What's the real diff between a Voigtlander and a Leica?

lifevicarious

Established
Local time
11:34 AM
Joined
Aug 26, 2006
Messages
64
I'm expecting some crazed responses here, but aside from build quality and shutter noise, is there a major difference in picture quality between the two? Let's say the difference between a R3A and a M7. Besides the sheer 'feel' of a Leica, what is the extra 3K going to get me?
 
Thanka back alley. That's pretty much what I thought. I know the glass is of hte utmost importance and I can alwasy put Leica glass on the Voigt!
 
focusing accuracy with long fast lenses might be a problem, too. The voigtländers rangefinders baselengths is smaller than that of a Leica M.

No problem for me, I'm cheap and use slower lenses 🙂
 
I have both. They both work well and whatever flaws in the output I'll attribute to pilot error. That said, the Bessa is a little more painful and time-consuming to load; I've missed a few shots in the heat of battle. Other than that and the stuff you've already mentioned, no real differences.
 
Thanks Socke and Ted.

I'm more interested in WA then long. Pretty much 35 or 40 only, and perhaps 75 but that would be rare.

As far as loading, that's good to know. Hadn't heard that before! Thanks!
 
As I was just saying in another thread, I think the Leica will outlast the Bessa in the long run. I have used and enjoyed shooting with both but am going to purchase a used M6 in favour of a brand new Bessa. I don't plan on doing a lot of buying and selling of gear and want something that will last my lifetime. I also own an M4 from 1970. It's older than I am and works absolutely perfectly. Only time will tell if the Bessas can equal that.
One thing in favour of the Bessas - I like the meter much better than the M6. It may take some getting used to but so far it's frustrating enough that I'll probably just shoot without batteries. (I was originally looking for a nice M4-P anyway, but the M6 kind of fell into my lap.)
 
photogdave said:
... One thing in favour of the Bessas - I like the meter much better than the M6. It may take some getting used to but so far it's frustrating enough that I'll probably just shoot without batteries. (I was originally looking for a nice M4-P anyway, but the M6 kind of fell into my lap.)
Could you elaborate a bit? I recently started using an M7 and have an R2 as a backup body. I'd be very interested to know what kind of differences in metering between the M6 and the Bessa you noticed / to watch out for.
 
As usual, this forum is so great, so responsive, and so helpful.

One final question though, I've never heard the shutter on a Voigtlander. I have heard the shutter on a Leica and love it. How much difference is there in the shutter sound? This is merelhy out of curiosity as the Voigtlander will be quiter, at least somewhat them my 5D anyway.

Thanks!
 
Leicas have a much quieter shutter. Build quality is second to none. My first real Leica was a very abused DS M3. That camera saw a lot of action before me and just wouldn't quit, no matter what I put it through. I doubt very highly that the Bessa would have lasted. BTW - that M3 is still going strong.
 
akptc said:
Could you elaborate a bit? I recently started using an M7 and have an R2 as a backup body. I'd be very interested to know what kind of differences in metering between the M6 and the Bessa you noticed / to watch out for.
The M7's meter is different from the M6. The M6 has left and right arrows but no centre dot. The arrows point in the opposite direction that the shutter dial turns. If only the left arrow is illuminated it indicates underexposure. The right indicates overexposure. Both is correct exposure.
Sounds easy but I find it a pain in the butt!
 
lifevicarious said:
It's quieter then a SLR though isn't it?

I would actually say no. I just fired off my DSLR and then my R3a. The SLR has a different type of sound, with different components, and is however many ms longer, but I can't say that in terms of overall volume, one is quieter than the other. The Leica, however, is quieter than both, definitely.
 
First off, you have to define what you mean by comparing Vogtlander to Leica. Do you means lenses, or just camera bodies?

Camera bodies:
The Leica is a precision bench fitted hand assembled camera body made in Germany on a low volume basis and is very well built. It retains its value very well, and if you keep it long enough will be worth more than what you paid for it, if historical precedent is considered. A Leica can be considered an investment as well as a photographic tool. It has a much better rangefinder (longer base) than the Voigtlander, and thus can more accurately focus longer focal length lenses.

The various Voigtlander rangefinder cameras are well built semi-mass produced cameras using some "off the shelf components" such as their Copal shutters, and have good performance, and great value for the money.

Leica lenses are just about the most expensive lenses one can buy for use with 35mm film. Are they the best? Maybe, but the new Zeiss Ikon, and Voigtlander lenses are not far behind, if not equal, and are much cheaper.
 
not much difference between them. they're both good tools. if you take lots of pics, the leica's shutter will need more servicing than the voigtlander's copal, but will ultimately last longer. from mr. gandy's warranty statistics, the bessas have a good track record. regarding discreetness, size matters most. volume is after the fact.
 
Back
Top Bottom