hexar RF or bessa r2a?

M

morgan

Well-known
Local time
7:12 PM
Joined
Jun 12, 2006
Messages
711
Location
Los Angeles
View My Gallery
So I want to upgrade my bessa-r to something with AE. I'd love an M7, it just isn't going to happen right now (no matter how hard I stare at used one's on ebay). I'm torn between the Hexar and the R2A. I'm worried about ongoing support for the hexar, but I like it's feature set, and it sounds like they're built like tanks. On the R2A side, i get a fresh camera, fresh warranty, and to be honest, I like the way the bessa's look. I'm fairly stuck on which way to go, so any input would be much appreciated.
 
Keep in mind that the Hexar RF has a magnification of only 0.6x. So it's ideal for wide angle lenses, but less than ideal for longer lenses.

What about a Zeiss Ikon? More expensive than an R2A but far cheaper than an M7.
 
Hexar RF. No ifs, ands, or buts.

I have three of 'em how and no regrets. Buy one or two while you can. My M7 is a dust collector now...
 
if you use 50mm a lot, i'd go with the r2a. i like the magnification, even though the ebl is much lower. if you use 35mm and 28mm, i've go with the hexar rf. there was a recent thread about hexar rf service centers.
 
Thanks so far, guys. Dave, I know you're obsessed with the hexars. Some post of yours is what's got me on this kick. I should add that I shoot usually a 35, but also a 50 occasionally and a 15. The Ikon is an interesting idea, but I feel like if I'm going to spend 1300 or so, I might as well kick in the extra 600 and get a used M7. I'm also contemplating a new 35 (the cv ultron most likely, but maybe the nokton if I go with the bessa). Does the hexar "feel" that much more solid than the bessa?

Lots to ponder.
 
Can't really go wrong with either, or the ZI. I personally like the Hexar RF. If you can find a good one, there are a couple of places that can service them, although on a maybe, limited basis. To me, the camera is well worth the risk. I have one, and can't part with it. I have two mech. RF's though...
 
Along with a few Leicas, I've owned a Hexar RF and a Bessa R2. I still own the Leicas and the Hexar. The Hexar has as good as or better "quality feel" than my Leicas. The R2 was a quantum step below that. The Hexar, even with motorized film advance, was quieter than my R2's shutter sound.
 
morgan said:
The Ikon is an interesting idea, but I feel like if I'm going to spend 1300 or so, I might as well kick in the extra 600 and get a used M7. I'm also contemplating a new 35 (the cv ultron most likely, but maybe the nokton if I go with the bessa).

Lots to ponder.
Click to expand...

Since you mention a used M7, consider a used ZI. They've been out for almost a year & a half now, so they have worked their way onto the used market. There's a post currently on www.photo.net from a poster who bought a used ZI in excellent condition with a 35 mm lens for a total of $1000.
 
I'm going to be the dissenting voice here. I've had and used extensively an R3A and R3M, and I've got a Hexar RF. While the Hexar is a very nicely-designed camera, they cut corners in one crucial area - the rangefinder mechanism. To put it bluntly, they cheaped out when they put it together, and it is prone to getting knocked out of alignment or breaking. And because Konica no longer exists as a company, getting replacement parts is next to impossible. I bought my Hexar used and it arrived damaged (it simply would not focus properly), and although I managed to get it fixed (by Precision Camera), it's still not great, partly because they couldn't get new parts for it.

I'm not alone in my feelings about the Hexar. Tom Abrahamsson, who knows a thing or two about rangefinder cameras, claimed he could knock his Hexar rangefinder out of alignment by putting the camera in his bag the wrong way. An exaggeration, perhaps, but I know that he ended up adjusting the rangefinder then loc-tighting it into place to hold it there.

Don't get me wrong - I would love to love the Hexar. I really like the AE, the magnification of the VF, the power winding, and the titanium body, but the rangefinder mechanism is its achilles heel, IMHO.

On the other hand, I have dragged my R3A and R3M through Cambodia, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Malaysia and Borneo and never had a problem with anything.
 
W.r.t. the Hexar, a lot apparently depends on the sample you get. And even more on your personal taste..

Everybody's telling how silent it is compared to a Bessa, even with the motorized film advance included. Well, I'll tell you, mine had the film advance from hell. It was a high pitched schreech that was as bad as drawing chalk over a black board. Unnerving.

The rangefinder assembly on mine was fixed into place with a piece of wax. Good thing is, it wouldn't change alignment all by itself. The bad thing is, it was not vertically aligned when used with the left eye.. I had to cut through the wax to adjust it.

The finder is good up to 50mm, or at most for 75mm if you're hard pressed for it. Focussing was alright, but framing a 90 was a nightmare. The shutter speed read out is at the very edge of the viewfinder, and can not be seen from the same position where
you have your eye when you focus..

There are a couple of very good things about it though, the exposure was always spot on. The AE nailed it without problem, every time. Focus was always spot on. Never had a problem, not with the Hexanon, and not with the CV lenses long and short.

The build is impressive. Loads better than CV, on par with Leica, and most certainly shaped more comfortable to hold.


All in all, the best advice is to try before you buy. It's always good advice, but in the case of the Hexar, it's crucial..
 
I'll climb on board the Hexar RF bandwagon here. It was the first RF I used, and I fell in love immediately. (That's why I now have two - I couldn't be without it so wanted to have a spare. Trouble is that I'm now inclined to use both, so am even thinking of a third as spare...)

Its not for someone who hates electrics and electronics (I have an M3 as mechanical backup) but I find it a really usable camera. I don't know about long lenses - the longest I have is a 75, and I imagine that perhaps the 90 and certainly the 135 frame-lines would be a little on the tiny side. However, it works fine with the 75 and is precise enough to focus accurately even wide open at f1.4 (with perhaps a little extra care; its not as easy as with the M3 - but having framelines is nice). I have a thread floating around somewhere showing samples from the 75/1.4 on the Hexar RF.

Nothing against the Bessa, by the way. I haven't used one but I'm sure its a good camera. Its just that I love my Hexar RF (s).

...Mike
 
Can't offer an opinion on the Bessas but I do own a Hexar RF and absolutely love it. I take it on multi day hikes all the time usually worn in a waist bag and believe me, it doesn't get molly coddled. I had to get the rangefinder realigned after a year which coincided with lending it to my wife one night. Have not had a glimmer of a problem since. I also have a M6 but overall I would say the Hexar is more user friendly. And don't get me started on the Hexanon M lenses.
 
I'm mildly surprised at the lack of love for the bessas. I've read that some Hexars have the 'screeching weasel' film advance, and a lot seems to depend on the copy that one gets. I actually don't really care too much about the auto film advance. I'm more interested in correct exposure, reliability and durability. I'm not easy on my cameras, I tend to just throw it in a messenger bag, although my bessa-r has an ever ready type case.

I have a block of money to spend, and it's tough for me to go beyond that (or else I would get an M7). As I said above, I'd love to get a faster 35 than the cv 35/2.5 cs than I've got now. So that plays into my thinking as well. It'd be easier for me justify the R2A and an ultron, but a lot harder for an ikon and an ultron. So that puts an M7 and an ultron out of reach.
 
Despite not owning a M6 or R2A, I agree with Alan and the others.

I love my Hexar RF.

Always thinking about an RF with a good meter, I saw an offer for a brand new one in a Cologne photo shop before Photokina, but didn't buy.
I was away then for some weeks and when I came back to Cologne, I was sure that the camera was gone - but they had two left.
So, quickly calculating my Christmas gratification to come, I bought it and have not regretted, yet.

Best regards,
Uwe
 
Morgan, you currently own a Bessa R, correct? If you are happy with the "feel and function" of that camera, you will be more than happy with an R2a as the build quality is improved. (metal top/bottom plates, back door, and improved shutter too I think)
 
morgan said:
I have a block of money to spend, and it's tough for me to go beyond that (or else I would get an M7). As I said above, I'd love to get a faster 35 than the cv 35/2.5 cs than I've got now. So that plays into my thinking as well. It'd be easier for me justify the R2A and an ultron, but a lot harder for an ikon and an ultron. So that puts an M7 and an ultron out of reach.
Click to expand...

Why would a used Ikon be more money than a used Hexar RF?
 
Huck Finn said:
Why would a used Ikon be more money than a used Hexar RF?
Click to expand...

I've seen a few bodies only for around $700, and kits with 50/2 going for under 1k. I'm less familiar with the used prices on the Ikon, but they seem to be going for 1100-1200 used. Reachable but it'd be a stretch if I also wanted a new 35. A Shutterbug review says that the Ikon shares the shutter and metering system with the R2A/R3A - is that true? The same review says it's got a nicer viewfinder than an M6. Maybe I should think about it some more...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom