Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
These days you have to be a maniac or Canadian doctor to decide to spend your own $$$$,$$ on digital M....In somewhat agreement with Ko.Fe, I'm curious what your age and prior experiences are? Is there a specific reason you are inclined towards the masochism of film over digital?
Frankly, a new Nikon Z body with an appropriate adaptor will allow the use of all the classic lenses much more easily than any old Leica or Nikon RF body.
But hey, I'm a loon who's off on a Pentax APS-C DSLR jag of late so what do I know?
I have thousands pictures taken of my family and counting.
We started on film, went digital, I liked film&gear more, switched to film again, left it for now.
Nobody at home really liked their photos on film
Looking at film pictures of family brings good memories of ... awesome film gear and times I could kill.
Looking at digital pictures... technically they are better.
IMO, it is OK to waste time and money on film. Every year it gets less and less affordable. Do it while you can.
Cascadilla
Well-known
But don't forget that coin you'll need to open the battery compartment--probably another gram or two. First world problems...Carrying two extra button cells will be an extra burden of about 4 grams, if batteries were to ever fail.
Although the battery compartment on the CLE just slides open with a finger tip, no coin needed!
Darthfeeble
But you can call me Steve
I didn't see the Bessa R4A mentioned. I believe it has everything you're looking for.
mlzplayer
Member
I actually really like the Bessa cameras, the only thing that makes me hesitate is their rangefinder alignment. From what Ive heard its finicky and unreliable.
Coldkennels
Barnack-toting Brit.
As @mdarnton pointed out, lens availability is going to be more important than anything else. Good built-in 28mm viewfinders are rare... a wide selection of 28mm lenses is even rarer, and fast 28mm lenses are even rarer still.
Most RF systems have a good selection of 35mm lenses. But 28mm? Contax has the slow f/8 Tessar or the incredibly rare f/6 Orion, Nikon has the f/3.5 W-Nikkor or the f/3.5 SC-Skopar, and unless I'm missing something, that's it. A lot of other (smaller) systems don't even have a single 28mm lens; they just weren't that common when rangefinders were the most popular thing going.
LTM has a lot more options, from the super-slow f/6 Orion to the f/1.9 Ultron and the brand new f/2.8 version of the Color Skopar - but no rangefinder lens mount has more 28mm lenses than M mount. There's loads of all speeds, styles, and prices.
That said, personally, I can't see the 28mm framelines in any 0.72x Leica at all, so I'd rather have a smaller LTM camera and a good 28mm external viewfinder - but if you were dead set on a built-in 28mm viewfinder, the Bessa R4M or R4A is a solid choice.
Most RF systems have a good selection of 35mm lenses. But 28mm? Contax has the slow f/8 Tessar or the incredibly rare f/6 Orion, Nikon has the f/3.5 W-Nikkor or the f/3.5 SC-Skopar, and unless I'm missing something, that's it. A lot of other (smaller) systems don't even have a single 28mm lens; they just weren't that common when rangefinders were the most popular thing going.
LTM has a lot more options, from the super-slow f/6 Orion to the f/1.9 Ultron and the brand new f/2.8 version of the Color Skopar - but no rangefinder lens mount has more 28mm lenses than M mount. There's loads of all speeds, styles, and prices.
That said, personally, I can't see the 28mm framelines in any 0.72x Leica at all, so I'd rather have a smaller LTM camera and a good 28mm external viewfinder - but if you were dead set on a built-in 28mm viewfinder, the Bessa R4M or R4A is a solid choice.
mlzplayer
Member
The Canon 28mm 2.8 looks like a good option in this direction. Could use a Canon L2 with 28mm 2.8, paired with a Canon P and Voigtlander lens.
I already own an L2, so all I would need is the 2.8, a P and a Voigtlander lens.
I could also wait more and get an M2 or M4 instead of the P.
Darthfeeble
But you can call me Steve
I have an "L" and an "R" both bought used and just tossed in film and went to work with them with outstanding results from both. Makes sense to me that the newer ones should be good too. Certainly the price difference would more than offset a trip to the shop. I chose the older ones as I had a couple of LTM lenses that I thought could use a good home.
froyd
Veteran
I had an R2a for several years and was not particularly gentle with it. Never had an alignement problem. Actually liked it better than the ZI that followed it. Excellent camera. Darthfeeble is spot on, an R4a seems like the perfect fit for your needs, and maybe you could pair it with an R2a or R2m for extra flexibility.
