Which way bessa? M or LTM? And what about macro?

Yesterday I spent almost the whole evening procrastinating and reading many threads on RFF. And thus came another doubt or rather idea into my mind - in the way of how to start building a small RF set. You see, my income is not growing as quickly as my family does (which I do not grudge, of course :) ), so I have to be quite patient with every next purchase.

In your opinion - is it more sensible to start adding decent (e.g. CV or old Leica) lenses to FSU body that I already own and leave a decent body as a next purchase after one has acuired at least one decent lens - OR is there more reason in purchasing first a good body and then slowly to add few lenses?
 
andreios said:
(...)- is it more sensible to start adding decent (e.g. CV or old Leica) lenses to FSU body that I already own and leave a decent body as a next purchase after one has acuired at least one decent lens - OR is there more reason in purchasing first a good body and then slowly to add few lenses?
Click to expand...

What is "decent" in this context?

Which lenses do you have with your FSU camera?

I think, FSU lenses (and even bodies) are underestimated.

(OT: Some members here are impertinent enough to call them "crap", but believe me: that's an arrogance which is typical for social climbers -- I hope, you don't want to belong to this group?)


But, if you want to have TTL-metering: stay with the FSU lenses, and replace your camera / add a second body.
 
I have recently acquired a Zorki 6 (so it seems) with Jupiter 8, but neither is in very good condition. I do not think they are crap when they are put to perfect working order.
And my intention was to step up a bit - not in the eyes of anybody - just that I don't want to buy the same stuff risking the poor quality of that certain piece again - and I'd rather invest a bit more into something that seem to me more reliable - I was looking at some CV lenses (and bodies also, of course)... (I agree with the quote of Tomas Bata - we are not poor enough to be able to afford cheap stuff..)
 
No macro. A SLR is the best way to go for that. Whether to go to an M or LTM mount depends on what focal lengths you want to shoot. An Elmar C or it's Rokkor twin is an excellent 90mm lens for a cheap price. You can't really find an LTM equivalent. For 35mm and 50mm, the LTM versions of the Leica Summicron and Summaron lenses are as good as anything in M mount. W/ old lenses the sample variations are all over the place, so I have found it necessary to buy a particular focal length several times to get a good one. The LTM 50 collapsible Summicron I have now is as sharp as a Rigid. The ones before it weren't that good.

Really, the big question is whether a rangefinder suits you vs an SLR. I find myself using my Leicaflex more and more because I just enjoy seeing the shot come into focus in the viewfinder, and it's lenses are excellent, especially the 90 Elmarit. So you might want to get an inexpensive Bessa R and use your Russian lenses on it and see how it goes before committing a lot of time and money into the system.
 
It is settled, only a while ago I've picked up an olive R2. Already lookin forward to run the first roll through it - hopefully during this weekend.. Thanks everyone for help..
 
radi(c)al_cam said:
I think, FSU lenses (and even bodies) are underestimated.
Click to expand...

They are simultaneously under- and overrated.

Some are very good. The fact that they are 80-year-old designs does not mean they are worthless: just that they are very different (most notably, less sharp) than many more modern designs.

But equally it is foolishness in the extreme to denigrate modern lenses because the old Soviet lenses are 'just as good' in every way. If they were, no-one would buy anything else.

(I know you're not doing this, but FSU lenses do have some fans whose praises go beyond the bounds of the credible).

Cheers,

R.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom