Leica III v Beesa L

lxmike

M2 fan.
Local time
6:23 AM
Joined
Jun 28, 2008
Messages
4,140
Location
Co Durham NE England
I've decided to go for either a good user grade Leica III or a Bessa L as the body for my cv25/4 Skopar. I'm quite familia with the Leica III, used to have one mny years ago but not too familiar with the Bessa L. I realise that they are a bit like chal and cheese, bottom loading and no meter v back opening loading and light meter. My head suggests the bessa but my heart seems to think how cool would a Leica III look wih a 25/4 cv Skopar mounted. Any thoughts would be appreciated
 
I'd get the III. It's lasted this long, it'll last another few decades. Haven't handled the Bessa before but it looks a bit…well, I always thought bottom loading bodies were more durable than hinged backs.
 
I had a Bessa L for about a month for my 15mm Heliar, before it needed a repair, which was more than the thing was worth.

In my opinion the Bessa L is very poorly made. The 15mm Heliar, is by contrast a nice lens and has no place on a thing like the Bessa L.

I bought a nice Leica iiif and mounted the 15mm Heliar on it. I am pleased with the results. You will be too.
 
I have a Bessa L; the plastic looks awful these days, and the flash sync and one of the LEDs on the meter stopped working a long time ago- but the shutter still works. It's 'cheap and cheerful'- but if you want a reliable camera for the long haul- get the Leica.
 
Why not go upscale a little and get a Bessa R2 or R3? Much better build quality than the L. Just slap an aux finder on it and an M to LTM adapter and you'll have a reliable metered camera w/ 1/2000 top shutter speed. The III is definitely a better built camera of course, but you can nearly always figure on getting it CLA'd to get the shutter running right, so you'll end up w/ more money in it than the Bessa.
 
I like my Bessa L & I use it with my 25/4. Never a problem so far. Only paid around $80.00 for it almost new. Previous owner said he only used it twice & by the looks of it I believe him! Wasn't any scratches anywhere!
 
IIIc. They're just so pretty, and still very functional, despite beng up to 70 years old. I'd say IIIc because it has the die-cast chassis instead of the fabricated chassis of the III-IIIa-IIIb, though quite honestly it's possible to overstate the importance of that too.

The L works fine. It feels a bit flimsy and plasticky, but the shutter works well and there's not a lot else to worry about in the thing.

Of course, if your Leica comes with a 5cm Elmar, or if you acquire one later, you may find that the 1,5cm receives a lot less use than you expect, excellent lens though it is.

Cheers,

R.
 
Had an L with 25/4 early on (actually a Cosina 107)
Sold it.
Big mistake.
Bought a black L, again with the 25/4.
Love it.
Simple, functional.

PS - I do have a IIIf, too... so there is no brand prejudice involved.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom