das
Well-known
Unfortunately, I have fallen down an M42 rabbit hole -- primarily in a quest to put some Carl Zeiss Jena lenses to the test. Although my household was gifted a working Pentax Spotmatic SP, I much prefer to use M42 lenses on a Contax SLR body because of its much, much brighter viewfinder than any of the classic M42 bodies and also because of the multi-metering modes. Focusing wide open and then stopping down to the appropriate taking aperture where the camera automatically readjusts the meter has not been a bad way to operate. To me, it is much easier than the two-three step process of using the Spotmatic. I also recently acquired a Chinon CE-3 which is one of maybe two classic M42 bodies that has actual aperture priority autoexposure, but it is in the shop for some needed repairs.
For the past few weeks, I have been studying the Bessaflex, which came and went almost 15 years ago now. I am not impressed with the Spotmatic-style metering switch operation -- I kind of hate that system. It seems like a shame that Cosina did not put an electronic shutter in some of these like the R3A/R4A. However, I am intrigued by its reputation for having a bright viewfinder, reportedly brighter than any other classic M42 body.
For those who use and enjoy the Bessaflex, how do you like it? Does it provide any advantage over using M42 lenses on a Contax body? It seems to me that it does not, but I would love to hear folks' impressions.
For the past few weeks, I have been studying the Bessaflex, which came and went almost 15 years ago now. I am not impressed with the Spotmatic-style metering switch operation -- I kind of hate that system. It seems like a shame that Cosina did not put an electronic shutter in some of these like the R3A/R4A. However, I am intrigued by its reputation for having a bright viewfinder, reportedly brighter than any other classic M42 body.
For those who use and enjoy the Bessaflex, how do you like it? Does it provide any advantage over using M42 lenses on a Contax body? It seems to me that it does not, but I would love to hear folks' impressions.
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Chinon Memotron CE-II.
Austintatious
Well-known
I have a Chinon Memotron CE-3. It does all that I need it to do very well and it was reasonable cost. I have lots of M42 glass that sees the most use adapted to my Sony A7II.
Recently picked up a really nice Helios 44-3 which as you know is a Biotar copy. Really happy with the old FSU lenses I have.
Recently picked up a really nice Helios 44-3 which as you know is a Biotar copy. Really happy with the old FSU lenses I have.
charjohncarter
Veteran
I like my M42 lenses: all are Super Takumars from the late 60s (except for a Zenitar 16mm which I never use). I just had my Spotmatic CLAd and it is performing beautifully. Even though it may not be the brightest with the f1.4 it just pops into focus. So, I'll stick to it. I also have a (2)Pentax P3n(s) which is very easy to use. It has aperture auto and an electronic shutter, and a split image screen which is great for wide angle lenses. But of course, you would have to have a K mount to M42 adapter. I bought one of P3n bodies when it came out (1989?), the batteries last 18 years, I only changed them because I was going to use it on a trip.
I don’t have any experience with the Bessaflex, but am curious about using M42 on Contax. Which adapter are you using? I have Fujinons and Olympus M42 lenses that are particular, with unique aperture pins, need to find an M42 adapter that will work with them.
das
Well-known
Just some cheap Fotodiox one. Works fine on all M42 lenses that I have which have pins. That adapter should work fine for almost anything.
David Murphy
Veteran
The Bessaflex is a fabulous camera with a bright view finder -- perhaps the brightest SLR viewfinder ever made -- a good TTL meter, and a solid mechanical shutter. The all mechanical nature of the Bessasflex means no annoying battery dependence or associated electronic reliability issues. I recommend this camera.
It is now an expensive camera on the used market however.
It is now an expensive camera on the used market however.
charjohncarter
Veteran
Here you go, an argument forever on SLR brightness:
http://forum.mflenses.com/manual-focus-slr-with-biggest-and-brightest-viewfinder-t64386.html
You will never find answer on this or any other forum. Your answer is what you like. (period)
http://forum.mflenses.com/manual-focus-slr-with-biggest-and-brightest-viewfinder-t64386.html
You will never find answer on this or any other forum. Your answer is what you like. (period)
Post deleted.
retinax
Well-known
Unless some specific eye condition dictates it or you use a lot of very slow lenses, brightness may be not the end goal. If you give yourself some time to get used to the spotmatic you will find that its finder is very easy to focus, at least with faster lenses.
Don't be surprised that the Bessaflex stop-down-meters, most M42 lenses simply dont permit oa metering and of those that do there are different, incompatible systems. There was the workaround, employed e.g. by Chinon, of metering right before the exposure, when the lens is already stopped down, but that doesn't allow a meterred manual mode. Why not simply use a hand held meter?
Don't be surprised that the Bessaflex stop-down-meters, most M42 lenses simply dont permit oa metering and of those that do there are different, incompatible systems. There was the workaround, employed e.g. by Chinon, of metering right before the exposure, when the lens is already stopped down, but that doesn't allow a meterred manual mode. Why not simply use a hand held meter?
Larry Cloetta
Veteran
I’ve never used the Bessaflex, so am of no use with regard to the original question, but have used Contax SLR bodies extensively with M42 lenses, in addition to 3 generations of Pentaxes, 2 Chinons, 2 different Fujicas, Mamiya-Sekors, and, I think, every other M42 body mentioned here, and then some, basically all of them short of the Eastern bloc ones.
The Contaxes are miles ahead, and it’s not just the viewfinder, it’s the available shutter speeds, the greater accuracy of the more modern metering, and on and on. The viewfinders are so bright, relatively speaking, that the stop down metering is a non issue in terms of ease of use.
I had thought about getting a Bessaflex at one time because it seems to be the perfect made for purpose solution,, but didn’t, so I can’t help there, but I did compare it’s feature set (on paper) with the features of the RTS III I already had, and just stayed with that, as well as some other Contaxes. And you can buy two or 3 RTS III bodies for what a Bessaflex goes for now. I would have tried a Bessaflex at $300, but that was never an option by the time the thought occurred to me.
The Contaxes are miles ahead, and it’s not just the viewfinder, it’s the available shutter speeds, the greater accuracy of the more modern metering, and on and on. The viewfinders are so bright, relatively speaking, that the stop down metering is a non issue in terms of ease of use.
I had thought about getting a Bessaflex at one time because it seems to be the perfect made for purpose solution,, but didn’t, so I can’t help there, but I did compare it’s feature set (on paper) with the features of the RTS III I already had, and just stayed with that, as well as some other Contaxes. And you can buy two or 3 RTS III bodies for what a Bessaflex goes for now. I would have tried a Bessaflex at $300, but that was never an option by the time the thought occurred to me.
I plan to get an M42 adapter for my Contax 159, based in large part on @larry’s previous recommendations to me. I don’t have an arsenal of M42 lenses but all the ones I have are slightly non-standard: Fujinon and Olympus (FTL lenses.) The Fujinons have a tab on the aperture ring which conflicts with rotation on most M42 adapters except for the XS adapter from Fujica, which accommodates for the tab. This adapter is made for Fujica X-mount SLRs like the AX and STX series. Those cameras all come up short in various ways compared to Contax bodies. One of my Olympus lenses works fine on this adapter but another doesn’t.
None of these lenses work on an OEM Pentax M42 adapter used on K-mount SLRs either.
I would prefer not to perform surgery on these lenses to make them usable, would rather keep them original…could use an M42 Fujica body like an 801 but the ones I’ve tried have been flaky (most seem to have not been well-cared for) and they are rather large/heavy compared to my Contax.
EDIT: I also have an OEM Konica AR M42 Praktica adapter that works with the Fujinons, but my Konica bodies are also iffy…and the viewfinders don’t have the brightness or clarity/contrast of the Contax.
None of these lenses work on an OEM Pentax M42 adapter used on K-mount SLRs either.
I would prefer not to perform surgery on these lenses to make them usable, would rather keep them original…could use an M42 Fujica body like an 801 but the ones I’ve tried have been flaky (most seem to have not been well-cared for) and they are rather large/heavy compared to my Contax.
EDIT: I also have an OEM Konica AR M42 Praktica adapter that works with the Fujinons, but my Konica bodies are also iffy…and the viewfinders don’t have the brightness or clarity/contrast of the Contax.
das
Well-known
Thanks for the insights, everyone. Larry, I tend to agree with you on your points. In assessing what is the most advanced, versatile, and easiest to use M42 film platform, this is how I see it.
1. Later Contax C/Y Bodies
Screens that are 2-3 stops brighter than any classic M42 body, shutter speeds up to 1/4000, multi-metering modes, and integrated motor drives. The only drawback is having to focus wide open and then stop down manually. However, I have found, like others, that many CZJ lenses don't actually mate super well to the Contax body with a tiny bit of space between the lens and the body, while Pentax ones work fine.
2. Chinon CE-3
The only M42 body (maybe also the CE-2) with what approaches actual autoexposure with M42 lenses. The focusing screen is just ok, the bodies are just ok quality, there is an exposure lock that is kind of primitive and clunky, and the top shutter speed is only 1/1000. However, it remains the most advanced and automated native M42 body.
3. Bessaflex
A reportedly bright focusing screen, but otherwise works like a Spotmatic. 1/2000 top speed is nice. I really don't care about dependence on batteries for a shutter -- in 20 years of shooting, I have never had a battery fail or an electronic shutter problem out in the real world. I know some people LOVE their Spotmatics and Fujicas, but for me, there are better options. If it were a $200-300 purchase, yes, take a chance and play around with it before passing it on. For $500-600, it does not seem like an especially good deal.
I still think it is a shame that Cosina did not make a version that worked like the CE-3. Cosina already had an electronic shutter version of the body (the R3A and R4A), so it would not have been difficult to do. Make a semi-manual Spotmatic-style version with a manual shutter and an auto CE-3 version with an electronic shutter.
1. Later Contax C/Y Bodies
Screens that are 2-3 stops brighter than any classic M42 body, shutter speeds up to 1/4000, multi-metering modes, and integrated motor drives. The only drawback is having to focus wide open and then stop down manually. However, I have found, like others, that many CZJ lenses don't actually mate super well to the Contax body with a tiny bit of space between the lens and the body, while Pentax ones work fine.
2. Chinon CE-3
The only M42 body (maybe also the CE-2) with what approaches actual autoexposure with M42 lenses. The focusing screen is just ok, the bodies are just ok quality, there is an exposure lock that is kind of primitive and clunky, and the top shutter speed is only 1/1000. However, it remains the most advanced and automated native M42 body.
3. Bessaflex
A reportedly bright focusing screen, but otherwise works like a Spotmatic. 1/2000 top speed is nice. I really don't care about dependence on batteries for a shutter -- in 20 years of shooting, I have never had a battery fail or an electronic shutter problem out in the real world. I know some people LOVE their Spotmatics and Fujicas, but for me, there are better options. If it were a $200-300 purchase, yes, take a chance and play around with it before passing it on. For $500-600, it does not seem like an especially good deal.
I still think it is a shame that Cosina did not make a version that worked like the CE-3. Cosina already had an electronic shutter version of the body (the R3A and R4A), so it would not have been difficult to do. Make a semi-manual Spotmatic-style version with a manual shutter and an auto CE-3 version with an electronic shutter.
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
davidde,
The CE-II really is the model to get, the CE-3 is a downgraded camera.
The Fujica ST-801 was suggested too, it has a top shutter speed similar to the CE-II (2000th) and does indeed have a brighter finder than the CE-II, but you'll need to get Fujinon EBC lenses to take full advantage of its open aperture metering capabilities.
The CE-II does that with ALL M42 lenses that have an aperture pin, regardless of their manufacturer.
Plus, the CE-II is black paint over brass and it truly matches the fabled Leicas in paint quality. And they're built like a tank. I have three of them and will not ever let them go. My kids borrow them and they also swear by them.
Don't take my word for it, read Mike Eckman's review on the camera, get yourself a good one and you will not be disappointed.
The CE-II really is the model to get, the CE-3 is a downgraded camera.
The Fujica ST-801 was suggested too, it has a top shutter speed similar to the CE-II (2000th) and does indeed have a brighter finder than the CE-II, but you'll need to get Fujinon EBC lenses to take full advantage of its open aperture metering capabilities.
The CE-II does that with ALL M42 lenses that have an aperture pin, regardless of their manufacturer.
Plus, the CE-II is black paint over brass and it truly matches the fabled Leicas in paint quality. And they're built like a tank. I have three of them and will not ever let them go. My kids borrow them and they also swear by them.
Don't take my word for it, read Mike Eckman's review on the camera, get yourself a good one and you will not be disappointed.
santino
FSU gear head
But isn‘t it hard to get a ce-II nowadays? Im looking for one for years, so far no luck.
das
Well-known
Johan -- Yeah, when I was snooping around for an M42 Chinon, I was looking out for a CE-2 or CE-3 or their "Revue" equivalents. I get the impression that they did not sell particularly well in the USA during the 1970s, and they come up fairly rarely. I found a cheap CE-3 that came with that weird motor drive at a good price and snatched it up. It needed some TLC, though, so it's in the shop. Also, the CE-3 is a little smaller and lighter than the CE-2, which I like in SLRs -- small, light, and full-featured. It is a shame that the CE-3 lost the 1/2000 top speed. The only M42 lenses that really interest me are the CZJ ones -- not necessarily for their sharpness or optical quality, which may not be as good as certain Pentax and Fujica lenses, but for their effects.