So what IS the verdict on the Bessa L?

[Koolzakukumba]

I'm quite keen on a Bessa L with the 25mm Skopar. I've read lots of nice things about the lenses but a whole load of conflicting stuff about the L body. Some people think it's the bee's knees while some others think it's a "worthless piece of plastic crap".

It's obviously been on the go a while now so has a concensus been arrived at or has dodgy quality control made that impossible.

If the L isn't up to much, is the R any better?

Any opinions would be gratefully received provided they shed some light on this vexing question.

Thanks,
Bruce

 

[laptoprob]

hi Bruce, I had a Bessa L some years ago when I got into rangefinder photography via the Heliar 15mm. It did not really feel sturdy to me, but used with care it should not be a problem. I sold it because the meter was not useful in combination with the 15mm. I went ahead with Russians.
Later I got a Leica M2 and started building an equipment set around that. Now it includes a CLE and a Bessa T. The Bessa T is a lot like the L (no finder, same meter etc) but feels more sturdy to me.
If you use the Bessa L - without rangefinder - with wideangles there is no problem with it. A simple and effective little leightweight machine. Just use it!

Rob.

 

[pvdhaar]

The Bessa-L is the proverbial light tight box to expose film. There's not a lot to go wrong with them, unless you throw them off a cliff or drive over them with your car..

The chassis has seen use in a plethora of cameras of other brands, (nikon-fm10 olympus-om2000 ricoh-kr5 and what not) whose names haven't been damaged from this oem so I'll hazard a guess that it's good enough for any normal purposes..

 

[chug]

The L is a good camera for wideangle lenses. Cheap as well 🙂 You can go and spend a lot of money on an MDa and have a nice flashy Leica.. But with an L you get a built in light meter and it only costs US$69 from Cameraquest.. Where can you go wrong?

 

[Koolzakukumba]

Thanks for the responses everyone. I'm not too bothered about the lightweight build of the Bessa L as I have a Minolta A2 digital-not exactly a heavyweight-and thinks it's great. It was more to do with the stories of light leaks, rangefinders in need of recalibration, shutters jamming, etc. A reliable light-tight box with a good lens on the front will do me nicely.

On a slightly different note, I used to have a Leica M2 and M3 and have to say that the results from the Minolta A2 beat the pants off scanned negatives from those cameras or prime Nikkor lenses. A nice scanned 6x9 negative from my Mamiya Press is too good for the A2, though. The reason for the Bessa L and 25mm is to give me a wider lens than the 28mm equivalent on the A2. I might yet go for the Bessa and the 21mm instead.

Bruce

 

[pvdhaar]

The CV 25/4 is a gem for a modest price. It's capable of handling a startling amount of contrast in a scene... The scan below doesn't do it justice, but this was about the harshest you can get and still it held up wonderfully..

 

[rich815]

I have one (a 107 SW actually) with a 15mm permanently on it. I find it perfect. Not the greatest build but I find it has a great feel. It's use will be perfect for what you want. And you simply cannot beat the price. As for the meter I find it works fine if one takes into account using this type of meter with a wide angle lens, the "issues" that can potentionally cause, and accomodating for such.

 

[kuvvy]

Just sold my L today. Not that it wasn't good, just not for me. The next to go is the CV 25mm/f4. That lens I do like, in fact all the CV lenses as many here will bear out are great performers and goo value too.

Paul

 

[Bertram2]

. Some people think it's the bee's knees while some others think it's a "worthless piece of plastic crap".
Bruce

Well, I belong to the "bee's.knees" fraction. It's reliable and nothing broke since I bought it 2 years ago tho it is my most used combo with a 4/25.

If you heard any idiot say it is a "worthless piece of plastic crap" it must have been one of those BMWs = "big-mouthed-he-man-wallets" belonging to the well known "all-talk-no-photo" club. Maybe he has seen that it is offered for $69 at Cameraquest and thought it cannot be good because he pays that money normally for a normal rear cap. 😀

For those who take it to shoot pics th L is a very nice and fast camera, those who use cameras as hammers too should buy another one.
Regards,
Bertram

 

[sockeyed]

I love my Bessa L, which is paired with a 25/4. It is a lot of fun to use and does exactly what it is supposed to do, and the construction is just fine. I love throwing in my backpack for a day's hiking, or wandering the city snapping street photos.

The 25/4 is a stellar lens which gives even better results than my Canon FD 24/2.8 (although it's a stop slower).

 

[nihraguk]

I'm very happy with my Bessa L + 21/4 combo. The camera body is lightweight but sturdy enough for my normal usage -- which consists of leaving the camera in a bag while not taking photographs -- and the lens is just excellent. This shot speaks for itself I think; I suspect the scanner (a Canon 9900F or something like that; wasn't mine) did not have enough resolution to do the negative justice.

The depth-of-focus of the superwides and ultrawides also means that the rangefinder is really rarely needed. I had my doubts when I first heard this claim; but I've taken many shots without remembering to set the focus correctly.... and most of them come out in focus anyway! DOF is great enough that zone focus is sufficient for most purposes.

The only gripe I have with the whole Bessa L concept is that the beautiful viewfinder sits on top of the camera unprotected. I wish the viewfinder came with a little 'hood' or pouch that I could envelope it in for protection from the other elements in my bag.

 

[Goodyear]

The L makes the perfect rear lens cap for my 21.

You won't look back - seriously.

 

[David S]

It ought to be slow and cumbersome, but it isn't. Click stop focussing on the 25/4 is really helpful and you can rely on the meter. I use a 15/4 and a 90mm Elmar on mine for landscape work and the results are excellent.

 

[dominicLF]

It ought to be slow and cumbersome, but it isn't. Click stop focussing on the 25/4 is really helpful and you can rely on the meter. I use a 15/4 and a 90mm Elmar on mine for landscape work and the results are excellent.

How in the world do you focus a 90mm Elmar on your L??

I just read this thread for the first time and was supprised to read about a metering issue with the 15mm. What exactly is the issue? Is the rear element too close to the light cell? How exactly would one compensate for that?

 

[Doug]

How in the world do you focus a 90mm Elmar on your L??

Most lenses including the Elmar have a distance scale engraved on the lens; just estimate or measure the subject distance and set the lens by the scale. Innumerable folding cameras of the past had no rangefinders, yet featured lenses around 100mm that had to be focused by the distance scale. If done well this stands up to considerable enlarging. Stopping down helps, and for David's distant scenery it's even easier to get sharp focus.

I just read this thread for the first time and was supprised to read about a metering issue with the 15mm. What exactly is the issue? Is the rear element too close to the light cell? How exactly would one compensate for that?

The 15mm is so wide it often includes considerable bright sky, perhaps even the sun or other light sources that fool the meter into underexposure. It's tricky, and good to keep in mind. With the 15mm I often meter from some nearby representative objects or just use a hand-held incident meter instead. Keeping "sunny 16" rules in mind helps assess how reaonsonable are the meter's readings.

 

[Roman]

Well, no news from me, but let me chime in in the chorus: the Bessa L and the 25/4 SnapshotSkopar are a match made in heaven; very compact, lightweight and practical.
That said, compared to a Bessa R, the L does indeed feel a bit cheap and plasticky (with the L, it is very obviuos that it is a plastic camera, with the R you would never notice - but maybe the reason is tha my L came in cheesy silver paint, and the R in elegant black 😉 )
But since there is not a lot that can go wrong (no RF), I have no doubt that the L is reliable.
The wind-lever/shutter-lock combo on the L is a mixed blessing - on the one hand, it prevents the camera from emptying your batteries when carried in your bag w/ a soft-release (happened to me in Barcelona with my R), on the other hand I hate cameras where the wind lever has to stick out for shooting (I'm left-eyed).

Roman

 

[chug]

Ive got CV 15mm lens on my L, works wonders 🙂 I prefer to have one lens on one camera so I dont have to keep changing lenses all the time. So the L and 15 are married and will not part 🙂

 

[laptoprob]

Protecting the separate viewfinders on a L or a T is not that difficult. I aways carry my T in a neverready case purpose made for the L and the T: with a bump for the viewfinder. It even looks quite elegant.
If you pay attention to Ebay, they come across every now and then for about 1 or 2 euros. The shipping is about all you pay!
Even a Leica M with a viewfinder fits in!
Soon I will have two of those cases.

Rob.

 

[David S]

How in the world do you focus a 90mm Elmar on your L??

?

Good old fashioned estimation, which is what I always had to do when I started taking pictures!

Seriously, I only use it for landscapes, so mostly it's being used at infinity, and by using hyperfocal scales I get useful depth of field, so it's not as clever as it sounds!

David

 

[Fred]

Bottom line:

- Lightweight and has a shed full of available shutter speeds (more than a Leica M anyway)

- Used with wide angle lensed you get a bigger depth of field at modest f stops

- External CV VFs are very bright and for any slight distance work with Wide angle lenes parallax should not be a big issue. Oh and can definitely recommend the CV15 f4 although finder distorts a tad, lens if fine.

- Should you change or complement your L body all your lenses are still going to fit other RFs'

OK, just go for it and enjoy taking photos.