice above, so I won't repeat, except to say that were I in your shoes I'd opt for an R2* (in my case, it would be an R2m). It has the same vf and framelines as the Bessa R, which I think is terrific. The CV 50 Nokton is a wonderful lens, albeit a little large. I have not used the CV 40/1.4, but shots from recent posts here are amazing. I don't think you could go wrong either way.
But why the self-denying ordinance on used lenses? Canon made some terrific 50mm lenses in the 1950s and 1960s that can be purchased, in excellent condition, for less than the price of a new CV lens; in some cases MUCH less. The 50/1.8 and the 50/1.4 are superb, and would balance very well on an R2* body. I have a Bessa R, and regularly use a Canon 50/1.8 on it: it's a great shooting combination. The Canon 50/1.8 in good condition can be purchased these days for around $150, which leaves you plenty left over for an LTM-M adapter and film. I'd recommend going to the M-mount group on flickr and looking at some of the photos there from different lenses. You have more possibilities w/in your budget than you may realize.
But why the self-denying ordinance on used lenses? Canon made some terrific 50mm lenses in the 1950s and 1960s that can be purchased, in excellent condition, for less than the price of a new CV lens; in some cases MUCH less. The 50/1.8 and the 50/1.4 are superb, and would balance very well on an R2* body. I have a Bessa R, and regularly use a Canon 50/1.8 on it: it's a great shooting combination. The Canon 50/1.8 in good condition can be purchased these days for around $150, which leaves you plenty left over for an LTM-M adapter and film. I'd recommend going to the M-mount group on flickr and looking at some of the photos there from different lenses. You have more possibilities w/in your budget than you may realize.
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
I think I have the full complement of Bessa lenses and I have been using them for 10 years. They are nothing short of amazing when you take price and performance into consideration. I also use Leica M's systems and have at one time or another used every lens made for that system. Yes, there are "super" lenses in the Leica system, as well as in the Bessa or Zeiss set ups. In most shooting you are not going to see much difference between them!!!
As a starter kit and within your budget, I would go for the R3 - the 1:1 finder makes a lot of difference. It is easy to focus and as good as it gets ( the only finder that is superior is actually the Zeiss ZM one - but not by much!) Going for AE or Manual is probably a matter of taste. My preference is the R3M - I simply like the EV +/- exposure system as it is easier to over-ride the exposure. Meters are rather stupid and occasionally you have to tell them what to do. The EV set up is quicker here than the AE. I also like the fact that it will still work when the batteries die. I know, they are small and cheap - but Murphy's law applies here - they never die when you have spares in your pocket!
As you are going with a 50 as a first (or possibly only lens) - go for the Nokton 50f1.5. For the money it is unbeatable. The only competition is really the Asph Summiluc 50 and the C Sonnar 50f1.5 and both of these are beyond what you want to spend.
The Bessa's are a bit "noisier" than a well tuned M camera, but by no means disturbingly so. Coming from the mirror slapping of a DSLR/SLR - it is quiet!
Rangefinders take a bit to get used to, coming from SLR's - less precise framing, but more "connection" with the subject as there is no mirror black out. Rf's close focussing is a bit limiting occasionally, at least compared with SLR's.
The R3 with the 50 allows you some "space" around the 50 frame so you see what's going on outside the frame (and what is heading into your shot).
There is a good rule for using Rangefinder cameras - Keep it Simple and buy film instead of lenses - at least for the first 6 month.
As a starter kit and within your budget, I would go for the R3 - the 1:1 finder makes a lot of difference. It is easy to focus and as good as it gets ( the only finder that is superior is actually the Zeiss ZM one - but not by much!) Going for AE or Manual is probably a matter of taste. My preference is the R3M - I simply like the EV +/- exposure system as it is easier to over-ride the exposure. Meters are rather stupid and occasionally you have to tell them what to do. The EV set up is quicker here than the AE. I also like the fact that it will still work when the batteries die. I know, they are small and cheap - but Murphy's law applies here - they never die when you have spares in your pocket!
As you are going with a 50 as a first (or possibly only lens) - go for the Nokton 50f1.5. For the money it is unbeatable. The only competition is really the Asph Summiluc 50 and the C Sonnar 50f1.5 and both of these are beyond what you want to spend.
