Bessa R Review

Bessa R Review

  • *

    Votes: 5 1.5%
  • **

    Votes: 6 1.8%
  • ***

    Votes: 60 17.8%
  • ****

    Votes: 155 45.9%
  • *****

    Votes: 112 33.1%

  • Total voters
    338
L

lars

Guest
Background:
I've owned this camera since new, starting around spring 2003, so I've had it for btwn 6 and 12 mos.

Appearance:
Aesthetically, this camera is lacking, due to its plastic exterior which doesn't compare well with the plastic (polycarbonate) bodies used on high end SLRs.

Handling:
My biggest complaint with the Bessa R is the fact that its strap lugs are positioned such that the camera doesn't hang straight up and down unless you're using a heavy lens. So, with most 35 or 50 lenses, the camera body hangs at an angle, with its bottom protruding further forward than its top. This makes it somewhat uncomfortable to hang around your neck or shoulder.

The LED meter display is very easy to see (and probably more robust than a mechanical needle). It can display 1/2 stop under- or over-exposure. The meter has proven to be accurate once you know the pattern (centre-weighted, with an unusual pattern that is quite tall).

Shutter release is very precise. Press half-way down activates the meter and finding the half-way point is very easy. You'd have to be quite ham-fisted to accidentally go too far and release the shutter. Shutter noise is quiet (maybe not Leica-quiet but certainly not loud) and is quieter than any SLR I've used. At speeds below 1/60 or so, the noise is a bit louder because you can now distinctly hear TWO shutters in action, the inner and the outer. At these speeds, the loudness is more on par with the Olympus OM series of SLRs (known for being a quiet SLR). One other thing: the shutter release is threaded for a cable release. This is a great thing to have and it's a pity that so many modern cameras do not support these simple, inexpensive, but very useful devices.

The film advance feels ok. The only niggle is that you can't use multiple strokes to wind the film. It's single-stroke only. And if you reach the end of your roll mid-stroke, the advance lever stays where it is until you rewind the film. Only then can you finish the stroke.

The self-timer is, like everything else on the camera except for the meter, purely mechanical. It feels cheap but it works just fine.

Focussing is very easy, thanks to the bright viewfinder. Eye placement is important or else you could loose sight of the focusing patch. The base length of the rangefinder is, in my opinion, a bit too short. Close focusing, even with a modest telephoto length such as the 75/2.5 lens, is a hit and miss affair that requires great care and bright light. I assume that Cosina went with this short base length due to limitations imposed by the SLR chassis on which this camera is built.

The camera weighs less than the metal SLRs of yesteryear, and it heavier than the low-end plastic SLRs of today.

Performance:
It's a mechanical camera (except for the meter) so there isn't much to talk about with respect to performance. The camera works just fine. The meter is accurate, as is the focussing and shutter speeds.

Reliability:
Although some Bessa R's were reported to have vertical misalignment problems with the rangefinder, mine was perfect. Although I've had mine for only less than a year, I have carried it almost every day and it has performed without a hitch.

Evaluation:
Performance-wise, aside from its bright viewfinder, there is nothing in the Bessa's feature set that makes it desirable from an engineering point of view. It is merely a basic rangefinder that works well. It has some annoyances but none of them impact the functionality of the camera or noticeably obstruct the photographer's creative process. This sounds like a backhanded compliment but it's not. When you put the Bessa R into its chronological context, it gains a certain significance. In 2004, the ONLY manual rangefinder you can buy NEW for an AFFORDABLE price (generally speaking) is the Bessa R (and its siblings). Then consider that it also has a built-in meter and accepts a huge variety of Leica screw mount lenses. Its under USD$300 (North American price) price gives it a significant price/performance ratio that other camera manufacturers cannot beat.

So if you're looking for a new, affordable "user" rangefinder that gives you those features that most serious photographers require (manual focus, manual aperture control, manual shutter control, manual film advance, interchangeable lenses), the Bessa R is the obvious choice.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I rated this camera a 5 mostly because of its value. I don't have one, but having handled one in a camera shop led me to rangefinders, so I must credit the little gizmo for such a life-altering choice... :)
 
Lars that's a great review! Have seen a couple of them and also of the R2 after some visits to the camera store. You're right that they look a bit cheap but sometimes this is not a reference of the final product quality...

Going for $249 at cameraquest I think these ones must be selling like hot cakes, they are sold here for... (sit please)

735 EUR

in fact more expensive than its younger sister the R2... and I think that is without lens... :confused:
 
I agree, you are right on Lars. I would caution though that if someone is interested, don't be turned off by the reviews saying that this is a cheaply built camera. "Plastic" yes, but the construction isn't as bad as that seems. Find one to handle and make up your own mind. I got an ever ready case for mine, and it looks and feels very nice indeed when sitting in the bottom half of the case.
 
