meso
Established
I am about to purchase a Bessa rangefinder and three lenses,
the lenses are Nokton 35 1.4, Nokton 50 1.1 and 75 1.8,
what I can't decide is whether to get the Bessa R2A or the R3A,
the R2A has 35mm framelines but the R3A has a more accurate rangefinder which will benefit when focusing the 50 1.1?
So my main question is, is the R3A that more accurate to focus to chose it over the R2A which has framelines for all the lenses I am about to buy?
thanks in advance
Andri "Meso"
the lenses are Nokton 35 1.4, Nokton 50 1.1 and 75 1.8,
what I can't decide is whether to get the Bessa R2A or the R3A,
the R2A has 35mm framelines but the R3A has a more accurate rangefinder which will benefit when focusing the 50 1.1?
So my main question is, is the R3A that more accurate to focus to chose it over the R2A which has framelines for all the lenses I am about to buy?
thanks in advance
Andri "Meso"
kshapero
South Florida Man
Good question - I do not have the answer, but based on the numbers, I would go with the R3A to get more accurate focusing. Using a 35mm lens with a 40mm frameline I would think is not a big deal. I use a 35mm lens on my M3 with a 50mm frameline, no problem.
Well, the 40mm frameline on the R3a is hard to see in the first place. I wouldn't want to use it for a 35mm lens. However, I like my framelines to be accurate, so I wouldn't even dream of using a 40mm (50mm) frameline for a 35mm lens. I use my whole frame to compose, not just the center (and yes, rangefinder framelines can be accurate). The OP may differ though.
It is a good question though... the effective baseline is about 12mm longer on the R3a. Even then, that nokton may be rough to focus on that camera as well. I used the 50mm 1.5 on a R3a with no issues though.
It is a good question though... the effective baseline is about 12mm longer on the R3a. Even then, that nokton may be rough to focus on that camera as well. I used the 50mm 1.5 on a R3a with no issues though.
meso
Established
Thank you both for your opinions, I think I will go with the R3A, I think I can live with 40mm frame lines for the 35, if not then I will just get the 40 1.4 and sell the 35 
if not then I will just get the 40 1.4 and sell the 35
Hey, save yourself some money and trouble and just get the 40... it's nice.
meso
Established
I thought about that but decided on 35 as 40 is so close to the 50 in focal length.
ethics_gradient
Well-known
Personally, I'd probably go with the R2a (pending reviews of R2a users experience focusing the Nokton 1.1 wide open). I have an R3a and love it, but using an accessory finder to frame 35mm is a bit awkward, and there are a lot more cool 35mm lenses out there than 40mm. The finder on the Bessa R I had was plenty big/bright, I actually think I preferred it to the R3a's.
Honestly, while I've got some sentimental attachment to my R3a, I'd probably trade it for an R2a if I found someone willing to (and I don't even own a 35mm lens anymore, although I'd like to purchase another one in the future). I was originally all about the 1:1 finder and supposedly more accurate focusing, but I find I never shoot with both eyes open, and wonder how much of a real-world difference the slightly longer baselength of the R3a really makes. Have no problems focusing my Canon 50mm f/1.2 wide open on it, and the Bessa's have a shorter EBL than Leica's.
Honestly, while I've got some sentimental attachment to my R3a, I'd probably trade it for an R2a if I found someone willing to (and I don't even own a 35mm lens anymore, although I'd like to purchase another one in the future). I was originally all about the 1:1 finder and supposedly more accurate focusing, but I find I never shoot with both eyes open, and wonder how much of a real-world difference the slightly longer baselength of the R3a really makes. Have no problems focusing my Canon 50mm f/1.2 wide open on it, and the Bessa's have a shorter EBL than Leica's.
haempe
Well-known
Meso, I don't know if you really WANT a Bessa.
If not, I would buy a Zeiss Ikon instead.
Longer EBL; better finder ... and so on.
And if you can afford these three lenses, you can also afford a ZI.
If not, drop one lens now and buy it later.
meso
Established
I was sure I would find a solution to my problem but you guys just add more options to the equation
so now my question is, is the Zeiss Ikon $1000 better than the Bessa?
What are the benefits of the Ikon over the Bessa other than a better/more accurate veiwfinder?
I would also like to point out it will be my first rangefinder,
at least my first working rangefinder
imush
Well-known
I was sure I would find a solution to my problem but you guys just add more options to the equation
so now my question is, is the Zeiss Ikon $1000 better than the Bessa?
What are the benefits of the Ikon over the Bessa other than a better/more accurate veiwfinder?
I would also like to point out it will be my first rangefinder,
at least my first working rangefinder
I had no idea that ZI finder is supposed to be better. I think the viewfinder on the R3x is the best if you can use it (i.e. do not wear glasses and use longer focal lengths).