The Bessa's are a bit "noisier" than a well tuned M camera, but by no means disturbingly so. Coming from the mirror slapping of a DSLR/SLR - it is quiet!
Rangefinders take a bit to get used to, coming from SLR's - less precise framing, but more "connection" with the subject as there is no mirror black out. Rf's close focussing is a bit limiting occasionally, at least compared with SLR's.
The R3 with the 50 allows you some "space" around the 50 frame so you see what's going on outside the frame (and what is heading into your shot).
There is a good rule for using Rangefinder cameras - Keep it Simple and buy film instead of lenses - at least for the first 6 month.
retnull
Well-known
My vote:
Used Konica Hexar RF (about $600 to $800) and
used Minolta M-Rokkor 40mm/f2 (about $300).
Used Konica Hexar RF (about $600 to $800) and
used Minolta M-Rokkor 40mm/f2 (about $300).
Fred
Feline Great
When I was looking into going RF I checked out the R3A when first introduced, now I also wear glasses (long sighted) and although loved the 1:1 finder I had a lot of trouble seeing the 40mm frame lines so had to rule it out. I checked the R2 (not the A) and was very impressed with the VF and could see the 35mm lines. Certainly the build of the R*A was impressive for the cost.
I have a Bessa R which I use with a 35 Ultron and have no problems at all focussing close up and wide open, no problems either with the CV 75 F2.5 or the CV 90 F3.5. Generally I just use the Bessa R, 35 and 75 combination which is small and light enough to carry when I'm on the bike.
I have a Bessa R which I use with a 35 Ultron and have no problems at all focussing close up and wide open, no problems either with the CV 75 F2.5 or the CV 90 F3.5. Generally I just use the Bessa R, 35 and 75 combination which is small and light enough to carry when I'm on the bike.
Colman
Established
I'm not long using RFs, and I recently got an R3A as my first "real" one - having gone through a Bessa-L (since sold) and a Bessa-T (back-up and long lenses now) - and I think, on balance, I'd go with TomA's advice (normally a good idea anyway!).
R3A with the 1:1 finder is lovely, and I find myself mounting my Hexanon 50/2 on it a lot more than I expected to even though I have the CV40/1.4. I went with the R3A rather than the M because I like having AE, but that's a personal thing. I don't find any problem using the 40mm lines, but I don't wear glasses.
R3A with the 1:1 finder is lovely, and I find myself mounting my Hexanon 50/2 on it a lot more than I expected to even though I have the CV40/1.4. I went with the R3A rather than the M because I like having AE, but that's a personal thing. I don't find any problem using the 40mm lines, but I don't wear glasses.
Lilserenity
Well-known
Now isn't that the truth! It wasn't until my 24mm wide angle packed in on my SLR that I was left with a 50mm lens and that was it. No money at the time to go and get something else so to use an overused term of the moment, I really had to work it hard. And it paid off, a 50mm lens is just a pure joy to use and underrated. It's also a delight when coming from a crop sensor. I've taken shots with a 50mm that have had people asking me which wide angle I shot the photo with! It's all a matter of experience and practice. Had I not scratched a roll of Tri-X the other day it would have been my most successful roll ever with at least 10 keepers on it. But anyway, I digress and it's also a sore point.
Not being a glass wearer I can't really advise on that aspect but I would be inclined to go for the R3A purely because you then have the choice of AE (when your family/friends are restless and want you to "hurry up!") but also full manual with an integrated meter is there when you can pour more time into it without nagging voices. I would add if shooting manually and in black and white, get a 18% grey card to meter from if there isn't a large enough patch of midtone to meter from (which in the field is quite likely) -- once you start doing that, I found my black and white prints took on a whole new tonality. On my EOS 3 I don't need it as it has a spot meter and I can pick out the 18% grey region usually but with a centre weighted meter on the Bessa R's it's a cheap and useful item. That said the CW meter on the Bessa's is superb from my brief experiments with one.
The R3M is an excellent camera and it is a marvel when you have only used the equivalent of a computer in a camera to go to something that is entirely mechanical with no electonics driving the thing. I also prefer the R3M's black finish (they differ from what I have seen.)
That said, I'd go for the R3A still, it's well made, a good heft, quiter than an SLR (put it this way, the R3A is a definite click, my EOS 3 is a rifle being fired in an echo chamber) and the 1:1 finder is gorgeous.
The only thing I can't recall reading is what you want to use the rangefinder for? The only thing that would point you a bit more towards the R2A is if you shoot a heck of a lot of landscapes. 35mm is the most under-rated, wonderful, natural wide angle perspective out there in my book (I positively chunder seeing 12-15mm architectural shots in 35mm, just my opinion) -- with the R3x you would probably need an external finder, not such a bad thing for panoramic landscapes where parallax is less of an issue, and Voigtlander does make the excellent combined 28/35mm finder - so yes, my money would be on the R3A with 50mm Nokton f/1.5.
(I also had no problems focussing wide open on close objects and people with the R3A and Nokton 40mm f/1.4 when I tried it a few weeks ago.)
I'll admit I have probably (so long as it's as described) acquired a Leica M2 as it was cheap (£210 - about $300 now) but it's not new by any stretch of the imagination but, I know a good camera when I see and feel one and the Bessa is, just treat it with respect (don't use it to knock in tent pegs like my EOS 3 has...) and it'll bring you a whole lot of joy and fun.
Before long, you'll be developing your own films, it really is dead simple. When you don't scratch your negatives. (<-- still gutted about that!)
Enjoy whatever you decide
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
david.elliot: Upthread kshapero said it all.
Local stores often won't stock a slow selling camera. So you'll be buying mail order.
Tell us where you are, and if somebody is nearby with a Voigtlander maybe you could meet up?
[and welcome to RFF, probably the best rangefighter website.]
Local stores often won't stock a slow selling camera. So you'll be buying mail order.
Tell us where you are, and if somebody is nearby with a Voigtlander maybe you could meet up?
[and welcome to RFF, probably the best rangefighter website.]
david.elliott
Well-known
Bingley:
Thank you for the input. Sorry if I gave the wrong impression - I have nothing against used lenses. In fact, my lenses for the D70 were purchased used. I just hadnt seen any fast 50s on KEH or ebay that were in reasonably good condition for a good price. It definitely does seem as if there are more options than I had realized - I agree. And I will definitely check out the flickr group. Thanks for the heads up about it.
Tom A.:
Thanks for the great information. Good to hear from somebody who has used all the various systems and the entire CV lens lineup. I think that my preference for the R3M over the R3A matches yours. Despite the convenience of aperture priority, I am used to and enjoy manual control.
Thanks for the shutter comparison and imprecise framing mention - good info. I believe I will definitely be following the rule - film first and additional lenses second, since I only plan to get the single lens.
Retnull:
Thank you for the suggestion. I hadnt looked into either of those options, but I will do a bit of research and check it out.
Fred:
Thank you for the R3A and the 40mm mention. Interesting that you could see the 35mm lines on the R2 without issue though. I think that is the widest frameline on that camera?
Colman:
Thanks as well for the info and the nod to Tom A.'s post. I havent looked into the hexanon, but will do so.
Lilserenity:
Sorry to hear you scratched your film the other day.
I think my family is rather used to me being a bit slow given that I have to do everything fully manual with my current setup, without metering even. Good call on the grey card - I have one in a drawer somewhere that I will go find. I am glad to hear that the Bessa meters are superb. I think I read that they are center weighted with the emphasis toward the bottom half. Sounds interesting and makes sense.
Thank you for the shutter comparison and also the heads up on the finish - I was not aware that they were different.
I had never seen the term chunder before. I had to look that one up. Learning something new every day. You are right though, I did neglect to mention what sort of photography I would use the camera for. I enjoy taking photos during dinners out (typically in dim lighting), and some of my favorite places to photo are the various Smithsonian museums here in Washington DC. I like to photograph not only the exhibits, but also the people enjoying them. Naturally, while I am on my way to the museums, I can never resist taking a few photos while on the metro. In addition, I like to take casual photos of the family and our two cats (when they are being cooperative). I have never really been into taking landscapes, it just isnt my thing.
I do baby my equipment and all of my possessions really so I dont envision knocking the Bessa about.
Congrats on your M2 purchase! I hope it arrives well and brings you much joy.
Jon:
Thank you for the welcome and the nod to kshapero's post up above.
Great idea. I am in the Washington, DC area - out in the MD suburbs, PG county. I dont think I will have time to with anybody before the holidays since I am in the middle of law school finals at the moment. However, if anybody in the area wants to go out photographing after Christmas, let me know and maybe we can set something up.
---
Thank you all for the input. Barring revelations from future research, I am currently leaning heavily toward the R3M and the 50/1.5 Nokton.
While I'm at it though, I dont suppose I could get some recommendations for which film to use? Preferably a recommendation for both color and black and white - 400 speed.
Thank you!
EDIT: Two additional questions.
(1) Does the Bessa come with a camera strap?
(2) Is it worth purchasing the sidegrip accessory?
Thanks again.
Thank you for the input. Sorry if I gave the wrong impression - I have nothing against used lenses. In fact, my lenses for the D70 were purchased used. I just hadnt seen any fast 50s on KEH or ebay that were in reasonably good condition for a good price. It definitely does seem as if there are more options than I had realized - I agree. And I will definitely check out the flickr group. Thanks for the heads up about it.
Tom A.:
Thanks for the great information. Good to hear from somebody who has used all the various systems and the entire CV lens lineup. I think that my preference for the R3M over the R3A matches yours. Despite the convenience of aperture priority, I am used to and enjoy manual control.
Thanks for the shutter comparison and imprecise framing mention - good info. I believe I will definitely be following the rule - film first and additional lenses second, since I only plan to get the single lens.
Retnull:
Thank you for the suggestion. I hadnt looked into either of those options, but I will do a bit of research and check it out.
Fred:
Thank you for the R3A and the 40mm mention. Interesting that you could see the 35mm lines on the R2 without issue though. I think that is the widest frameline on that camera?
Colman:
Thanks as well for the info and the nod to Tom A.'s post. I havent looked into the hexanon, but will do so.
Lilserenity:
Sorry to hear you scratched your film the other day.
I think my family is rather used to me being a bit slow given that I have to do everything fully manual with my current setup, without metering even. Good call on the grey card - I have one in a drawer somewhere that I will go find. I am glad to hear that the Bessa meters are superb. I think I read that they are center weighted with the emphasis toward the bottom half. Sounds interesting and makes sense.
Thank you for the shutter comparison and also the heads up on the finish - I was not aware that they were different.
I had never seen the term chunder before. I had to look that one up.
Learning something new every day. You are right though, I did neglect to mention what sort of photography I would use the camera for. I enjoy taking photos during dinners out (typically in dim lighting), and some of my favorite places to photo are the various Smithsonian museums here in Washington DC. I like to photograph not only the exhibits, but also the people enjoying them. Naturally, while I am on my way to the museums, I can never resist taking a few photos while on the metro. In addition, I like to take casual photos of the family and our two cats (when they are being cooperative). I have never really been into taking landscapes, it just isnt my thing. I do baby my equipment and all of my possessions really so I dont envision knocking the Bessa about.
Congrats on your M2 purchase! I hope it arrives well and brings you much joy.
Jon:
Thank you for the welcome and the nod to kshapero's post up above.
Great idea. I am in the Washington, DC area - out in the MD suburbs, PG county. I dont think I will have time to with anybody before the holidays since I am in the middle of law school finals at the moment. However, if anybody in the area wants to go out photographing after Christmas, let me know and maybe we can set something up.
---
Thank you all for the input. Barring revelations from future research, I am currently leaning heavily toward the R3M and the 50/1.5 Nokton.
While I'm at it though, I dont suppose I could get some recommendations for which film to use? Preferably a recommendation for both color and black and white - 400 speed.
Thank you!
EDIT: Two additional questions.
(1) Does the Bessa come with a camera strap?
(2) Is it worth purchasing the sidegrip accessory?
Thanks again.
Last edited:
thomasw_
Well-known
Go for a Leica M2 ~650USD + Canon 50/1,4 ~400USD or Summicron C 40/2 ~400USD. Great lenses and within your budget. The M2 is the best all-round body for your stated interests; I urge you to look for a M2 over any Bessa body for these reasons: it is more durable, easier to focus and less noisy.
