Bessa-T's baselength and a 135mm

Nando

Well-known
Local time
2:44 PM
Joined
Jan 16, 2006
Messages
1,122
Location
Sault Ste Marie, Canada & Coimbra, Portugal
Hi,

Perhaps you don't remember me but around 2 months ago I was asking advice on creating a good rangefinder kit. At first I was torn between what lenses to choose but then I became torn between choosing either a Bessa-T or an R2.

Well, I got me a Bessa-T with the 35/1.7 Ultron at that time to test the waters. I've been really enjoying the camera and lens so a few days ago I ordered a 21/4 Color Skopar and 75/2.5 Color Heliar from Cameraquest. I cannot wait until they arrive!

Anyway, upon hearing about my purchases a colleague of mine presented me with the opportunity to buy a very nice 135/4.5 Hektor. Being a newbie at this, the price he gave me seemed incredibly low for a Leica lens but upon seeing some examples that sold on Ebay, I saw that the price was reasonable. Although I don't think I use the Hektor often, I wouldn't mind picking it up since it is in very nice condition and a liked the few Hektor photos I saw here on RFF.

Anyway, I was told that my Bessa-T had a short baselength and, despite the 1.5x magnification, a 75mm or a 90mm should be about as big as I should go. He said that my camera's baselength was like that of a Leica CL, which according to him was very short compared the baselengths of the regular Leica M's. However, Stephen Gandy's tooted the fact that the Bessa-T had a longer effective baselength than the .72 M6 (57.3.7 vs 49.86) on his website. I'm a bit confused.

What do you guys think? Should I feed my GAS cravings and get that Hektor?
 
The base-length is more than adequate, but parallax is a problem with longer lenses on a non-VF camera like the Bessa T. You will need a good viewfinder with parallax adjustment to frame correctly, and even then, you should take a test roll at different distances to see how the viewfinder adjustment corresponds to the focusing distance. Hope this helps.
 
Nando said:
Thanks for all the replies. I'm somewhat relieved that I can use a 135 on the Bessa-T.

pbjbike,

Thank you for the heads-up about the parallax problem.

raid amin,

May I ask what viewfinder you are using with your Nikkor 135?

Nando: I use one of the Leitz multiple focal lengths viewfinder (35mm-50mm-85mm-90mm-135mm).
 
Well I got the Hektor. Its condition was absolutely beautiful so I couldn't resist the temptation. It looked like it was new right out of the box. Luckily, the seller also had an Imarect finder that looked almost mint so I bought that too. I got both for just over $100.

I wanted finder like a Tewe zoom finder or a dedicated Leica SHOOC finder for a larger view but I'll probably won't use the 135 that much. So I can definitely live with the Imarect. Plus I love the way it looks.

Thank you all very much for your help.
 
Congrats. Once with your assortment of lenses, adding a 135 means you can pretty much photograph any situation. 135mm is very nice for travel/landscape/detail shots. It adds a bit of telephoto drama that the other lenses can't quite reach.
 
I think I have a good all-rounder rangefinder kit for travelling now. All I want to add is a VC 15mm and maybe a fast 50mm. I will have to wait a while though. I'll be paying for the three lenses I bought this week in more ways than one once my better half finds out!
 
Last edited:
pbjbike said:
The base-length is more than adequate, but parallax is a problem with longer lenses on a non-VF camera like the Bessa T. You will need a good viewfinder with parallax adjustment to frame correctly, and even then, you should take a test roll at different distances to see how the viewfinder adjustment corresponds to the focusing distance. Hope this helps.

Yes. I've used an aux viewfinder for a Steinheil 135 LTM and for my CZJ 135, and when focusing close, framing is a whole new learning curve.
 
Back
Top Bottom