If you want to go wider, I would suggest adding an R4 body later. The two Bessas cost about the same or cheaper than one ZI, with a full choice of framelines.
But the best approach would be to go to a store where they have them all and hold each candidate camera in your hands. Some people then refuse to buy anything other than an M7, but some (like me) think that the Bessa is the better deal, and an outright winner in some respects (viewfinder).
Last edited:
Tompas
Wannabe Künstler
I second that. I wouldn't want to use the 40mm framelines on my R3a for anything, it just sucks. I do consider, though, the R3a the perfect rangefinder for 50mm (not that I know them all firsthand).
I do the opposite, using my R2m's 35mm frame for my 40mm Summicron-C. Works great for me.
To the original question I'd answer: get a R2x for 35 and 50mm lenses. Then probably later get a R3x for the 50mm. Or get a R3x for the 50mm and forget about the 35mm. Or maybe get a 0.85 magnification Leica Mx?
I guess I'm not much help...
I agree...
meso
Established
That is not an option for me as there is no-one selling Voigtlander or Zeiss Ikon in Iceland, so I will be ordering online.
I am now more confused than before I starded this thread, R2A, R3A, Ikon?
I can afford the Ikon if I skip the 75 which i suppose I could,
but only if there is a real benefit over the Bessa cameras.
meso
Established
There is little to no used market where I live and I dont want to buy a camera from overseas only to have to ship it overseas for a CLA,
so I would prefer a new camera I can be confident works as advertised when it arrives
Steve M.
Veteran
Do you wear glasses? Then get the R2A. If you don't, maybe get the R3A. I wasn't aware there was any difference in rangefinder accuracy between the two. They're exactly the same cameras save for viewfinder magnification and frame lines. None of that adds up to increased focus accuracy.
For what it's worth, I had an R2A and it was hands down one of the best cameras I've ever owned. Sure, it's no Leica, but it was a neat camera w/ a very accurate meter, and the build quality was light years better than the R2 and R models. I never had any problems focusing even a 90mm lens on it. The shutter sound and vibration, well, that's one of the reasons it isn't a Leica. But feature for feature, it trumps even an M6. That extra stop of top shutter speed comes in handy w/ 400 ISO film.
For what it's worth, I had an R2A and it was hands down one of the best cameras I've ever owned. Sure, it's no Leica, but it was a neat camera w/ a very accurate meter, and the build quality was light years better than the R2 and R models. I never had any problems focusing even a 90mm lens on it. The shutter sound and vibration, well, that's one of the reasons it isn't a Leica. But feature for feature, it trumps even an M6. That extra stop of top shutter speed comes in handy w/ 400 ISO film.
The effective baseline is longer on the R3... which leads to increased focus accuracy.
haempe
Well-known
I was sure I would find a solution to my problem but you guys just add more options to the equation
so now my question is, is the Zeiss Ikon $1000 better than the Bessa?
What are the benefits of the Ikon over the Bessa other than a better/more accurate veiwfinder?
Sorry, meso, that was not my intention.
Maybe I'm not the best person to answer this, but I'm sure you find some threads about the Bessa vs ZI clash. Maybe here.
Personally, I own a Bessa R and a ZI SW, and there is no doubt, that the ZI is the better camera. But I don't know the newer Bessas, so I can't compare.
Maybe a problem for you is the absence of 75mm framelines in the ZI (only 85mm), if you want the Heliar (what I understand
).meso
Established
Sorry, meso, that was not my intention.
Maybe I'm not the best person to answer this, but I'm sure you find some threads about the Bessa vs ZI clash. Maybe here.
Personally, I own a Bessa R and a ZI SW, and there is no doubt, that the ZI is the better camera. But I don't know the newer Bessas, so I can't compare.
Maybe a problem for you is the absence of 75mm framelines in the ZI (only 85mm), if you want the Heliar (what I understand
No need to feel sorry
I now just have to deciede if I want the ZI or the 75 Heliar more,
as my budget is ~3500USD
haempe
Well-known
Again, personally, I found 50 and 75 too close to carry both. Possibly is a 90 the better choice. I would make two steps forward instead of changing the lens, but I'm lazy with that
.If you look at the framelines, you may see, what I mean...
Otherwise the 35/1.4 and the 75/1.8 give a very nice two lens outfit.
Your choice...
imush
Well-known
That is not an option for me as there is no-one selling Voigtlander or Zeiss Ikon in Iceland, so I will be ordering online.
I am now more confused than before I starded this thread, R2A, R3A, Ikon?
I can afford the Ikon if I skip the 75 which i suppose I could,
but only if there is a real benefit over the Bessa cameras.
Then I would start with the Bessa. The body is relatively cheap; even if you'll prefer a ZI or a Leica later on, a second body on hand is a good idea. Especially in a country where any repairs will likely mean shipping overseas and waiting for a while.