Bessa R2A VS. Zeiss Ikon

[Rudolphono]

I don't know, whats the right camera for me.
Whats the advantage of the Zeiss Ikon besides the baselength, the 28mm frame and the less heavy moneybag?
I want to use a standard 35mm lens and some other from 15-90mm.

Ralle

 

[back alley]

the baselength is very key.
the zm finder is best of show for all 35mm rangefinder cameras.
it has great framelines and is comfortable in the hand.

the bessa is good too though.

 

[mirrored]

Looking through Bessas 1:1 finder can just be the reason to choose it. Try it both eyes open! It's personal, is it important.

Bessas finder have a frame for 40mm and someone use it with 35mm too (without frame). With glasses finder is a bit more narrow of cource.

I am interested how short distance in focus system (baselenght) will work different situation and lenses. I will soon get experience.

 

[Jason Sprenger]

Like Back Alley says, the baselength and viewfinder are the biggest advantages. The R2a viewfinder is real good though; even with spectacles, the 35 frame-lines are visible. On the ZI, there's just more space around the frame.

On the minor side, the strap lugs are also better placed on the ZI. The R2a accessory grip provides a new lug in a better position but blocks the tripod socket.

On the R2a, the tripod socket is placed centered under the lens. On the ZI, the socket is curiously on the right-hand side a la the Leica M. However, the ZI grip accessory puts it back where it belongs.

Also, the meter display on the R2a is more visible than on the ZI. The ZI has it on the far left side in the viewfinder and the R2a has it on the bottom.

Having both cameras, I feel better about using the ZI with my 85/2 but wouldn't hesistate to use the Bessa with any of my 35's.

 

[dazedgonebye]

One of the things that bothers me most about my R3A is the shutter speed display. I often have a hard time finding it in the viewfinder. No such problem with the ZI (from my limited, held it once, experience).

28mm framelines might be compelling for some and the longer baseline for those with longer and or faster lenses.

Overall though, I can't justify one over the price of a Bessa for my purposes. Even so, I'd have one if not for my being cheap.

 

[mirrored]

SORRY! I spoke on R3A and R3M. They have 1:1 magnification.

Looking through Bessas 1:1 finder can just be the reason to choose it. Try it both eyes open! It's personal, is it important.

Bessas finder have a frame for 40mm and someone use it with 35mm too (without frame). With glasses finder is a bit more narrow of cource.

I am interested how short distance in focus system (baselenght) will work different situation and lenses. I will soon get experience.

 

[Keith]

I'd actually choose the R3A rather than the R2A for the slightly better 1:1 viewfinder. The 40mm farmelines are fine for 35mm and you get the advantage of slightly better focusing capability. I've used my 90mm f2 Summicron on my R3A with no accuracy problems ... I don't do it as a rule but I did try it to satisfy my own curiosity.

That said the Ikon is a better camera with a superior viewfinder ... at a price of course!

 

[mirrored]

Here is my short meeting with ZI
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=63758&page=2

I like sweet shutter sound of it. Cover feels plastic, but good quality. Bessa have same (or at least same kind of) shutter but 'better acoustic base', and I suppose I like it more. I expect musicality. 🙂 I haven't met Bessa yet. Thus I write.

I will try R3A or R3M for 50mm first which is most important focal lenght to me. As we heard, it works nice to longer too. (Frame is naturally bigger than in smaller magnifications. It give help for accurate sharpening as longer baselenght would give. That I understand now, thanks Keith.) For a wider I think other body too. I don't like to change lenses.

Covering frame illumination window make frames disappear. That is a tip if working near the whole sight in any RF, where additional finder becomes near needed. Wearing glasses makes all that personal when glasses are different too in their glass size and thickness. Glassframes influense too are they bending nice way.

Many seems to use R3A and R3M with 40mm and then company would be for example 25mm and 75mm. 25mm is so wide, that you can focus (almost always) with meter scale and estimate distance.



http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=943184#post943184
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=941747#post941747

 

[mfogiel]

The Ikon is simply a better camera: better build quality, more substance, more reliability, better VF, more silent shutter, prettier finish, and most of all the most accurate RF in 35mm around - not even my 0.85x M7 is so accurate - which makes it easy to focus fast lenses wide open. And I also agree : the Bessas have the most annoying backward tilt due to the erroneous lug placement. If ZI was made in other VF magnifications, I would not want to use any other brand.

 

[mirrored]

😉

more reliability

I don't expect you can show this, but maybe you can surprize me? It belongs to subjective expections as more substance, I suppose.

I liked ZI very much too, but I bought M6 instead. Soon I will see turn I Bessaist or Leicaist. Ikonist was very close to happen too. 🙂 I am quite sure I have some Zeiss lens sooner or later - if not some old Leica lenses take that place.