Voitlander R3M or used M6?

[Zodiac]

First off; Hello, my name is Zodiac, and I was happy to find this place. I thought I might be crazy thinking that I wanted to go back to shooting film. Turns out my photography jonez died once digital became the norm.

Started a thread on another site about it and it turns out I'm not alone. I was directed here.

Then a friend lent me his M6, and I dusted off an old Nikon FM2 and I started snapping again. I missed this.



So $ is tight, but I'll need a RF camera- one with a 1 to 1 VF. One that can shoot without batteries if necessary.

I've seen the R3M for $540 locally, and can go with an M6 on KEH or ebay for 1k to 1.4k - but I'm trying to keep some $ aside for a Canoscan F9000 too.

Thanks for any advice.

 

[stompyq]

What lenses are you using? BTW the M6 is not 1:1 VF

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Welcome!

All M Bessas are great cameras, and the mechanical (and metered) R3M is a tough machine with a bright 1:1 finder... Which lens or lenses would you use on it? If a 35, you could use the whole finder, or get the R2M for some space around 35 framelines...

Right now there's a Special Edition R2M below $600 at cameraquest... Both are great cameras... I have used several Bessas daily and traveling without any problem...

It all depends on the focal length you think you'll use the most...

Cheers,

Juan

 

[Phantomas]

I have both (altough it's an R3A version, not M) and if I was to choose I'd stick with M6 - it feels more solid and nicer to use. 1:1 viewfinder is nice, but not that important to me (since 40mm framelines are hard to see (that also means that 35mm guessoframing is even harder!)).
But of course there's a cost issue, in which case Bessa is a great camera.

 

[Austerby]

Can't go far wrong with either but they are different and you should try an R3M to compare to the M6 you have already used. Only then will you be able to make an informed decision on your preference for either.

On each camera get a feel for the shutter release and listen to the sound it makes, look through the viewfinder in different lighting conditions, check out the metering display, get a feel for adjusting shutter speeds, loading films etc. Think about the weight and the size and which lenses you will be using with it - be aware that the R3M viewfinder doesn't go wider than a 40mm but the M6 will show 28mm framelines.

 

[Jaime M]

Simple answer, M6.

 

[film nut]

Hello
I have an R3M with the Heliar classic 50/2 lens. I love the camera. It seems sturdy and the photo results are great. I also have a Bessa R with a 50/1.5 Nokton. Sometimes I wish I would have got the 40mm Nokton for the R3M. For the money, the R3M can't be beat for what you get.

Mike

 

[Zodiac]

What lenses are you using? BTW the M6 is not 1:1 VF

Yea, it's a 72 VF, but I really want a 1 to 1.

Currently using a 35 Voitlander lens. The "new" RF would preferably be suited for urban scape shooting. I figure a 40 lens would be nice for all around use on the RM3. Maybe a 50 too (?)

 

[elmer3.5]

M6

M6

Hi, M6 what a camera! Try also a ZI.

Bye

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

I think this is about building a system... One day you'll use two different bodies for wide and short tele lenses... As you have a 35, there are two options: get the camera for that lens and wider: R2 or R4, and in the future get a second body for longer, faster lenses... (This option leaves you without the 1:1, and this is what happened to me when I decided my first body...): now I have two T's and an R4M and an R3A for different lenses and films... The other option is getting the R3M now and enjoy the 1:1 finder you want, and use the 35 with the whole finder, and maybe in a near future -instead of a wider body- first get a longer portrait lens that works great on your R3M... I would take this second option, because the R3M is good for both kinds of lenses: a 35 and a 75/90, and you would feel complete with a single body...

Cheers,

Juan

 

[johannielscom]

If you insist on 1:1, the Bessa is your only choice, since the biggest Leica magnification is 0.92 in a Leica M3.

Alternative is the Zorki 4K, also a 1:1 viewfinder, but rather squinty. Fedka.com has them for sale as well, and he's in Brooklyn NYC, IIRC.

Please consider: If shooting urban landscapes is your goal, you will pretty quickly turn to zone focusing or hyper-focal focusing and the RF magnification matters less and less, unless shooting in low light.

The M6 is the nicer camera, better built and more solid. The 0.72 really is enough for urban landscape shooting.

 

[Zodiac]

I think this is about building a system... One day you'll use two different bodies for wide and short tele lenses... As you have a 35, there are two options: get the camera for that lens and wider: R2 or R4, and in the future get a second body for longer, faster lenses... (This option leaves you without the 1:1, and this is what happened to me when I decided my first body...): now I have two T's and an R4M and an R3A for different lenses and films... The other option is getting the R3M now and enjoy the 1:1 finder you want, and use the 35 with the whole finder, and maybe in a near future -instead of a wider body- first get a longer portrait lens that works great on your R3M... I would take this second option, because the R3M is good for both kinds of lenses: a 35 and a 75/90, and you would feel complete with a single body...

Cheers,

Juan

I like that 2nd option as well. Cheers

 

[Zodiac]

If you insist on 1:1, the Bessa is your only choice, since the biggest Leica magnification is 0.92 in a Leica M3.

Alternative is the Zorki 4K, also a 1:1 viewfinder, but rather squinty. Fedka.com has them for sale as well, and he's in Brooklyn NYC, IIRC.

Please consider: If shooting urban landscapes is your goal, you will pretty quickly turn to zone focusing or hyper-focal focusing and the RF magnification matters less and less, unless shooting in low light.

The M6 is the nicer camera, better built and more solid. The 0.72 really is enough for urban landscape shooting.

