Bessa-L Finding the Range (50mm)

[PeMaty]

Hi I am new in this type of photography. Currently I am using an Bessa-L with the 15mm/f4,5 and it is pure fun to take pictures and develop them by myself with a Jobo-Tank.

I realy like this super-wide-angel-view, but for Portraits its not my type of favourite focal length. I really would like to buy me a 50mm or perhaps 35mm Lens but I doubt if I could focus right with that Body.

Does anyone has experience with the Bessa-L and fast 50mm Lenses? Or should I spare my money for a "real" Rangefinder?

 

[aad]

It is possible, but if you want to get decent focus you should measure and scale focus carefully, after testing to be sure you're getting it.

The L really is a wide-only camera, and I'm sure you could get up to a 40 or slow 50 and be OK.

 

[btgc]

I scale-focus 40/2.8 with acceptable results wide open. Of course precision focusing works better, though I'm fine. For interest I have used ruler to get exact distance, if you are planning to do portraits in controlled environment with model sitting/lying you could be fine with paper marks of distance put around positions you would possibly use.

 

[batterytypehah!]

I say get an FSU lens and give it a try. Given the prices for some of those Industars, what do you have to lose?

 

[ruby.monkey]

There are plenty of accessory rangefinders floating about on the second-hand market, should you wish to try a fast 50mm without buying a new body.

 

[PeMaty]

Thanks for Inspiration.

Okay, I search for one of that 50mm Russian Prime Lenses. Are there any good very cheep Viewfinders?

 

[batterytypehah!]

Are there any good very cheep Viewfinders?

Every so often you can find wide/tele auxiliary lenses auctioned for next to nothing. These were popular once for fixed-lens cameras and came in a set with a viewfinder for the accessory shoe. I have a Petri set that, I believe, is meant to go with a 45mm fixed lens. The lenses are ridiculous, of course, but the finder is quite usable with a 1:1 view, allowing you to shoot with both eyes open. The wide frameline is pretty close to a 35mm view, the tele somewhere around 60. Should work quite well as a 50mm finder.

 

[pvdhaar]

My personal experience (Minox 35) is that a 35/2.8 is about as long/fast I can go, and still get results that are acceptable in this day and age. A 35 has sufficient depth of field to allow for focus errors.

Photos that I see in photo albums made by my parents from a scale focus 45mm camera from the sixties were enlarged to no more than 6x9 cm (ca. 2.5x3.5 inch). That small enlargement hid focus errors quite well, but if I look carefully, many of them are actually off.

So, I'd say that for 10x15cm or 4x6inch enlargements, you should stick to a 35. That's long enough for portraits that include some of the environment..