Voigtlander Purchase=Good Deal?

[Bingley]

That's a good deal and you should go for it. I bought an R3A (used) earlier this year, mainly to use for reception candids (w/ a Rokkor-M 40) at a wedding I shot in October. I wound up using the R3A/40 combination for nearly the whole thing, and it performed like a champ. It did have rf alignment problems, but I had the camera CLA'd and the rf patch is now fine.

The metering system (including AE) on the R3A is outstanding. Makes shooting vintage 50 lenses w/ it a joy.

 

[brachal]

I wonder how many Bessa R series rangefinders will still be working in 56 years, or repairable then. I would not bet a penny on many of them lasting 95% as long as that.

How much film will you be able to buy 56 years from now? By 2066 I'm fairly sure we'll just be uploading images directly to the matrix from our corneal implants. It'll be fast and efficient, but the bokeh will be dreadful. 😉

I've used a Bessa-R (earlier and not as well built as the R3) for the last 5 years under all kinds of conditions, and it's never let me down. It's not as heavy or solid as a Leica or an old Nikkormat, but it's a usable, reliable camera. I fully expect mine to last as long as film does.

 

[Roger Hicks]

"I wonder how many Bessa R series rangefinders will still be working in 56 years, or repairable then. I would not bet a penny on many of them lasting 95% as long as that."

Who cares? How many folks here are really going to keep the same camera for five years, much less 50 years? I just don't understand this common statement.

Most of the sane film users, I'd have thought, once they've bought a decent camera. My oldest Leica (IIIa) was bought around 40 years ago; my oldest M (M2) was bought well over 30 years ago; my oldest bought-new M (M4-P), just under 30 years ago. My most recent mechanical M (MP) must be 5 years old already.

Not just Ms, either. I still use a couple of Nikon Fs I bought in the 70s, and come to think of it, my D70 must be half a decade old. And if my M9 isn't still working in 5 years, or 10, or more, I'll not be happy.

As long as a camera does what I want, the only reason to replace it is because (a) the newer camera does something different or better and (b) I can afford it (preferably justifying it on the business).


Cheers,

R.

 

[George9]

How many folks here are really going to keep the same camera for five years,

Most of the sane film users, I'd have thought,
Cheers,

R.

Think again Roger.
You might not fit in here with the rest of us gasbag gear heads, as most of us change gear pretty frequently.

Of my 20 odd cameras I guess the one I've had for the longest time is about 4 years.

I'm not alone in this category.

(I am sane.)




edit. I used a Bessa R for a couple of years and was very pleased with it. No complaints.




...

 

[Roger Hicks]

Think again Roger.
You might not fit in here with the rest of us gasbag gear heads, as most of us change gear pretty frequently.

Of my 20 odd cameras I guess the one I've had for the longest time is about 4 years.

I'm not alone in this category.

(I am sane.)

edit. I used a Bessa R for a couple of years and was very pleased with it. No complaints.

...

Dear George,

Why do you change cameras so often?

My perspective is indeed unusual in that (a) I earn a good part of my living with my cameras, so the picture is more important than the camera and (b) I get to try most of the new gear that I want to try -- and quite honestly, the latter can stand in the way of getting good pictures, because it's always easier to use a camera with which you are familiar.

Thus, for example, while the ZI is an excellent camera, and one I might well recommend to many people over many unmetered Leicas to anyone who didn't have an RF, there'd be no reason to get rid of my MP or even R2 and replace them with a ZI. Periodically there is something so good I can't ignore it (hence MP alongside M4P and all the digi Ms to date -- I think it'll stop at the M9) but basically I'd rather have cameras I can use and spend the rest of the money on travel.

Then again, it seems to me that quite a lot of the people I know keep their cameras a long time, once they've seen the wisdom of buying a first-rate camera and using it rather than (basically) buying the same second- or third-rank camera again and again. It costs more in the short term but it's a lot cheaper in the long run. And, I find, more enjoyable.

Cheers,

R.