R3M or R4M:

[paulfish4570]

I am considering my first new camera purchase in more than 30 years, because I learned today on another thread that the later R series Bessas take Nikon corrective viewfinder diopters.

I probably am jumping the gun a bit because spring is the earliest I might be able to buy.

I had a Bessa R and loved it but it was TOO light; and hand tremors and lessened fine motor skills caused by a neuropathy had me torquing almost every shot. In addition, I had to use reading glasses to properly focus.

Tremors are substantially reduced now, thanks to new medication, and I have been able to shoot my most-excellent FED-2 down to 1/30 and still get better-than-passable photos.

So, I ask: what say the Bessa owners?

 

[paulfish4570]

I reckon I should add R2M to the request for advice ...

 

[Bingley]

Hi Paul -- I had a Bessa R and currently have an R3A. The R3A is heavier and has a more substantial feel to it than the R, although it's not a great difference in weight IMO. But you might notice it nevertheless. I assume the R4* weighs about the same. The R3A is not a heavy camera by any means, though; it's still lighter in weight than an M2 or Canon P.

The vf on the R3* is great, as is the metering. If you're buying new, the Bessa R3* or R4* are good value for the $$$.

 

[rbsinto]

If the weight of the camera is your only concern, it would be easy to have a machine shop make you a metal bottom plate (1/8"-1/4" thick aluminum would probably be suitable) that attaches with a countersunk 1/4" screw into the cameras tripod socket. If the plate had an approproriately drilled & tapped tripod socket and larger hole centered over the rewind button, you'd be all set.
I hope this information is helpful.

 

[mrbrown]

I have both the R3M and the R4M. They are not very heavy cameras and neither are they as light as the Bessa R. I use the CV Trigger Winder with them and I like the additional heft and grip it provides.

As for which R, it depends on whether you want to shoot wide or not. The R4M/A has fantastic framelines for 21, 25 and 28mm lenses while the R3M/A sports the 1:1 viewfinder that works great with 40mm and 50mm lenses.

I usually have a 28mm on my R4M and a 40mm on my R3M.

 

[Keith]

You don't appear to be a compulsive wide shooter Paul and the R4* is a dedicated body for lenses wider than 35mm and not a lot of fun out of that range IMO.

I vote R3M. 😀

 

[thegman]

I think if I wanted to add weight to a camera, rather than have a custom machined part made, I'd just buy the optional hand grip. I don't own a Bessa but I think they look like good cameras, and quite attractive in the black paint which the *M models are coated.

 

[Leigh Youdale]

Paul, the M6 is substantially heavier than the R series Bessas but at a cost of course. But it is steadier to hold. I often shoot 25 or 21 focal lengths so having the R4A is good, although it's possible to manage with an accessory 21/25 viewfinder on the M6 or R3A. However the accessory VF is nowhere near as good as the VF in the camera body itself.
In your situation I'd be inclined to look at the R2A model but I'd want to handle one first to see if the framelines for 35 were useable. I prefer the "A" models because I have the option of using AE (mostly) or Manual. The 40 frames in the R3A body have given some eyeglass wearers a problem.
And yes, the Nikon diopter lenses just screw into the eyepiece, but the same items are now also sold as a Voigtlander accessory. I think Stephen Gandy has them listed under RD-1 accessories but maybe an email to him would clarify the situation.

 

[tofagerl]

If you want a steadier camera, I actually recommend building a small contraption made of a screw to fit in the 1/4" mount, fishing line and a washer. Screw the screw in the camera, use JUST enough fishing line to fit your height, and stand on the washer which is tied to the other end of the fishing line. That way it works kind of like a monopod cause you can't lift the camera higher than the length of the line.
Works fantastically for me, I rarely even use a tripod anymore for outdoor use.

 

[paulfish4570]

thanks for all of the info and advice, guys. i'm leaning toward the R3M because of the 1:1 viewfinder and "normal" frame lines. the grip looks like it would be a nice addition.

now then, which m-mount lens? i am disposed, just going by what i can read and see on the 'net, to go with a cv lens. the 40 looks like it might be a little too small. the idea of a heliar or nokton 50 is intriguing. you guys have seen what i shoot in black and white. what might be best?
shooting for .te winter or early spring ...

 

[Bingley]

I think the 50/1.5 Nokton would be a great choice for you. It's a terrific optic, very sharp, and gives you great low light options. If the CV 40 is too small for you, the 50 Nokton should work just fine, since it a little on the large size (which is why I sold mine).

As an alternative, the Canon 50/1.4 would be a good choice as well for an all 'rounder w/ some heft.

Either lens in good condition should be affordable these days.

 

[Tompas]

(...) now then, which m-mount lens? (...)

I can recommend the Konica M-Hexanon 2/50; mine is excellent.

Or the Summicron-C 2/40; also very nice. But I prefer to use the Summicron-C on my R2m with the 35mm framelines -- the 40mm frame on my R3a is just "too tight" for me.

Both lenses should not be very expensive, IIRC I paid less than 200€. In any case, you're unlikely to find a less expensive Leica lens than the Summicron-C.

 

[paulfish4570]

i did a little arithmetic on weights:
R3M body, 430 g; heliar 50/2, 191 g for a total of 621g.
R3M; 40/1.4 Nokton, 175 g for a total of 605 g.
FED-2 with I-26 aboard, total of 586 g.

i shoot the FED right well. going by weight, an R3M plus either cv lens, weighs a little more, which is a good thing for stability ...