R4M/R4A and 50mm lenses

[JRG]

Just received a Bessa R4M (which I'll probably have to sell, durnit!). The VF is excellent, but I'm really surprised by the 50mm framelines. I'd read several threads here before, for example this one:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=61689

which led me to believe the 50mm lines would be near unusable. Gosh, to my aged and bespectacled eyes, the R4M 50mm lines are nowhere near that.

I just spent some time pointing the R4M and an M4 at various targets. The R4M's 50mm lines fall around halfway between the M4's 50mm and 90mm lines --- exactly where the 75mm lines would be on the M4, if it had them. I had expected far worse --- more like the 135mm lines on an M4.

So, has anyone experienced actual focussing errors with an R4x and, say, a 50 f/2 wide open?

 

[peter_n]

I tried a rigid Summicron on my R4A (which I too have since sold) and didn't have any problems focusing it wide-open that I can recall. But I had bought the camera for my 24mm & 28mm lenses so it was only an experiment. I wouldn't use the R4 as a single body unless I was using super-wides very heavily. Great camera though, although I bet these new Summilux super-wides from Leica will block quite a bit of the VF.

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

Focusing 50's wide open is no problem for me on the R4A. The framelines are perfectly fine, and the patch is still the same size, after all. I only run into trouble when shooting with the J-9.

 

[JRG]

"the patch is still the same size, after all"

Yes, but there's the EBL problem, which is more than the size of the patch, no?

The Leica CL has EBL=18.9mm, and that was (apparently) good enough for a 40mm f/2. The R4x has EBL=19.25mm, effectively the same as the CL. So, is 19.25 short enough to cause focussing errors with a 50 f/2 wide open?

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

Yes, but there's the EBL problem, which is more than the size of the patch, no?

Yeah, that's the one thing I'd change on the Bessas if I could, a longer EBL. Nevertheless, my luck with the Heliar Classic wide open has been good.

 

[JRG]

I found with my R4A it was less the EBL and more the size of the 50mm frame lines ... it wasn't that hard to focus at f2 but the small frame lines for 50mm aren't great and it caused me to get an R3A to go with the 4A!

A matter of taste, I guess. 😀

Like I said, the R4 50mm lines look just about like 75mm lines on an M4 (if it had them), and I don't hear much complaining about the 90mm lines on the M4 (let alone 75mm).

 

[JRG]

True ... but if you're an habitual 50mm shooter like I am it soon becomes a compromise. Anyway ... everyone knows that the M3 is the best 50mm focal length camera ever made ... I read it here! 😛

Yeah, I guess that if I used a 50mm regularly, it'd be on my M3. But a mix of 35/75 seems to fit best about 90% of the time, so the M3 rarely gets used.

 

[Sam N]

True ... but if you're an habitual 50mm shooter like I am it soon becomes a compromise. Anyway ... everyone knows that the M3 is the best 50mm focal length camera ever made ... I read it here! 😛

Don't you mean R3a? 😛
At least if you like shooting with both eyes open.

 

[kxl]

My 50's are typically mounted on my R3A. In a pinch, I can and have used the 50 on my R4A; it is usable, but just barely and only for distant subjects... if you plan to use an R4A mounted 50 at minimum distances wide open, then you are a better RF man than I.

 

[JRG]

"if you plan to use an R4A mounted 50 at minimum distances wide open, then you are a better RF man than I."

I doubt that I am! 🙂

But my point remains: The 50 framelines on an R4x are just the size of 75mm frames on an M4 (if it had them). I don't hear griping about using a 90mm lens on an M4, let alone a 75 (at the same magnification). From all the talk, I expected the 50mm lines in the R4M to look like 135mm lines in an M4; they're a long way from that.