Fred
Feline Great
The R and R2x have about .7 magnification (someone will be here to correct me I'm sure), the 35 lines seem further 'in' from the finder edge than that of the 1:1 40 lines on the R3x. The R (and R2x) finder outer limits are also very close to the 28mm angle, OK if I've got contact lenses in which these days is quite rare.
I also us an M7 (.72), again the 35 lines are clear with glasses but the 28 are not with my glasses.
Good luck with the RF hunt, you seem to be taking the right steps in researching the options.
As for a grip, I use on on my M7 but don't feel the need with the Bessa R as the back is shaped for the thumb.
I also us an M7 (.72), again the 35 lines are clear with glasses but the 28 are not with my glasses.
Good luck with the RF hunt, you seem to be taking the right steps in researching the options.
As for a grip, I use on on my M7 but don't feel the need with the Bessa R as the back is shaped for the thumb.
Bingley
Veteran
This is also good advice, but prices these days are usually lower for these items. A good user M2 can be purchased for between $550 and $600 (and sometimes less!), and prices on the Canon 50/1.4 lens have fallen below $300, if recent sales here, on ebay, and at KEH are any indication.
TomBob
Member
the bessa is an excellent camera to own and use, it stays on my desk, by my bed with 2 rolls of film ready for any moment, and i never leave the house without it, even to go 3 doors down to the post office.
i personally would recommend getting yourself the Bessa R (1), as it takes screw mount lenses which 2nd hand you can get some excellent lenses for very little money, a good example is the Jupiter 8 50mm lens, a soviet lens using east german glass, as well as the old Leica lenses discontinued in the 1960s, after the introduction of coated lenses and Canon lenses until the 1970s if i remember correctly. the only lenses i know of that will not work as they can damage the shutter, is the Jupiter 12 a 35mm lens where the rear optic sticks out too far and hits the shutter, and any of the collapsable lenses for the same reason.
i paid £150 for a Bessa R, black in mint condition with box and original manual and a jupiter 8, i have also bought a new 35mm 2.5 Voigtlander lens for £180 in london.
So yes the Bessa R is a fantastic 1st rangefinder if you do not want to replace it for something better anytime soon. the later cameras do have there perks, but lenses are alot more exspensive due to the M mount
i personally would recommend getting yourself the Bessa R (1), as it takes screw mount lenses which 2nd hand you can get some excellent lenses for very little money, a good example is the Jupiter 8 50mm lens, a soviet lens using east german glass, as well as the old Leica lenses discontinued in the 1960s, after the introduction of coated lenses and Canon lenses until the 1970s if i remember correctly. the only lenses i know of that will not work as they can damage the shutter, is the Jupiter 12 a 35mm lens where the rear optic sticks out too far and hits the shutter, and any of the collapsable lenses for the same reason.
i paid £150 for a Bessa R, black in mint condition with box and original manual and a jupiter 8, i have also bought a new 35mm 2.5 Voigtlander lens for £180 in london.
So yes the Bessa R is a fantastic 1st rangefinder if you do not want to replace it for something better anytime soon. the later cameras do have there perks, but lenses are alot more exspensive due to the M mount
Andrew Sowerby
Well-known
Welcome to the forum!
My advice: get a Bessa R2A. The 50mm framelines aren't too small and 35mm is a very good rangefinder focal length that you won't get to use if you buy the R3A/M. 50mm and 35mm are standard rangefinder focal lengths. For your first and only RF, I would get a camera with framelines for them. As for aperture priority, it's very nice to have and you can always choose not to use it. For the same $$$, I'd get it. Also, I don't really care for the glossy finish of the R2M.
As for a lens, you could get a new CV Nokton, but for similar $$$ you could get a used Konica Hexar 50mm, which is better optically and mechanically IMHO. They show up in the classifieds regularly.
My advice: get a Bessa R2A. The 50mm framelines aren't too small and 35mm is a very good rangefinder focal length that you won't get to use if you buy the R3A/M. 50mm and 35mm are standard rangefinder focal lengths. For your first and only RF, I would get a camera with framelines for them. As for aperture priority, it's very nice to have and you can always choose not to use it. For the same $$$, I'd get it. Also, I don't really care for the glossy finish of the R2M.
As for a lens, you could get a new CV Nokton, but for similar $$$ you could get a used Konica Hexar 50mm, which is better optically and mechanically IMHO. They show up in the classifieds regularly.