Ideas for a starter kit

[whatmicah]

Hi,
Okay so i just spent the last 20 minutes of my life browsing the Bessa Porn pages, and I think I am sold on getting a Bessa, but of course I need some advice.

Basically here is the deal. I shoot nearly 100% digital right now with Canon equipment. I have been longing to get back into shooting Leica, but the cost has been an issue and I haven't come up with a way to justify the expense.

So for now, I was thinking to try out a Bessa and a couple of lenses just for fun and to wet my appetite for rangefinder shooting.

Looking over the options the cameras that seem the most desirable are the R2a/m and R4a/m. This is mostly because I like to shoot fairly wide most of the time (35 is the longest I think).

I also really like to shoot in low light so I am looking for fast lenses. I see that there are some pretty fast Voigtlander lenses that are screwmount, but have adapters, etc.

So my question is ( and I'm sure this has been asked 1000 times here before) which Bessa and what lenses should I get. I am thinking a 35/1.4 or 35/2.0 coupled with a 28/2 would be a great setup.

But what are the details between the cameras. The A vs. the M? R2 vs. R4? Should I go with a brand new Voigtlander lens, or try and find a used Leitz?

Any input would be very welcome!

-micah

 

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Micah,

Remember that the Bessa RF base length is short, and the effective base length is even shorter because of the viewfinder magnification. I find the R2 marginal at close distances with a 50/1.5, so the R4 is not ideal (smallest effective base length of all) for faster lenses.

A is good if you use auto-exposure; M is better if you want battery independence (apart from the meter). I prefer M.

The lenses are astonishingly good for the price and personally I'd buy new Voigtländer before used Leica, unless you're buying current Leica.

Consider the 35/1.7 or 35/1.4, but remember that the 28/1.9 is quite big by rangefinder standards.

Cheers,

Roger

 

[whatmicah]

Base Length

Base Length

Yeah I saw that - Rangefinder Base length of 37mm: This translates to an effective rangefinder base length of 37mm for the 1.0x magnification R3A, and 25.6 mm(37mm x .68 magnification) for the R2A. In other words, the R3A's rangefinder is 74% as long as the standard .72 Leica M finder, while the R2A's rangefinder is 51% as long as the standard .72 Leica M finder with EBL of 49.32.

Not really sure what the base length is exactly...

Anyway, I am now thinking, after looking through all the choices that the R2M and a 35/1.4 Nokton, would probably be a great combo for me.

This would add up to about $1200 or so. I sort of thing I could find a used M6 and 35/2 for about that price or a couple hundred more. What do you think?

-m

 

[kshapero]

For the best VF in a Bessa, I'd go with the R3M with the CV 40mm/1.4. You will be so so happy.

 

[payasam]

If 35 mm is to be your longest lens, then (a) the choice of Bessa body is self evident and (b) fast Leica glass will be expensive.

 

[ClaremontPhoto]

One camera, one lens might be the best way to learn.

I went for R3A with 40mm.

Other people have chosen other combinations.

 

[thomasw_]

If you are looking to spend 1200 bucks on one 35mm lens and one body, then I'd get the CV 35/1,4 or 35/1,7 and a user grade M2 and get a Youxin Ye CLA on the M2. You should be able to get all that for $1200 loonies.

My .02$ canadian 😉

 

[myoptic3]

If your experience is like a lot of others, you'll buy a Bessa. You'll love the small size and meter, and be unhappy w/ the noisy, vibrating shutter and the build quality. The strap lugs are in the wrong place too, and the camera digs into your back when you have it on a strap.You'll sell it at a loss, and end up buying a Leica anyway. Why not just start there? One justification for the cost is that you get what you pay for. The other is that the resale value is going to be excellent. The Voigtlander lenses are sharp and very affordable, but if you prefer the more classic look you will end up w/ Leica again.

If you are used to DSLR's you probably won't be happy with an un metered camera. My suggestion would be to find an M6 TTL or a Zeiss Ikon (or an M7 if you can afford it so you would get the AE) and a couple of good lenses. I think you would be far happier w/ the whole shooting experience. If you normally wear glasses when you shoot, a Konica Hexar will give you a .60 viewfinder and motorized film advance.

This is the route I went, and while I was extremely happy w/ the images I never got comfortable w/ the RF focusing and went to an R5 and a couple of lenses. Now I get the same lens signatures as the RF's along w/ an easier to shoot (for me) SLR. Fortunately I was able to sell the Leica RF gear for what I paid for it, so it was a painless move. And seeing what the older Leica glass could do w/ my own eyes was a big plus. Looking at the web samples is one thing. Seeing the shots in front of you is another.

 

[imush]

I have bought R2M as a [re-]starter kit (I had some limited experience with Russian RFs long ago), with the 40mm Nokton, in addition to the 50mm Heliar that comes with the kit, and very happy with the setup. Both lens are very good, and the 35mm/f1.4 Nokton is reportedly similar to the 40mm one. There is nothing comparable at their price range.

If you don't wear glasses, R3 may be preferable to R2, you need to go to a store and try the viewfinders. Even without the glasses, the 1:1 viewfinder in R3x seemed a bit too wide to me.

Shutter noise exists, but nothing like what I was used to with Russian cameras, and certainly less than any SLR I have seen. But I was not too spoiled, the next newest camera I have is a Pentax Spotmatic. Build quality seems very good to me. Yes, Leicas are quieter and feel better in your hands, but really not that much better to justify the price differential in my view.

The strap holes are indeed misplaced, and the camera tilts backward with most smaller lenses attached. But, with the heavier 35mm/f1.2 Nokton, they are about in line with center of gravity.

 

[Roger Hicks]

I wouldn't argue with anyone else's advice -- which shows how personal the whole thing is. Am I right? Are they? No-one can really tell you...

Cheers,

R.

 

[sockeyed]

A couple of points to add on to what folks have said already:

The R3A or M cameras are not good for most folks who wear glasses if you plan to use a 40mm lens - the framelines are very close to the edge of the viewfinder. The R3's are great with 50mm and longer lenses

A Voigtlander side grip will sort out the problem of the strap lugs and let the camera hang properly.

The R4's are best thought of as a dedicated wide-angle body for 21mm to 35mm lenses. They are a great partner for an R2 or R3, but not great on their own unless you only shoot wide.

As for 'A' or 'M' bodies, the choice is yours. I prefer manual metering, and I found the AE-lock thumb button on the R3A I had awkward to use.

Good luck with your decision. Regardless of what you choose, you'll have fun.

 

[whatmicah]

Thanks

Thanks

Thanks everyone for all your input. I'd love to hear more. Basically, I have shot with an M6, 24/2.8, 35/2.0, etc. It was an M6 Classic, and it rocked. Perfect camera in my opinion.

Anyway, since then I have been shooting DSLR exclusively, doing mostly photojournalism/documentary. These types of cameras work out great in the places I have worked, where people sort of expect you, and recognize you as a photog. It's obvious what you are doing and they either accept it or reject.

But now, I am faced with doing more street photography, and more sublte documentary style stuff.

On top of all that I really just want to get back to shooting RF. (For the past two weeks I have been burning up film through my Holga!!!)

So, I was thinking about an M2, but I really need something that doesnt need an external meter. I want to be able to have this thing on me all the time.

I looked at the old Contax kits, but I dont want the auto-everything setup. I looked at used M6 classics, but they are hard to find in good shape and can be sort of a gamble....

So, I ended up looking at the Voigts...

Currently I am thinking an R2M and a 35 Nokton 1.4 would be a great setup for the price.

the little details about the strap lugs really dont concern me. I'm looking for a tool, and I can deal with stuff like that. As long as the meter is very accurate, the focus and f-stops on the lens are easy to use, along with the rangefinder, I'll be ok.

I don't wear glasses (though I probably should) and I shoot mostly wide.. 35mm or less...

So, R2M and Nokton 35/1.4... or maybe a used M6 Classic and the same lens?? I dunno...

$1200 is sort of my starting budget for this...

Nice that the R2M comes in black paint. Thats kind of a bonus... but not a requirement... I'll probably cover the thing in tape anyway...

So anyway, thanks for all the ideas... and keep em coming if you have more!

 

[BillBingham2]

Micah,

From what you say I would go with an R4a/m as my body and two lenses, the 35/1.4 and the 25/4, here's why.

You said you like wide and the longest you use regularly is 35. While the R2 and R3 are great cameras, start where your eye and head are at. Yes, the R4 has a short effective base length, not so much an issue with wide. EBL comes into play when you shoot close up, wide open and small (numerically) f-stops, especially with longer lenses. I love to shot with 105/2.5, 85/2, 90/2 lenses so I would not be able to trust the rangefinder with lenses like this wide open (existing darkness) and close up. In bright light, seven feet away the R4 would be close enough. If you are shooting wide the depth of field that these lenses bring with their perspective take care of this.

Skip the side handle and go for the winder. It costs a bit more, adds very little weight but it gives you an additional strap lug so you can hang the camera from your right shoulder the correct way (read opposite the Leica M5 which hangs correctly from the left shoulder). It adds about 1 CM to the bottom and works like a charm.

I say the 25/4 because it is my favorite all around lens from CV. It's slow but it's small and you really do not need a rangefinder to get shots that are dead on 99% of the time. The new 35/1.4 I say because of speed and size. While the 35/1.2 is FAST, it's big and I think what you are looking for is a small kit.

If in the future you really want to shoot with longer lenses you add an R3 to the mix and get a 75/2.5 CV or if you're feeling well off that day a 75/2 'Cron (leica glass).

I think the two lenses (25/4 & 35/1.4) will give you a kick butt kit that will handle just about everything. If you want to go with a third lens pick up a 15/4.5. It realllllly wide but a fun lens to play with, I think it will open your eyes.

I never liked the 21mm focal length because of the distortion, but mine was an Elmarit, it might have been different if it was a CV. My 24/2.8 Nikkor F mount makes footballs out of heads with ease, but my 25/4 CV gives me great results with people every time.

B2 (;->