Economical lenses for the Bessa R

[Dez]

I have a Bessa R, and it is a truly amazing camera, and a great vehicle for old LTM lenses. When looking for a good 50mm lens to leave on it most of the time, though, I have a problem. I am sure that the modern CV lenses are going to deliver the best performance, but I simply cannot afford to buy one of these.

I have tried the camera with a few old LTM lenses, and although I have never done any rigorous testing, I am happy with the results. In choosing the "right" 50, I do not want to lose the advantage of the many features of the camera, so I have a few boundary conditions:

- easily available at a cost under $200
- non-rotating focus mount, so I can always see the apertures
- click-stops in the aperture, so the settings will stay put, and I don't HAVE to always look at the aperture ring
- aperture rings that turn the same way as the light meter arrows in the finder. This means that maximum aperture is found when the ring is turned all the way counter-clockwise
- collapsible would be nice, but only if collapsing the lens will for sure not damage the camera

I am a bit nervous about the short RF base in this camera, so I worry about using a really fast 50mm lens.

So far, the only two candidates I can think of are the Canon f1.8 (which cost me ~$120), and the FSU Industar 61 (which came on a very nice FED 2 for a total of $40).

Both of these work very well, although I did need to clean and relube the I61, as you might expect.

Are there any other lenses that meet the criteria, and that I should be considering?

Cheers,
Dez

 

[VTHokiEE]

I don't really have an answer but I have been thinking about upgrading from an Industar to a Canon 1.8 and I'm curious if there is a reason you aren't happy with the Canon (I've really only heard praise about it)? or are you simply curious about alternatives to the lenses you already have?

 

[haempe]

You have already found the ideal lens for the Bessa R.
Keep the Canon 50/1.8 if it is in good condition.
You will hardly find a (noticeably) better lens within your budget.

 

[lam]

Hrm, the Canon 50 gets my vote as well, unless you're able to snatch up a low-sale-price VC 50mm f2.5 LTM, that's about all I can think of.

 

[eto]

I also agree that the best lens is that you already have - canon 50/1.8. I also have one, but all in chrome, it came with my Canon rangefinder IVSB and it's amazing. as for soviet lenses (see my location) I consider Industar 61LD to be the worst one. Find yourself Yupiter 8 (serial number starting from 53 to 57) and Industar 26 (both lenses in chrome), they draw fantastic and pretty cheap

 

[Dez]

I don't really have an answer but I have been thinking about upgrading from an Industar to a Canon 1.8 and I'm curious if there is a reason you aren't happy with the Canon (I've really only heard praise about it)? or are you simply curious about alternatives to the lenses you already have?

Just curious, I guess. Both of the lenses I have are working great, and the Canon is the better of the two.

I would love to find a cheap CV Color Skopar f2.5, but I don't think there is such a thing.

One thing about the Canon f1.8 lens, many of the later black lenses like this one have a severe internal haze problem, where whatever lubricant is used on the aperture mechanism seems to outgas and corrode the coating. The earlier chrome ones don't seem to have the problem.

Cheers,
Dez

 

[Dez]

I also agree that the best lens is that you already have - canon 50/1.8. I also have one, but all in chrome, it came with my Canon rangefinder IVSB and it's amazing. as for soviet lenses (see my location) I consider Industar 61LD to be the worst one. Find yourself Yupiter 8 (serial number starting from 53 to 57) and Industar 26 (both lenses in chrome), they draw fantastic and pretty cheap

The Jupiter 8 is a very good lens indeed, but it does not have clickstops, and the aperture ring turns in the "wrong" direction.

I'm surprised at your bad luck with the Industar 61 lens. I only seem to hear good things about it here on RFF. Maybe you had ones that were made the day the quality control inspector was off sick?

Cheers,
Dez

 

[eto]

The Jupiter 8 is a very good lens indeed, but it does not have clickstops, and the aperture ring turns in the "wrong" direction.

I'm surprised at your bad luck with the Industar 61 lens. I only seem to hear good things about it here on RFF. Maybe you had ones that were made the day the quality control inspector was off sick?

Cheers,
Dez

I mean that I don't like the picture of 61, the drawing is usual and nothing interesting for me, and I have tried a plenty of them )

 

[ferider]

The Canon is a good choice, and probably the only one I would pick, given your budget.

If your copy is clean, never mind the hazing that could happen in the future, it's easy to clean; if you can re-lube an Industar, you sure can also clean the Canon 50/1.8.

There are other Canon lenses in the same budget, the collapsible 50/1.9 (not sure if it collapses into your Bessa), 50/2.2, the 50/2.8, and the collapsible 50/3.5.

Sometimes you can find Niccas for sale bundled with a Nikkor 50/2, and you could keep the lens within your budget by re-selling the camera. The nice thing about the Nikkors is that they do have click stops, and can be modified to focus to 0.7m. There is a Nikkor 50/2 for US 225 in the classifieds right now, BTW.

Also don't worry about lens speed. A well calibrated Bessa can easily focus even a 50/1.2. The EBL is only too short for most tele lenses.

Good luck,

Roland.

PS: When I think about some of my favorite 50s (Zuiko 50/1.4, SMC Pentax 50/1.4, etc.) and what they cost used, it always strikes me what we (me included) consider "Economical" in the RF context ....

 

[Dez]

If your copy is clean, never mind the hazing that could happen in the future, it's easy to clean; if you can re-lube an Industar, you sure can also clean the Canon 50/1.8.

Yes, it's very easy to clean the internal elements of the Canon 50mm lenses, but there is a problem that I have only seen in the black f1.8 lens, and have seen it a few times. There seems to have been a strange incompatibility between the internal coatings and the lubricant used in the aperture ring. Internal haze, if left long enough, can actually irreversibly etch the coatings of the elements closest to the aperture. It does not look like fungus- it looks like actual corrosion. I have never seen this problem in the earlier chrome lenses or the black f1.4 lens. So if you buy a black f1.8 with haze, you really want to make sure the haze is removable before you pay for it.

Cheers,
Dez

 

[clifton]

Any stuff like that is for sailing? I am looking for 12mp professional camera... that should be water proof too...