When I say urban scape, I didn't mean landscape. More incognito Winogrand style, people.

Thanks for the Fedka info too.

 

[coelacanth]

When I say urban scape, I didn't mean landscape. More incognito Winogrand style, people.

Thanks for the Fedka info too.

If you are referring to

Please consider: If shooting urban landscapes is your goal, you will pretty quickly turn to zone focusing or hyper-focal focusing and the RF magnification matters less and less, unless shooting in low light.

This still stands for people/street candids in metro area. You'll be surprised how often you want to shoot without aiming through viewfinder, and also be amazed how well it works.

If you are into candid/incognito shooting style, Leica M has a huge advantage: super quiet shutter. Bessa is a great camera (owned R3A, T), but the shutter sound is very "camera-like" and that makes your subjects aware of the shot. With M, I can easily shoot someone right next to me on street (hipshot style with zone focusing) and he'll never know the shot was taken.

So I'd recommend Leica M for your use. Consider M2 (if you are into 35/50/90) or M4/-P/-2 (if you want more framelines). You can get good user M2 for $600 or less. If you don't need built-in meter (also totally unnecessary if you shoot b/w for candids), it's as great as M6 if not better.

 

[baycrest]

As said the Bessa R3's is the only 1:1; if that's the critical factor then you can stop thinking about Leica.

On the other hand, if you use lenses wider than 40mm most of the time, then you're gonna have to get accustomed to using a finder most of the time. If that doesn't bother you, then continue to pursue the R3M.

Eventually, you'll get attracted by the lure of the M6, I'm sure. But in the meantime, the R3's will not disappoint, other than the somewhat louder shutter actuation, but if that bothers you, slap on a leather half case to deaden the sound a bit.

Oh, I almost forgot, I haven't noticed any reduction on focusing accuracy when using faster lenses on the R3 over the M6, due to its shorter rangefinder baseline, however, I'm not making large prints. Its worth a consideration if you shoot wide open and make larger prints.

Good luck with your choice!

 

[Brian Puccio]

Why are you spending all that money on a coolscan 9000 if you don't shoot medium format. A lower model would be cheaper (more film, more lenses or plane tickets) and would scan faster since you can run the entire roll through unattended. You don't even need the adapter.

Another anecdote for you, I and a R2A and sold it for an M6.

 

[Zodiac]

Why are you spending all that money on a coolscan 9000 if you don't shoot medium format. A lower model would be cheaper (more film, more lenses or plane tickets) and would scan faster since you can run the entire roll through unattended. You don't even need the adapter.

Another anecdote for you, I and a R2A and sold it for an M6.

It looked like a bargain, for around $230, and from all accounts does a good/fast job of scanning 35 negatives/slides. I was also considering an Epson 600/700

When you say running an entire roll through unattended, are you referring to a Plusteck, or a dedicated film/neg scanner?

 

[Brian Puccio]

Why are you spending all that money on a coolscan 9000 if you don't shoot medium format. A lower model would be cheaper (more film, more lenses or plane tickets) and would scan faster since you can run the entire roll through unattended. You don't even need the adapter.

Another anecdote for you, I and a R2A and sold it for an M6.

It looked like a bargain, for around $230, and from all accounts does a good/fast job of scanning 35 negatives/slides. I was also considering an Epson 600/700

When you say running an entire roll through unattended, are you referring to a Plusteck, or a dedicated film/neg scanner?

Wait, you can get a Coolscan 9000 for $230? I'll take ten. I'll PayPal you tonight. The cheapest I can find on eBay at the moment are $2500. But you cannot run a roll of 36 through it straight. You can do two strips of six at a time. The only reason I know of to buy a Coolscan 8000/9000 over the Coolscan 4000/5000 series is is you shoot medium format. The 4000/5000 models can only take 35mm (and APS, but don't bother with that) but it can run an entire roll straight through if you haven't cut it. All of the above Coolscan models are dedicated film/neg/pos scanners.

 

[Mcary]

Wait, you can get a Coolscan 9000 for $230? I'll take ten. I'll PayPal you tonight. The cheapest I can find on eBay at the moment are $2500. But you cannot run a roll of 36 through it straight. You can do two strips of six at a time. The only reason I know of to buy a Coolscan 8000/9000 over the Coolscan 4000/5000 series is is you shoot medium format. The 4000/5000 models can only take 35mm (and APS, but don't bother with that) but it can run an entire roll straight through if you haven't cut it. All of the above Coolscan models are dedicated film/neg/pos scanners.

He' not talking about a Nikon Coolscan 9000 he's talking about a Canon CanoScan 9000F


http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consu...anoscan_9000f?selectedName=DriversAndSoftware

 

[Krosya]

Simple answer, M6.

Not so fast! I dont think its THAT simple at all.

Having had both, I sold Leica M6 and have Bessa R3M.
Why? - Leica has several things that bug me - Curtain that can have pin holes or burnt, Terrible, to the point of being unusable flary VF patch - fix costs almost as much as used bessa. Bottom loading - Ok - you can get used to it, but it still is not as easy as a swing door. For the price of USED M6 you will get 2 NEW Bessas and for the price of CLA and flare fix - you can get another Bessa. IMO m6 is not all that. But if you HAVE TO HAVE Leica - well - get Leica.
Does Bessa have faults? Sure - louder shutter, smaller/shorter RF base (but you have 1:1 VF to compensate). BTW - Bessa is fairly solid made. I have had several Bessas - R, R2M, R3M and I never had any problems with them. Had 4 Leicas and 3 of them needed CLAs and repairs, while costing more than any Bessa to begin with.
YMMV.