Coldkennels
Barnack-toting Brit.
I do hear good things about the Canon 28/2.8; if I didn't have the Color Skopar, I'd probably have gone that route for 28mm. If you're thinking about going for LTM lenses and bodies though, I'd recommend skipping the L2 as your dedicated 28mm body, and grabbing a Leica Standard, Ic, or If. Realistically, if you're shooting 28mm on the street, you're going to be zone focusing, and the rangefinder is just added bulk at that point.
As far as I'm aware, this is the smallest interchangeable-lens 28mm setup there is. It's an absolute joy to shoot - very quick and liberating.
mlzplayer
Member
Thats a beaut!
I might consider this, but I plan on using my 28 wide open indoors as well. I do own a Nicca IIIS which I could mount it on, although the rangefinder patch flares like hell. I will absolutely consider a setup like this.
If you are shooting mostly 28mm and 35mm focal length- and do not mind the separate hot-shoe mounted finder, a Leica CL might be worth looking at. It is less cost than an R2a and smaller.
Coldkennels
Barnack-toting Brit.
If you're feeling a bit... eccentric, you can always mount an external (uncoupled) rangefinder to the second shoe on the Ic and If to double-check focus when you're wide open and close up if you want/need to use the film that's in that camera instead of swapping the lens to another body. It is an absolutely ridiculous arrangement to be using in 2025, but there's something gloriously amusing about it. Besides, that's how the original Leicas were intended to be used.
I used that setup (albeit with a 35mm Summaron and a 50mm Elmar) to photograph a vintage motorbike meet last year, relying on the FOKOS rangefinder when I wanted to be double-sure the focus was perfect on the close-up shots. The light was terrible so I was shooting at f/3.5, and it worked a treat:
(This was with the 35mm f/3.5 Summaron in LTM. Highly recommend that lens, BTW. It's an absolute cracker.)
I used that setup (albeit with a 35mm Summaron and a 50mm Elmar) to photograph a vintage motorbike meet last year, relying on the FOKOS rangefinder when I wanted to be double-sure the focus was perfect on the close-up shots. The light was terrible so I was shooting at f/3.5, and it worked a treat:
(This was with the 35mm f/3.5 Summaron in LTM. Highly recommend that lens, BTW. It's an absolute cracker.)
@Coldkennels what viewfinder have you matched to the Color Skopar?
DownUnder
Nikon Nomad
In their posts here mdarnton (#18) and Godfrey (#17) made some interesting points about film cameras and lenses.
Re #17, friends who've bought TTArtisn lenses have for the most part good things to say about them. Images made with those are excellent given their relatively low prices. The main concern looks to be quality control, one lens may be crap but another will be outstanding. So best to buy from a reputable shop with a good return policy and warranty.
Re #18, I looked into the Nikon RF system way back in the day when more good cameras in this range were available on the secondhand market. And decided against buying on the sensible advice of my beloved camera repair person who pointed out that parts were no longer available, if something went wrong with a camera they would then have to cannibalise a parts one to fix it. Not a reliable way to go. (This at least in Australia but this also in Singapore where I nowadays have my cameras repaired for cost reasons.)
As to cameras, in the long term Leica seems the best way to go, in terms of investment and longevity of gear as against cost. You buy an M, you pays your money and you gets the quality. Repairs can be done fairly easily (I would get mine does in Asia) if one can stand the long wait, inevitably leading to more expense as then the logicalest way to go would be to buy a second M. Which is what I would do if I have the money, but then I've not been known in my long life for being the most sensible bunny in the hutch. And which may explain why I still fondly cling to my Nikkormats, Contax G1 and other odd-bod gear.
Other than TTArtisan there are several other generic brands (for new lenses) available, but no-one I know has invested in them. Secondhand, well, the sky seems to be the limit. A local friend who has recently bought into Leica LTM (at my suggestion, which I now quite regret as cost-wise this surely will not end well for him) found a Konica Konishiroku Hexar LTM 50/3.5 on Ebay, which could be interesting as the Hexar lenses had a fine reputation for sharpness and mid-tones. The price seems right so I will be following his quest and awaiting his decision on this lens with interest.
