Bessa R3a vs Leica M3

[Lucasnilsson]

so, I've been looking around and found two intresting cameras.

A leica M3 with a tiny bit of fogging in the VF (Don't really know how much, i've asked for pictures) otherwise in nice condition.

or a bessa R3a that's just been used a couple of times, with warranty.


of course the leica is a leica, but it's older and you never know if it will need to be CLA'd for _alot_ of money to work like it should (seller said that except for the slight fogging everything else worked great)

The only thing that I've found about the bessa now when searching around was things like "a camera with the looks of a 2500dollar camera but with the internals of a 100dollar camera, it's not build to last" wich kinda makes me think twice about it.

For lenses I'm thinking about setting it up with either a 35mm summicron and go with the whole VF since there's a great deal on one here in town (500usd here in sweden, they usually go for the double) or a voigtlander nokton 40.


pointers? ideas?
or should I just wait for photokina and see what the manufacturers have up their sleeves?

 

[simonankor]

Hey Lucas

For what it's worth, I've used a number of M Leicas, but never ended up buying one. I have had three Bessas though - my first one took a dive and never recovered (but no camera would have survived that fall).

The other two Bessas were awesome. The newer models are much more solid than the earlier R and L models.

I would (and do) happily recommend them to everyone!

 

[Keith]

I disagree with the theory of the Bessa being a camera with $100 internals ... and how long it will last has to be balanced against what it costs initially. I have an M3 and it's an unbelievably solid smooth camera but it is 54 years old and will probably cost a couple of hundred dolars to CLA every few years if I want to keep it in top shape. I bought an R3A recently because I know it's a good camera with an excellent viewfinder with the highest magnification ratio available which makes it perfect for the same lenses that are the M3's strengths ... 50 and 90mm. If I had to choose between one or the other I would go for the M3 because it will probably give you more pleasure but it won't take better photos and it doesn't have the option of AE.

I guess part of the reason I actually bought an R3A is because I Know I have the M3 at home sitting in the cupboard when I'm out knocking the Bessa about ... does this make sense? 😛

 

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Lucas,

You'd need to hammer a bayonet-mount Bessa fairly hard, for quite a long time, in order to wear it out.

I've had most for review, and my wife and I have been using the R2 and the T pretty constantly since they came out. The R2 needed a new rewind crank after it was dropped once. That's it.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Lucasnilsson]

well. the Bessa is a hundred usd more than the M3. should be able to get the price down a little bit.


the leica is 430usd
the bessa is 520usd
(good prices for sweden, the bessa retails at 1150)

 

[payasam]

There are other considerations: built-in meter, frame lines, finder magnification, and so on.

 

[winoto]

very hard decision with great prices. i have both leica and bessa cameras--use them regularly. however, if metering becomes an issue (i.e. different lightling conditions) i take out my r2 instead of my m3.

like Roger H, my bessa r2 has not needed any repairs apart from the rewind lever. my bessa t is still going strong. the m3 i've just aquired from a lucky find but a great solid camera.

 

[Solinar]

The R3a is like new with built in TTL meter and a aperture priority AE mode. It is ready to shoot as is. All you'll need buy is a lens.

The M3 that you are using for a comparison sounds like a DS in need of a CLA. So how much will a decent light meter cost? How much is a cleaning, lubrication and adjustment in Sweden, $150, $200 or $250 USD?

Granted you think that you have all the necessary info on both cameras - but the reality could be something less.

 

[P. Lynn Miller]

The Bessa is not a Leica, not built like Leica, does not handle like a Leica, does not sound like Leica, and does not cost as much as same aged Leica. It is pointless to compare the two really.

I own a Bessa R2, which has an inferior build to the newer Bessa bodies, but it has taken a beating and I would buy another without any qualms. I had trouble with it holding rangefinder alignment in the beginning, but that has been repaired and been a flawless performer ever since.

 

[FrankS]

You are trying to compare apples to oranges. Yes they are both food (cameras) and yes they are both fruit (rangefinders). But they are pretty different animals.

It's like asking: should I buy a pick up truck or a sports car? It all depends on your needs. They are both vehicles, but they have different strengths and abilities.

Think about what you want the camera for. What is your style? What are your priorities? One of them will be better suited to your needs.

 

[EmilGil]

Do you need the built in light meter? If yes, go for the Bessa. If no, go for the Leica. If in doubt, go for the Leica.

OTOH, the M3 was designed for 50mm lenses and longer so if your primary lens will be a 35mm, either go for the Bessa or find an M2 (can be had from the UK for about the same price as your M3). Nothing wrong with the Bessas, they're very nice cameras, but I prefer the feel and handling of my M6 (I don't even mind the film loading anymore but I still can't understand why they couldn't use a standard flip-open back??).

 

[Lucasnilsson]

might should have told a bit more.
waiting for some pictures of the M3 so i can see wich model it is.

I own a complete Mamiy6 setup, 40D, RZ67 and a G9. So that's sorted.

Going to use the camera to carry around everywhere, traveling, snapshots for memories and such. I already have a quantum calculight xp and a sekonic spotmeter so the external meter is no worries.


I want somethingsomewhat discrete, small and that can give me high-quality shots.
(been reconsidering the sigma DP-1 but the software and the slowness of the camera made it sound like a bad idea.)

So it's pretty much between these two cameras or just wait for photokina and see if there's anything new that can compete with the Dp-1

 

[Austerby]

Neither is a poor choice - I have both. The M3 is definitely more of a purist's camera - and as with all well-designed tools there is very real satisfaction in getting the best out of it and having it as your companion. However, it is a heavy brick that is difficult to stuff into a pocket and it does feel like an old camera. The R3a is a lovely little camera but has a modern feel to it - very competent but without the overall Leica satisfaction and craftsmanship feel to it. I use it when I'm not in the mood for the M3 - I'm taking it in preference to the M3 for a week's holiday in Sardinia soon, though with some Leica glass. It is difficult to quantify the difference between the two and both are great cameras - but they are different and you will be the best judge of what you want them for.

 

[ferider]

By both and sell the one you don't like. Cann't go wrong with the M3 for that price.

The R3 with 40 Nokton is a killer combo. It is annoying not to have the right framelines.

Roland.

 

[Lucasnilsson]

well. I don't really want to shell out the money for both cameras since i'm making the move to utah for a couple of months this winter.

The serial number of it is 872145

"3/25/1957"

 

[markbrennan]

Well, a bit late to this thread, but it sounds like quite an old M3. I would NOT take it. It might be nice for collecting, if you're willing to invest time and money into work, but I think it's a crapshoot. The Bessa will be much more reliable, a much better VF, etc. Granted, I understand the draw of the Leica "mystique" (I have one), but if you're mostly interested in getting out there shooting w/ a good RF cam, go with the Bessa.

Regards,
-Mark

 

[thomasw_]

I disagree with Mark that the Bessa will be more reliable than a M3. The M3 is a great tool; the build quality is generally regarded as superior to any Bessa. The .92x VF of the M3 is pure perfection with a 50mm lens. The reason I would recommend NOT getting the M3 is that the OP mentioned obtaining a 35mm lens; this would be lame with a M3. Iƒ the OP is determined to get a 35mm lens, I wouldn't recommend either the R3A or the M3; instead look at the M2 or R2*. The M2 is a marvelous body with a 35. OP, you should be able to find a M2 in the same price range as that DS M3. But if you will go with a 50mm lens, then do yourself a favour and shoot it with the M3. It is the camera for all seasons....

 

[luketrash]

I'm the one that posted that the Bessa R3A feels like a 2500 dollar camera with 100 dollar guts.

Mine had shutter issues develop after about 50 rolls of film.

My Bessa R2A occasionally overlapped film frames when I first got it, but has since not been doing it for a while (but I also have not been using it much lately.)

The M2 I have? The only sign of a CLA is a sticker marked 1971, and the thing is smooth and spaces EVERY single frame perfectly.

I bought all of my cameras used. My Bessas were both like new with hardly any use before they came to me. They always looked like new and were treated nicely.

I LOVE that Cosina makes these specialty cameras. I just don't want to be the guy suffering from crappy performance because I'm buying specialty boutique style items like this. The Leica has my confidence high. The cost to send my Bessa in to get it fixed was about the same as sending a Leica in to have it CLAed.

Just like your situation, I paid more for my Bessa R3A than I did for my Leica.

It's a no brainer.. Prices are falling on Leicas and they're staying the same on the Bessas. The value gap is narrowing quickly.

Nobody is going to fight over my Bessa R2A if I die and they have to divide up my estate. I can't say the same about the M2.

And I'm not just preaching leica-babble cultish stuff. It's just a flat out fact that the guts of the M2 are metal and 100 times higher quality than the Voigtlander internals. Externally, both cameras are top notch in my opinion.

Oh, and I HATE HATE HATE the stap lug position on the R3A. Not that it matters in my case, because I carry the cameras sideways on the speed winder accessory. But once I mounted the strap to the camera body lugs and it just hung really badly.

If you intend to make fine art that looks like this, by all means get one 😉

These images were taken both when I first got the camera and right before I sold it cheaply. It's the poor man's Hasselblad Xpan.

 

[kxl]

Maybe it's my relative inexperience with the M3, but loading film takes a bit of practice. OTOH, loading film into an R3A is fast and needs no learning curve.

 

[luketrash]

Loading film into my M2 is honestly about the same speed as the Bessas. It takes more steps, but with the Leica, once you have the film takeup spool stuffed full of leader tip, the process goes as fast as the Bessas. It's more clumsy though, and harder to do out in the field. But by no means is it that complex. It was another Leica legend that I was disappointed with.

I've seen a lot of people talk about loading a Leica being difficult, but the M cameras aren't. The older LTM ones might be since you need to custom cut your leaders.

I'm planning on making a little video to compare and contrast a few of my many rangefinder cameras to compare shutter sounds, show how to load them, and compare ergonomics, etc... What I'm finding out is that IF you can get a good price on a Leica that works right, it's a solid buy. My confidence with the Voigtlander Bessa RxA cameras is shaken, but I'm not selling my R2A at the moment 😉

I love the CV lenses I own.