Buying: CV Bessa R4M or Leica M6

[Jonas Adolfsen]

For 35mm i currently have no camera for wide angle shooting and i'm planning to buy me an new (or used) one that can take 28mm and/or 21mm lenses.

I have for a long time been wanting a Leica M6 because of its build quality and performance, but lately i have started looking at the Voigtlander R4M. Here in Norway noone imports Voigtlander so i have yet to try one, and therefore i come with these quiestions:

How is the build quality for the R4M compared to The M6? Is it as solid and will the shutter last?

Is there a big quality difference in pictures taken with the CV 28/2 compared to a Leica 28mm? Contrast, ease of focusing and so on?

Any other quirks?
I guess i can find a used M6 for the same price as a ned R4m here, but with old cameras you never know regarding service and so on.

Anyone who has any opinions?

Jonas

 

[notturtle]

The regular M6 would not be my choice (0.72) for 28mm. The framelines are too tight IMHO - the 0.58 finder is FAR better. If you want something for 21-28 the R4 is the only camera unless you want to use accessory shoe finders in which case the viewfinder is not important.

as for lenses, be sure you must have f2. if not, there are loads of great 2.5 or slower lenses.

 

[oscroft]

Hi Jonas,

I have both an M6 and an R4A (not an R4M, but the build is the same), and I use a CV 28/2 on both of them (and it's a great lens).

Firstly, the R4 is not as well built as the M6, but then we can't expect it to - it sells for a lot less than the M6 did. I still think it's pretty well built, but I'd be less confident of banging it around than I would be with the M6. But I have had the R4 since soon after they were released, and it's been to Asia and back with me a couple of times, and I've had no problems with it.

On to the lens. For a 28mm lens (and if I wasn't going to go wider), I'd go for an M6, because the 28mm frame fills the viewfinder - on the R4 with its 0.52x viewfinder, I think the 28mm frame is a bit too small. If you wear spectacles, you would probably find the M6 28mm frame too wide to see properly.

For anything wider than 28, I'd unhesitatingly go for an R4 - I use mine with a CV 21/4 quite a lot, and it's a wonderful combination.

Cheers,

 

[AgentX]

I still think it's pretty well built, but I'd be less confident of banging it around than I would be with the M6.

While true of you and probably many other rangefinder shooters, many people would also have a harder time banging around a Leica due to its cost and perceived prestige/value than the far less expensive Bessa.

(to the OP: ) IMHO, either camera will serve admirably as a photographic tool under the use most of us will put them through. The Leica is certainly a finer mechanical object, but how much is that really worth where the rubber meets the road?

I'd leave the decision up to which camera offers the features you want rather than a decision based on brand, especially as you can put the glass of your choice on either body.

 

[Jonas Adolfsen]

Thanks so far!

I'm definetly tempted to get a 21/4 also since i'm an architect and i photograph a lot inside the city. Nowadays i carry my Hasselblad SWC with me, which in some cases is a little bit too big.

Would you reccomend the R4A instead of the M, or is is just a metter of taste. Maybe the shutter is more reliable in the A body?

 

[Jonas Adolfsen]

I try to be careful and so far i have never dropped a camera, but this one will be going with me everywhere. I'm not looking for a jewel to sell in some years, i'm just looking for a machine. I just get a little unsecure since i have never seen a Bessa due to the fact that noone imports them here. Guess i might be ordering from Cameraquest...

 

[kshapero]

M or A is really just your preference for Automatic exposure. I prefer the black paint look on the M. Reliability is the same as I see it.

 

[Tom A]

I prefer the R4M as I have a bit more control over exposures. The A you have to decide wether strong lights (spots, windows etc) is influencing the exposure and fiddle with the compensation. With the M - you do that automatically.
As for being sturdy - I have had the R4M since it came out and it has seen a lot of film through it (and looks like it had) and it never missed a beat.
Another advantage with the M is the fact that it will work without batteries, while the R4A (or any of the Bessa AE's) is dead as the proverbial doornail without them. Murphy's Law here "Batteries never fail when you a/have spares with you and/or b/there is a store selling them still open".
The 21/4 is a very good lens, even for architectural work, it is rectilinear enough (and it uses 39 mm filters too). However if you already have the SWC and want similar quality images - go for the Zeiss C Biogon 21mm f4.5 - virtually no distorsion at all ( something to the tune of 0,01 %!).
The good news is that you can probably buy a R4A/M and a 21f4.5 C Biogon for what a M6 and a VC 21f4 + finder would cost you!

 

[oscroft]

Would you reccomend the R4A instead of the M, or is is just a metter of taste. Maybe the shutter is more reliable in the A body

I don't think there's any difference in the shutter reliability, so it really is down to which features you want.

I have a variety of aperture-priority automatic, manual metering, and unmetered cameras, and I think they're all just as versatile when you know how best to use them - for tricky lighting you can just switch the R4A to manual (it's also got the usual exposure compensation, which I never use, and an exposure lock button, which I do use).

The plus with the R4M, of course, is that its mechanically-timed shutter will work with no batteries, and that's something that I used to worry about a lot in the past. But I've actually never been caught out anywhere with dead batteries and no spares - I have a couple of SR44s in each camera bag, and I usually have at least two bodies with me anyway.

So, yes, it's just a matter of personal choice.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Hi Jonas,

I was wondering just the same as you a few months ago. Gladly I had good advice here! After considering used Leicas, I went for the Bessa R4M, a wonderful camera, very well designed and built, and along R3M, the last step in Voigtlander's rangefinders line. Also, it is a camera that has no similar offer by Leica, because of its widest viewfinder ever inside a camera of this kind. Being on production is an advantage too... By the way, this year I have bought three times from cameraquest, several lenses and cameras, and service is the best. Very fast, great price, real warranty (authorized dealer) and everytime my equipment came home (Spain) 100% perfect.

I'd do this: if I planned to shoot the 28 and other ultrawides and no more than a 40 or 50, I would order the R4M (as I did: it focuses the 40 1.4 easily too)... But if I planned to shoot with teles too, I'd buy the R3M just to see that 1:1 viewfinder and for keeping both eyes open...

I got a Bessa T too (after the R4M), and it feels great with both lenses! it's a very interesting machine...

I was about to buy the R4A... But as I was told here, when you don't go automatic, you think of the light in a more responsible way, and you think better than the camera's meter.

So the answer to your question depends of your other lenses...

Cheers,

Juan.

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

I'm a big proponent of the R4A. I love the AE--metering is pretty good and compensation not hard to get used to (save for the annoying lock of the EV knob)--and there is really no other RF that lets you shoot so pleasurably with a 21. It is definitely not as wonderful feeling as, say, my M2. But it is very solid, and feels like a professional camera. The shutter is rather loud but has a satisfying click to it. The finder is great.

My issue with the manual R's is that the metering LED's are very hard to see, especially in bright sun. Compared to, say, a Pentax Spotmatic, the readout is, to my mind, quite bad. I sold my R3M for this reason, and almost always use the AE on the R4A.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Jonas,

The R4A is, concerning metering, a lot more problematic than, say the R3A, because using wides in general will include sky, and it tricks any meter daily!

I have auto exposure in other cameras, but precisely the R4 would be harder to handle if you get it with auto.

Regards,

Juan

 

[Merkin]

I would go with the new R4 over the used M6. The viewfinder has more framelines that you are interested in using, and it is brand new. If you are buying any used leica, you should factor in the cost of immediately sending it off for a CLA, as the camera can look absolutely perfect, but still be out of adjustment in rather small and insidious ways. Will the R4 be a camera that you can pass down to your grandkids? Probably not, but it will certainly serve you well for a good while.

 

[Jonas Adolfsen]

Thanks everyone!
Fantastic to get so much good feedback.

Ofcourse it would be cool to have a camera to pass on to my son, but that should be for later when i have more money. I think i will go for the Bessa R4M and a 28/2 at first, and probably i will add a Bigon 21/4.5 later. I guess i will only be shooting wide angle with this since i have other cameras with stadard lenses.

Jonas

 

[kshapero]

I prefer the R4M as I have a bit more control over exposures. The A you have to decide wether strong lights (spots, windows etc) is influencing the exposure and fiddle with the compensation. With the M - you do that automatically.
As for being sturdy - I have had the R4M since it came out and it has seen a lot of film through it (and looks like it had) and it never missed a beat.
Another advantage with the M is the fact that it will work without batteries, while the R4A (or any of the Bessa AE's) is dead as the proverbial doornail without them. Murphy's Law here "Batteries never fail when you a/have spares with you and/or b/there is a store selling them still open".
The 21/4 is a very good lens, even for architectural work, it is rectilinear enough (and it uses 39 mm filters too). However if you already have the SWC and want similar quality images - go for the Zeiss C Biogon 21mm f4.5 - virtually no distorsion at all ( something to the tune of 0,01 %!).
The good news is that you can probably buy a R4A/M and a 21f4.5 C Biogon for what a M6 and a VC 21f4 + finder would cost you!

Tom, How about showing us what a well used R4M looks like?

 

[segedi]

In addition to the excellent advice here, I'd also say the the R4a/m is a lighter camera to carry, but well built. I would recommend the accessory grip to improve the holding of the camera, but even without it, it feels very comfortable. It was well designed.

I prefer AE and the way it is implemented is great with exposure compensation implemented much better than the Leicas. The only downside is batteries are always required. The upside is that the batteries are cheap and last forever.

 

[thegman]

I had a Bessa R4A, it's a great camera, had no trouble at all with it. I've had a Leica M6 too, it's a great deal nicer to behold, and better built. If you want functionality with wides like 21/25/28, then the R4A or R4M is the choice, if you value name/brand, really nice build, and resale value, then the M6.