Last edited:
Thanks, Larry, for the interesting review! I have the L model, even "cheaper" and odd looking without even a viewfinder. But it works just fine!

On your comment about hitting the end of the roll while winding, leaving the wind lever stuck out... If you at that point press the rewind button, you can finish the wind stroke and "park" the lever before rewinding.
 
Thanks to everyone for the feedback on the review. I just edited the Evaluation section because I felt it was a bit ambling so I made it more pointed.

rover said:
I agree, you are right on Lars. I would caution though that if someone is interested, don't be turned off by the reviews saying that this is a cheaply built camera. "Plastic" yes, but the construction isn't as bad as that seems.

Yes, I agree. While I have a fondness for the all metal cameras that I grew up with, I can honestly say that my polycarbonate "plastic" SLRs have been plenty reliable. In fact, my plastic Minolta 7xi lasted longer than my first Olympus OM1 (all metal). Plastic does not equate with poor durability.


...lars
 
after all this time living with plastic it's amazing how many people still don't like it.
i too have had plastic in my life in all forms ans it does not mean that build quality or reliability is missing.

on the other hand, i do like the feel of my all metal 60/70's rangefinders.

joe
 
Bessar R viewfinder, bright, clear, easy to use (bifocal wearer here). I like the switch to change framelines. I detect no slumming in the construction feel. I have used it with a CV 35 classic f2.5 lens, a CV Nokton f1,5 lens, and a Jupiter 9 85mm f2 lens. I am considering buying a second one from Cameraquest. I would not hesitate in recommending it to any friend interested in rangefinder cameras.

My other rangefinders include a Yashica Lynx 14e, Konica Auto S2 (great lens), Kiev 4 (third one bought works with almost all speeds), Leica IIIf, CV Bessa T101.

I began my rangefinder experience back when the Yashica Electro 35 GT was quite new.

I am considering buying a CV 28 1.9 lens or a CV 35 1.7, but I must confess to being chilled in buying any new film camera gear with the changes at AGFA and ILFORD.
 
It was Mike Elek's (ZeissFan) great writeup on the Bessa R that got me going on RF's again.

http://host.fptoday.com/melek/bessa-r.html

I had been sliding into an all-digital state except for my XA, Rollei and OM-1's but the looks of this camera, along with Mike's enthusiasm, and the fact that it didn't cost like a Leica really grabbed my fancy.

I ended up acquiring a good Leica CL instead, but it was the Bessa R, which I never owned, that got me back in the RF game.

I've subsequently sold the lovely CL (which I found a bit too small for my hands) and have an R2 on the way. It feels like I've come (almost) full circle ...

Gene
 
whatever happened to lars?

bill g, welcome to the forum! you've ressurected an old post i see. yes the bessa r, my only interchangable lens camera at the moment.
the r is a great camera and i tire so of it's endless comparison to leica. at almost 5 x the price, the modern leica is poorly sealed and as prone to repair as many cameras, if not more than the bessa. some of the stories about it are amazing when you consider the cost and the myth/legend behind them.

oh my, i better go upstairs and pour my first coffee for the day.
 
I have to agree with Joe - the Bessa R is fantastic - my first choice when I reach for a camera more often than not.

I've never had an issue with the polycarbonate body - in fact I find it quite acceptable. It does not feel flimsy to me, and in use it has been durable - no problems at all.

Welcome to RFF - and Joe, get that coffee into you! You were posting at 3 a.m., dude! I hope that your Canon P arrives today - we can't take the pressure anymore!

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
 
good morning bill!

i think that must have been 1 a.m., my time.

yeah, i can't sleep more than 6 hours at a time, kinda sad really.
oh, i'm finished the first cup and not feeling nearly as owly.

and yes, i really hope the canon p shows today but i'm not feeling overly optomistic.

joe
 
backalley photo said:
whatever happened to lars?
*sniff* It's nice to be remembered.

Well, I'll just come out and say it...for the past several months, I've been having a rather tawdry affair with a Minolta A1 digital camera. My main reason for going digital was to keep up with my weekly PAW (photo-a-week) commitment. It was getting expensive shooting that often, plus I never had enough free time to regularly get into the darkroom to do b/w processing.

I've been uploading my digital files to a lab for printing and have been quite happy with the results. However, I missed b/w quite a bit and although those Fuji Frontiers can do b/w, it often takes a second try before the operator removes the colour cast and/or doesn't blow out the highlights.

With the recent price drop of the HP7960 (CAD$199), I bought my very first photo three days ago. This printer is renowned for its true b/w output without using specialty inks and I gotta say, I am a believer. So now I can do b/w printing at home (my darkroom is in my Mom's house), in the daylight, even if I'm taking care of my infant son.

And that has got me looking at my Bessa R wistfully. I've got several rolls of Superia Xtra 800 and 400 leftover from my January vacation so I think I'll start shooting film again. The C41 film scans much better than my Tri-X and HP5, and I can convert to b/w quite nicely using the Channel Mixer in Photoshop, which also allows me to tweak the image to emulate filters (ie: darken the greens, achieve a pseudo infrared effect). And from there, I can print true b/w with the HP7960. As a test, I converted this shot (Reala 100) and printed it and the results were fantastic:

http://tinyurl.com/3scmj


The local photo-specialty lab will charge $4/roll for developing and an index print (normally $11 for a 36 exp roll with prints) so I can reduce costs that way.

The A1 will be used for snapshots and is now my daily carry camera. The Bessa will now be reserved for when I'm on a photo outing.

So that's the long answer to "whatever happened to lars?"


...lars
 
Good to hear from you lars...good to hear that you have been out shooting.

That is a remarkable image, I can imagine that a PAW project could be demanding. I have considered it, and realize that shooting constantly is important, I may look at mine (if I do it) as a "Post a week" which will allow my some wiggle room to shoot, process and post and image without holding to a strick post what you shoot each week.
 
EDIT: This is the new URL for my Bessa-R review:

http://elekm.net/bessa-r/


I had my flirtation with digital in 1996 with the 0.3MP Epson Photo PC 500. Nice camera, and pictures were great, as long as you didn't go beyond 480 x 320.

Then it was on to a Nikon CoolPix 700. Still have that camera. Slow autofocus and chromatic aberration galore. Eventually picked up an inexpensive CoolPix 950 -- which no longer works in shutter- or aperture-priority.

Last year, it was a Sony Mavica CD500. Good camera, but s-l-o-w writing to disk.

And that's the end. Not interested in a digital SLR, because I don't want to shell out $1,000 or more for temporary technology. You just know that thing is going to be obsolete in 18 months.

So, these days, it's Zeiss-Ikon or the highway ... whatever that means.
 
Last edited:
Yes really good to hear from you here Lars ! :) I've been more or less following your PAW trough the micapeak list though.

And you also introduced me to the PAW concept and I'm really happy that happened as at least in my case that changed my view of photography :D

Hope you'll join as well Rover !
 
ZeissFan said:
And that's the end. Not interested in a digital SLR, because I don't want to shell out $1,000 or more for temporary technology. You just know that thing is going to be obsolete in 18 months.
Although I understand your point about new digicams being huge improvements over past digicams, as long as you bought the old ones to do a particular task, they will continue to be useful. My first digicam was an Epson 850Z (about 2.1MP) that I bought about 3 years ago to shoot illustrative photos for articles on my 4x4 website. It still serves that purpose admirably. Even though I have a much more competent A1, I still use the Epson for the role for which it was originally purchased.

And after I buy a digital SLR, I will continue to use my A1 for general photography and possibly travel photography because of its small size and light weight. 5MP is plenty for me because I have only ever printed beyond 8x10 perhaps six times in my life. Its AF and buffer speed may be improved in later models, and I might upgrade then, but that's similar to film cameras, where advances in AF, metering, and control layout enticed me to upgrade.


So, these days, it's Zeiss-Ikon or the highway ... whatever that means.
I certainly understand the allure of a simple but finely made camera. That's why I still have my Bessa R, as well as some heavy Nikon F's.

...lars
 
rover said:
Good to hear from you lars...good to hear that you have been out shooting.
Thanks. Nice to talk to you guys again, too.

That is a remarkable image,
Thanks.
I can imagine that a PAW project could be demanding. I have considered it, and realize that shooting constantly is important, I may look at mine (if I do it) as a "Post a week" which will allow my some wiggle room to shoot, process and post and image without holding to a strick post what you shoot each week.
As I posted in the PAW mailing list which some of you may have read, I have found the PAW project to be of immense value. My wife commented that my photos from our past two holidays are noticeably better than before, and I attribute that to my PAW. Thinking about a photo every week forces me to think about photography constantly. That means I read a lot of photography books and am always evaluating scenes for their compositional possibilities. I'm by no means a professional-calibre photographer but I have most definitely improved my eye. I have also learned to stop taking a lot of weak snapshots that I would have normally taken in the past.



taffer said:
Yes really good to hear from you here Lars ! :) I've been more or less following your PAW trough the micapeak list though.

And you also introduced me to the PAW concept and I'm really happy that happened as at least in my case that changed my view of photography :D
That list provides lots of great inspiration, as do the theme contests on this site.

...lars
 
The PAW idea tempts me. Lars, did you say there's a PAW mailing list? Is there a URL that tells how to join?

Gene
 
Back
Top Bottom