Compare and Contrast: Canon, Nikon, CV, FSU

[gbb]

Hi, All

I've got the rf bug, been using a zorki 4 w j12 & 8, and want to get better gear. I'm considering the Bessa R and 35/2 from Camquest for $400, but am also curious about Nikon and Canon glass and bodies. If you were in my shoes, what would you do? What lenses & bodies partticularly stand out re value and performance compared to the cv equivalents? Thanks a lot,

GBB

 

[Doug]

Hi, GBB -- This largely boils down to a preference for new warranted gear versus used gear of somewhat higher quality but where condition is the question. You'll want to balance the pluses and minuses there. And there are so many attractive "previously owned" possibilities to consider...

And this question has arisen several times in RFF, so you might do a little digging in previous message threads for a variety of opinions. 🙂

 

[djon]

Quality, bottom to top:

Zorki, CV, Canon/Leica. Canon equals Leica unless you stretch out for an M6. No Leica is as rugged as a Canon P, IMO. Nikon and Contax are parallel but antique...if you like antiques, why not?

If you want something more "modern," you should consider the impending Panasonic/Leica digilux 3 or the 10MP Sony (which may be more like a Rollei than a Leica)

 

[FrankS]

No camera is/was as well built as a Lieca M3, IMO. (Perhaps Contax.)

 

[tedwhite]

For the money, you can't beat the Bessa R w/35/2.5. I have a FED 2, Zorki 4K, and a Kiev 4AM. The Kiev is the best of the lot, but none can compare with the ease of operation, the brilliant viewfinder, and the glass on the Bessa kit. I had an M3, and Frank is right. It is a piece of engineering art. Having said that, I find the Bessa combo easier to use and it produces pictures on a par with the Leica's lens (Summicron 50/2 - hope I've got that right). The other plus, of course, is the meter in the Bessa.

And, to reuse the phrase, of course the Bessa won't last as long as an M3 or a Canon P.

Right now, I wish I still had my old Rolleiflex. I'm sure I'll wear out before it.

Ted

 

[djon]

M3 is certainly the most gorgeous of the possibilities but it's not as user-friendly (it's a bottom feeder) or rugged as the Canon P IMO. The quick load takeup that some install on their M3s and M2s make them MUCH better as tools. M's main advantages over Canon P are *much* quieter shutter and superior, uncluttered viewfinder. An excellent Canon P can typically be obtained for $300, whereas the M3 will be twice that in poor condition (needing $200 CLA) or three times that in excellent condition. $600 Bessas don't come close to either in terms of quality, and since they're only prosumer Nikons at heart, can't last for more than a few years in heavy use (but how long do we expect to have film?) ...the Bessa meter and viewfinder seem to equal M6 but there sure are a lot of reports of rangefinder issues with Bessas.