Let us not forget of course that with most RFF cameras, any Len other than the 50 will need a separate viewfinder. Which adds to the cost, even if el cheapo plastic ones are available on Ebay (from China of course).
So yes, the RFF lenses are there if one has the inclination and time (and the spare cash) to follow and indulge.
All this has taken us off the original post's track a bit, but I thought I would contribute it anyway, to sort of expand the discussion.
If anyone here has experience with the 'generic' lenses for LTM, Nikon RFF etcetera, please post. I'm sure many of us will be interested.
Re #17, friends who've bought TTArtisn lenses have for the most part good things to say about them. Images made with those are excellent given their relatively low prices. The main concern looks to be quality control, one lens may be crap but another will be outstanding. So best to buy from a reputable shop with a good return policy and warranty.
Re #18, I looked into the Nikon RF system way back in the day when more good cameras in this range were available on the secondhand market. And decided against buying on the sensible advice of my beloved camera repair person who pointed out that parts were no longer available, if something went wrong with a camera they would then have to cannibalise a parts one to fix it. Not a reliable way to go. (This at least in Australia but this also in Singapore where I nowadays have my cameras repaired for cost reasons.)
As to cameras, in the long term Leica seems the best way to go, in terms of investment and longevity of gear as against cost. You buy an M, you pays your money and you gets the quality. Repairs can be done fairly easily (I would get mine does in Asia) if one can stand the long wait, inevitably leading to more expense as then the logicalest way to go would be to buy a second M. Which is what I would do if I have the money, but then I've not been known in my long life for being the most sensible bunny in the hutch. And which may explain why I still fondly cling to my Nikkormats, Contax G1 and other odd-bod gear.
Other than TTArtisan there are several other generic brands (for new lenses) available, but no-one I know has invested in them. Secondhand, well, the sky seems to be the limit. A local friend who has recently bought into Leica LTM (at my suggestion, which I now quite regret as cost-wise this surely will not end well for him) found a Konica Konishiroku Hexar LTM 50/3.5 on Ebay, which could be interesting as the Hexar lenses had a fine reputation for sharpness and mid-tones. The price seems right so I will be following his quest and awaiting his decision on this lens with interest.
Let us not forget of course that with most RFF cameras, any Len other than the 50 will need a separate viewfinder. Which adds to the cost, even if el cheapo plastic ones are available on Ebay (from China of course).
So yes, the RFF lenses are there if one has the inclination and time (and the spare cash) to follow and indulge.
All this has taken us off the original post's track a bit, but I thought I would contribute it anyway, to sort of expand the discussion.
If anyone here has experience with the 'generic' lenses for LTM, Nikon RFF etcetera, please post. I'm sure many of us will be interested.
Cameraquest has NOS 21mm and 25mm Voigtlander wides in S mount, there are also 50s and 85s and the modern Zeiss 50 C Sonnar which appear on the aftermarket from time to time. Did the original 28/3.5 Color Skopar get released in S mount also?
Coldkennels
Barnack-toting Brit.
The one in the picture of the Leica Ic is the old Voigtlander 28/35mm mini-finder. I was lucky enough to buy it before the price sky-rocketed. To be honest, I usually use an old Zeiss 28mm viewfinder for the pre-war Contaxes; it's a good balance between compactness and clear framing, because I sometimes find the mini-finder's framelines disappear if the light is in just the wrong place.
It did - Voigtlander SC Skopars - but bear in mind all the Voigtlander lenses of this era (in both LTM and S mount) are prone to irremovable haze. I got lucky with my 28mm Color Skopar - not so lucky with my 21mm one.
True, I'm sure Cameraquest would inspect the NOS units prior to sale.
I thought it was, the going rate for these was about $100 a few years ago, I bought, and foolishly sold, a couple.
LLL makes a similar small finder for 35mm but not for 28mm, a WEISU clone.
My choice for this topic would be a CLE body, and a 28/2.8 Voigtlander. I'd love to use a Barnack with a small finder, the larger 28mm finders tend to negate the advantage of the small body...
Or I'd just pick up a 28/3.5 Nikkor for my SP.
