FrankS
Registered User
My Bessa R arrived in the mail yesterday, and now I know what all the fuss was about. I'm just a little late getting on the bandwagon.
I loaded it up with FP4 (all I had, would have prefered 400) and stuck my "new" Canon 50mm f1.8 on it and took it out to the local coffee house for the evening. I had to shoot @ 1/8 sec and f1.8 but I took lots of frames so some should be good.
It's a sweet little camera. It fits into the Nikon FG bottom case that I had my Leica IIIf in, so it's that small. The viewfinder is a revelation! Even wearing eyeglasses I can see the framelines well.
Since I got to this point later than most of you I had the chance to do a lot of reading on the net about people's experinces and impressions of the R. I think I was able to avoid the dissappointment felt by some who hoped the Bessa would be up to Leica's build standard. I read it all and therefore had lower expectations. I knew the camera had a lot of plastic etc. The older cameras like the Leica and Canon RF that I have are real, they are metal. The Bessa is somewhat of a retro-lookalike wannabe with it's molded plastic top plate, but one thing, the most important thing, is not just cosmetic. This camera has real capability, and that's the functional thing that cameras are (should be) all about. It's only those (myself included here) that enjoy the camera as an object itself, who would be dissappointed. I know the Bessa R is not an old Leica/Canon/Nikon/Contax, but that's okay. I love the functionality of this camera. I even like that there is plastic on it, because that material choice allows the camera to be as light as it is. (Titanium would also do the trick but I wouldn't be able to afford it.) With the old Canon 50mm f1.8, it slips into my coat pocket and almost disappears there because it is so light. And since the camera is just a light tight box holding the film and the lens, and it is the lens that is responsible for the image, the plastic does not matter. The great viewfinder, the built-in meter, and the great ergonomics of the rest of the camera are all functionally great. I am a bit of a traditionalist and I wish the camera had metal top/bottom plates (like the R2) but I am happy with the trade-off for weight and cost. When I want the sensual tactile experience of a classic camera I can use my older metal ones. Since I'm using the same vintage glass on all my RF cameras, the images will all look the same anyway. When my primary goal is to come away with the best pictures possible with minimal fuss, it's the Bessa R for me.
Sorry for the ramble, but whenever I get new photo gear, I do a lot of thinking about it, and I know better than to expect my wife to be interested in this sort of banter. I can only hope that some of you are.
I loaded it up with FP4 (all I had, would have prefered 400) and stuck my "new" Canon 50mm f1.8 on it and took it out to the local coffee house for the evening. I had to shoot @ 1/8 sec and f1.8 but I took lots of frames so some should be good.
It's a sweet little camera. It fits into the Nikon FG bottom case that I had my Leica IIIf in, so it's that small. The viewfinder is a revelation! Even wearing eyeglasses I can see the framelines well.
Since I got to this point later than most of you I had the chance to do a lot of reading on the net about people's experinces and impressions of the R. I think I was able to avoid the dissappointment felt by some who hoped the Bessa would be up to Leica's build standard. I read it all and therefore had lower expectations. I knew the camera had a lot of plastic etc. The older cameras like the Leica and Canon RF that I have are real, they are metal. The Bessa is somewhat of a retro-lookalike wannabe with it's molded plastic top plate, but one thing, the most important thing, is not just cosmetic. This camera has real capability, and that's the functional thing that cameras are (should be) all about. It's only those (myself included here) that enjoy the camera as an object itself, who would be dissappointed. I know the Bessa R is not an old Leica/Canon/Nikon/Contax, but that's okay. I love the functionality of this camera. I even like that there is plastic on it, because that material choice allows the camera to be as light as it is. (Titanium would also do the trick but I wouldn't be able to afford it.) With the old Canon 50mm f1.8, it slips into my coat pocket and almost disappears there because it is so light. And since the camera is just a light tight box holding the film and the lens, and it is the lens that is responsible for the image, the plastic does not matter. The great viewfinder, the built-in meter, and the great ergonomics of the rest of the camera are all functionally great. I am a bit of a traditionalist and I wish the camera had metal top/bottom plates (like the R2) but I am happy with the trade-off for weight and cost. When I want the sensual tactile experience of a classic camera I can use my older metal ones. Since I'm using the same vintage glass on all my RF cameras, the images will all look the same anyway. When my primary goal is to come away with the best pictures possible with minimal fuss, it's the Bessa R for me.
Sorry for the ramble, but whenever I get new photo gear, I do a lot of thinking about it, and I know better than to expect my wife to be interested in this sort of banter. I can only hope that some of you are.
