Joshua_G
Member
This question was first posted on "Voigltlander Bessa" forum, yet I received no reply, so I post it here as well.
Coming back to film RF, I recently purchased Canon 7, Bessa R and few lenses (35, 50, 85, 135). The Bessa finder is very bright, indeed, much brighter than the Canon's. However, I find it difficult to focus with the Bessa, especially portraits, especially in dim light. I find the canon much easier to focus. (Yes, I wear eye glasses). What would be the RF camera easiest to focus (regardless of price)? Or will I be better of with compact SLR like Olympus OM? I need accurate focus on 35/1.7, 50/1.4, 85/2 and 135/3.5 . Few bodies is fine with me.
ferider
Veteran
Welcome !
If your fast lens pick is 50mm - 90mm, IMO, a good Leica M3 beats any other camera out there for low light
portraits (regardless of price). I agree with you: while the Bessa VF is bright, it is not as usable as others in the
almost dark.
Best,
Roland.
If your fast lens pick is 50mm - 90mm, IMO, a good Leica M3 beats any other camera out there for low light
portraits (regardless of price). I agree with you: while the Bessa VF is bright, it is not as usable as others in the
almost dark.
Best,
Roland.
Joshua_G
Member
Thanks.
So, will the Leica M3 enable easier focusing than SLR with micro-prism/split prism?
How about 28 and 35 mm?
ferider
Veteran
Joshua_G said:
I think so - other people might have different opinions. It's a personal thing. Best is to try it out.
Of course an SLR might feature auto-focus ,...
28 and 35 is even better for an RF. If you need this pick among M2, M4, M5, M6, M7 with lower magnification ...
Cheers,
Roland.
Joshua_G
Member
Thanks again.
However, I just ponder – will the M3 enable easier focusing than other M's? Why is it so? Or does all M's have the same ease in focusing?
ferider
Veteran
The M3 is special because it has the longest EBL among all Leicas. Also, the largest
magnification (.92). I use M2, M3, and M6, BTW.
Roland.
magnification (.92). I use M2, M3, and M6, BTW.
Roland.
Joshua_G
Member
Thanks again.
The longer EBL explains. Is it easy to see the 50mm frame lines in M3 with eye glasses?
ferider
Veteran
Don't know Joshua. Some say yes on older M3s.
Roland.
Roland.
Joshua_G
Member
Thanks again.
What manufacturing date or serial numbers should I look for?
ferider
Veteran
Joshua_G said:
Look for serial numbers > 1 Mio. They go for US 600-900 in good condition.
Good luck,
Roland.
Joshua_G
Member
Thanks.
Sorry, my English is a bit rusty. What's "numbers > 1 Mio"?
ferider
Veteran
Joshua_G said:
No problem. I meant larger than one million (1 xxx xxx).
Best,
Roland.
Joshua_G
Member
Thanks.
One more question, if I may. Will a Leica Mx with lower magnification give better focusing ease for wide angels than Konica Hexar RF? (I purchased one few days ago).
thomasw_
Well-known
Hi Joshua,
If you get a M3 to shoot 50mm to 135mm lenses, you are getting the finest viewfinder for that with the .91 magnification of the m3. But, if you want to shoot the 35mm and 28mm FLs, and no wider, then in addition obtain a M2 body or a .58 MP body. The former is much less than the latter. Use the entire m2/mp finder to approximate the 28mm FL; it works well. All 3 are classic leica bodies.
Good cheer,
thomas
If you get a M3 to shoot 50mm to 135mm lenses, you are getting the finest viewfinder for that with the .91 magnification of the m3. But, if you want to shoot the 35mm and 28mm FLs, and no wider, then in addition obtain a M2 body or a .58 MP body. The former is much less than the latter. Use the entire m2/mp finder to approximate the 28mm FL; it works well. All 3 are classic leica bodies.
Good cheer,
thomas
ferider
Veteran
Like Thomas said.
Roland.
Roland.
jamxo
work in progress
I've always been curious and perhaps this thread could be relevant enough to ask..
I understand that higher baselengths are needed to focus longer focal lenghts/ faster lenses, but..
a) Why?
b) Whats the visible difference? As in say I'm shooting my 35mm 1.7 ultron on a bessa r2a, would the focusing/rangefinder spot look different on a camera with a higher baselength?
Would be great if someone could explain this for me (or link me somewhere!)
Thanks!
I understand that higher baselengths are needed to focus longer focal lenghts/ faster lenses, but..
a) Why?
b) Whats the visible difference? As in say I'm shooting my 35mm 1.7 ultron on a bessa r2a, would the focusing/rangefinder spot look different on a camera with a higher baselength?
Would be great if someone could explain this for me (or link me somewhere!)
Thanks!
ferider
Veteran
Have a look here for instance:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=34185
- The RF accuracy has to be higher when you have less DOF
- Longer Effective Base Length (EBL) usually means higher RF accuracy. EBL is the product of Base Length and viewfinder magnification
- DOF decreases with (1) longer focal length, (2) faster apertures, (3) closer distances.
- The RF accuracy does not only depend on EBL but also on the mechanics of the system and on the photographer.
On the Bessa you can safely assume that all CV lenses are focusable accurately, in particular your 35/1.7 (even the 40/1.4, 50/1.5 and 35/1.2 are OK). But once you start shooting faster and longer lenses close-up (for
instance an 85/2 or 135/3.5) you might get into problems. For example, an 85/2 is at least as hard to focus than a 50/1.0
Best,
Roland.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=34185
- The RF accuracy has to be higher when you have less DOF
- Longer Effective Base Length (EBL) usually means higher RF accuracy. EBL is the product of Base Length and viewfinder magnification
- DOF decreases with (1) longer focal length, (2) faster apertures, (3) closer distances.
- The RF accuracy does not only depend on EBL but also on the mechanics of the system and on the photographer.
On the Bessa you can safely assume that all CV lenses are focusable accurately, in particular your 35/1.7 (even the 40/1.4, 50/1.5 and 35/1.2 are OK). But once you start shooting faster and longer lenses close-up (for
instance an 85/2 or 135/3.5) you might get into problems. For example, an 85/2 is at least as hard to focus than a 50/1.0
Best,
Roland.
Joshua_G
Member
Thanks, both of you. I'll heed your advice.
As for the question about EBL and focus accuracy. Focus accuracy is one thing, while focusing ease is a different matter. What I found out is that the contrast of the RF patch has high influence on focusing ease. Though Bessa Rx finders are very bright, and its RF patch is also very bright, its contrast is fairly low, hence, not so easy to focus, especially in dim light.
P.S.
The more I'm into photography and photo gear (it's over 40 tears now), the more I realize that indeed, there is no free lunch – you get what you pay for. My about 50 years old Canon 7 costs more than Bessa R – for a reason, it's easier to focus with the Canon (which, in a time of need, can also serve as an hammer). Not every one need the benefits of the more expansive gear, yet, there is a price for quality.
Last edited: