Voitlander R3M or used M6?

Krosya said:
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.
Click to expand...


Thanks, that's exactly what's pushing me over to Bessa. Now with all this talk about lens limitation, I find myself looking at the R4 again - but I think I lose the 1 to 1 VF.
 
If you want to shoot very wide lenses i.e. down to 21mm, then the R4 is the camera I think. I've never owned a Bessa, but I like the look of them a lot, if my Ikon got destroyed, I would certainly check out the R4A.

If you want to fondle cameras, Leica is where you will likely end up, if you want to take pictures, it does not matter all that much. All have faults, all have benefits. The more you spend on the body, the less you can spend on lenses, and the body is basically a light tight box, it's the lens that takes the picture.

Having said all that, I stare longingly at black paint MPs too.
 
Do you wear glasses? If so, the Leicas can be very problematic as far as seeing the widest frameline, which is usually the one you're interested in.. 28, 35mm.

For glasses wearers like me that like the 25 - 35mm range of lenses, Bessa R4 cameras provide excellent 'relief' around the framelines. I found the R4 to be perfect with a 28mm lens. And you get even more room around the 35mm framelines.

Another thought is to think about using the R2 body with a 40mm lens. Even if you can't easily see the 35mm framelines, the 40mm f.o.v. matches the entire viewfinder nicely for a glasses wearer.
 
And don't forget the Zeiss Ikon ZM camera. That viewfinder is SUPERB and provides more room around the framelines than Leica or Voigtlander.
 
Zodiac said:
Thanks, that's exactly what's pushing me over to Bessa. Now with all this talk about lens limitation, I find myself looking at the R4 again - but I think I lose the 1 to 1 VF.
Click to expand...

The great thing about your situation, is that no matter if you go with the R4 or the R3, any of them will be a wise move, and a powerful tool with a dedicated design, and you'll enjoy it a lot and keep it happily forever...

I got my R4M first because I got it with a 15 and that's what I couldn't do with my SLRs... You'll be able to use your 35 on any of them... To pick between R4 and R3, consider what you want more, and sooner: wider lenses, or longer lenses?

Cheers,

Juan
 
Zodiac said:
Thanks, that's exactly what's pushing me over to Bessa. Now with all this talk about lens limitation, I find myself looking at the R4 again - but I think I lose the 1 to 1 VF.
Click to expand...

Well, you can buy Bessa R3 and R4 for the price of Leica M6 ;)
 
Krosya said:
Well, you can buy Bessa R3 and R4 for the price of Leica M6 ;)
Click to expand...

Honestly that would be great!

You could use the 35 (great focal length) on both bodies...(One with cap) Even using the same Tri-X on both cameras, one could be dedicated to direct sun at 200 (short development), and the other one at 800 or 1600 for lower / soft light scenes (long development).

That would mean being ready for everything.

Cheers,

Juan
 
Juan Valdenebro said:
The great thing about your situation, is that no matter if you go with the R4 or the R3, any of them will be a wise move, and a powerful tool with a dedicated design, and you'll enjoy it a lot and keep it happily forever...

I got my R4M first because I got it with a 15 and that's what I couldn't do with my SLRs... You'll be able to use your 35 on any of them... To pick between R4 and R3, consider what you want more, and sooner: wider lenses, or longer lenses?

Cheers,

Juan
Click to expand...

I do have a Nikon FM2 which could be my long lens film rig, and a R4 could be my wide angle. But I really want the 1 to 1, so best I can do is play with them at the store and see what feels best.
 
If you play with both at a store, you won't get a clear idea:

As you won't be seeing through lenses, you won't see any benefit from the R4M... You'll just see through two very different finders: you'll prefer the longer base finder, and you'll buy the R3. But that's OK.

Cheers,

Juan
 
Zodiac said:
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.
Click to expand...

Strange that no one in this thread (unless I missed it) suggested Canon P, which even without waiting for a bargain, is a lot of camera for the current going price.

Or find a CLA'd Zorki 4.

If you can live without 1 to 1 which means that you can use wider than 50mm lens more comfortably, consider Leica M4-P. Basically M6 without the built in meter.
 
I've been shooting a R3A for about a year. While I loved the camera in many ways, I found certain faults with it that did not go away with time. Chief among these was the loud shutter, and the handling, which I found a little rough. The 1:1 viewfinder proved to be less of a draw in practice than in theory. I considered switching to a R2A (for the 35mm framelines), or to a Hexar RF (for the build quality, framelines, and some of the advanced features). This thought experiment produced a very helpful thread comparing the Bessas with the Hexar, where people shared their experiences with both cameras. It also helped me finally make up my mind about what to do.

I ended up purchasing a user M6, and I'm now going to sell the Bessa (along with my Mamiya 645E, and other assorted gear, in order to pay for it). I realized the Leica was what I really wanted, and that I was going to be running around in circles, buying different cameras, until I got it. This Leica fit the criteria I had developed through a year of shooting rangefinders: it is quiet, it handles perfectly (for me), it is 100% compatible with the lens I want to shoot. I find the framelines brighter than on the Bessa, and they do not disappear when I move my eye. I also find it slightly easier, and hence faster, to focus. It is a beautiful machine to use. It was also absurdly expensive for a 25 year-old manual camera, especially compared to what I paid for the Bessa, which does the exact same thing - on paper. But then, if we are going to paper race cameras, I would have been better off buying a digital compact than either the R3A or the M6.

I plan to write more comparing the two from my perspective, but so far I have found that I do not miss the 1:1 viewfinder from the R3A; the "cluttered" .72 framelines do not bother me; and I do not miss AE (which surprised me). I actually like the M6 meter quite a bit: it is predictable, and it forces me to think about my shots even more than the Bessa - which is part of why I turned to rangefinders in the first place.

In retrospect, one of the best bits of advice that I read here was this: get the Leica, because you will end up with one eventually. For me, this turned out to be true.

All this said, the Bessas are wonderful cameras, and you cannot go wrong with them. The people here who are speaking in their favour are experienced photographers and they know their stuff. But if you have a hankering to own a Leica in the back of your head, you may want to considering saving up the money and making the move sooner rather than later. The little voice inside your head will simply grow louder with time.
 
An M6 is a nice camera too...

But without back door loading, without 1/2000, and without AE, it's just a different tool compared to R3A...

Cheers,

Juan
 
Juan, that's an excellent way to look at them. For me, I'd rather use my Nikon F100 or DSLR for situations requiring advanced automation or fast shutter speeds - but that is just me. For someone new to the world of rangefinders, or someone looking for the particular features the cameras have, I'd be the first to recommend a Bessa.
 
I use SLRs and DSLRs too... But smaller RFs' size is why ZI, R2-3-4A, M7, CLE and Hexar RF exist... With a small lens they are so unobtrusive... A lot better than mirror cameras for street shooting...

Cheers,

Juan
 
shadowfox said:
Strange that no one in this thread (unless I missed it) suggested Canon P, which even without waiting for a bargain, is a lot of camera for the current going price.

Or find a CLA'd Zorki 4.

If you can live without 1 to 1 which means that you can use wider than 50mm lens more comfortably, consider Leica M4-P. Basically M6 without the built in meter.
Click to expand...


I have looked into that, but even though they're the "cheaper" Leica, they're still around 800 to 1200 for a good condition one (US).

Plus, I actually wouldn't mind having the meter when I want it.
 
rdeleskie said:
I've been shooting a R3A for about a year. While I loved the camera in many ways, I found certain faults with it that did not go away with time. Chief among these was the loud shutter, and the handling, which I found a little rough. The 1:1 viewfinder proved to be less of a draw in practice than in theory. I considered switching to a R2A (for the 35mm framelines), or to a Hexar RF (for the build quality, framelines, and some of the advanced features). This thought experiment produced a very helpful thread comparing the Bessas with the Hexar, where people shared their experiences with both cameras. It also helped me finally make up my mind about what to do.

I ended up purchasing a user M6, and I'm now going to sell the Bessa (along with my Mamiya 645E, and other assorted gear, in order to pay for it). I realized the Leica was what I really wanted, and that I was going to be running around in circles, buying different cameras, until I got it. This Leica fit the criteria I had developed through a year of shooting rangefinders: it is quiet, it handles perfectly (for me), it is 100% compatible with the lens I want to shoot. I find the framelines brighter than on the Bessa, and they do not disappear when I move my eye. I also find it slightly easier, and hence faster, to focus. It is a beautiful machine to use. It was also absurdly expensive for a 25 year-old manual camera, especially compared to what I paid for the Bessa, which does the exact same thing - on paper. But then, if we are going to paper race cameras, I would have been better off buying a digital compact than either the R3A or the M6.

I plan to write more comparing the two from my perspective, but so far I have found that I do not miss the 1:1 viewfinder from the R3A; the "cluttered" .72 framelines do not bother me; and I do not miss AE (which surprised me). I actually like the M6 meter quite a bit: it is predictable, and it forces me to think about my shots even more than the Bessa - which is part of why I turned to rangefinders in the first place.

In retrospect, one of the best bits of advice that I read here was this: get the Leica, because you will end up with one eventually. For me, this turned out to be true.

All this said, the Bessas are wonderful cameras, and you cannot go wrong with them. The people here who are speaking in their favour are experienced photographers and they know their stuff. But if you have a hankering to own a Leica in the back of your head, you may want to considering saving up the money and making the move sooner rather than later. The little voice inside your head will simply grow louder with time.
Click to expand...



Thanks, advice well taken.
 
Zodiac said:
I have looked into that, but even though they're the "cheaper" Leica, they're still around 800 to 1200 for a good condition one (US).

Plus, I actually wouldn't mind having the meter when I want it.
Click to expand...

Canon P in good working condition should be well below $400 if you wait for a while. I'm talking about ebay.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom