Who Prefers Their Bessa to (fill in the blank)?

[back alley]

i loved the r4a...if i were ever to consider shooting film again i would get another in a new york minute!

 

[mretina]

I have L, R, T, R2, R2S, R3M even Bessaflex. Cannot say that they provide the feel of handling Ig, Canon P/7, IIIf, M2/3, Nikon S2, M5, Spotmatic to compare to other cameras I have.
They are a bit plasticky, noisy and quite delicate.
But individually they are the cameras that I shoot most rolls with, as they are an easier hiking or travel companion, than their respective originals. They are light. pocketable. easy to load. Draw less attention. Accurate metering. I also find them beautiful.

But they are clever and smart cameras with nice accessories. The T for example is one of the best rangefinder for focusing, the R is arguably the best camera to shoot LTM, L plus 15mm is a unique combo. R2/R2S are lighter than any available M/S mount and fit in my coat pocket. R3M is a bit bulkier but is very slick.

This morning I was skiing with Bessa R2, Zeiss 25/2.8 Heliar 50/2 they all fit in a very small sking backpack and were very light.

In summary: if i travel, hike, ski, take a camera with me when my main objective is else, I most likely carry a Bessa "clone" and a point & shoot. If I go out shooting as main objective, then it is probably the "original".

(As a result I am more often in nicer places/unexpected events with the Bessas and take better pictures)

 

[thegman]

I've had ZI, Leica IIf, M3, M6, and MP, and currently use a Bessa R3M. It does not have the grandiose qualities of the Leicas, but ultimately I prefer using it. The Leica is a beautiful machine, but the Bessa I find easier, even just having a film window to see what is loaded is a little thing I wouldn't want to do without.

 

[JChrome]

I loved my Bessa R4M and 21mm viewfinder. It was mated to a Zeiss 21mm 2.8 lens and they were a match made in heaven.

On a different note with Voigtlander, I'll never understand why the Bessa III is more expensive than the Fuji GF670, even though it's just a re-branded camera. Maybe Fuji just required that Voigtlander not under-cut them. Unsure. But it definitely doesn't fit with Voitlander's theme of "reasonably priced".

 

[Pioneer]

I loved my Bessa R4M and 21mm viewfinder. It was mated to a Zeiss 21mm 2.8 lens and they were a match made in heaven.

On a different note with Voigtlander, I'll never understand why the Bessa III is more expensive than the Fuji GF670, even though it's just a re-branded camera. Maybe Fuji just required that Voigtlander not under-cut them. Unsure. But it definitely doesn't fit with Voitlander's theme of "reasonably priced".

I actually think that the Fuji GF670 was the "rebrand" not the other way around. Fuji agreed up front to purchase 5,000 units from Cosina and that may have been what got the whole project started.

Besides, for what you are getting I think that the price is actually pretty decent. Just think for a moment what that low production camera would have cost if it would have been built by Leica?

🙄

 

[f16sunshine]

I actually think that the Fuji GF670 was the "rebrand" not the other way around. Fuji agreed up front to purchase 5,000 units from Cosina and that may have been what got the whole project started.

Besides, for what you are getting I think that the price is actually pretty decent. Just think for a moment what that low production camera would have cost if it would have been built by Leica?

🙄

I like my GF670 over any other RF camera I have owned.
Regardless of which badge... it's a sweet machine.

 

[JChrome]

Fair enough. I suppose for a "new camera" it's decently priced. And if Leica were to build one, it would be outrageous. But of course I would want them to build one all the same. If only they had gotten in on the Medium Format rangefinder game...

I suppose when you compare the Bessa III to its competitors - Mamita 7 and Fuji 690 then it's price looks too much. But that's comparing used cameras to a new ones.

 

[ray*j*gun]

I like my Bessa T quite a bit but I never get the solid feel from it (nor did I from my R2s) that I get from my M's. I really like the light weight and the metering on it however and it has not let me down.... AND its the least expensive way to get into M lenses etc.

 

[rbiemer]

The Bessa R is the camera I keep coming back to. I have owned one or 2 (or 20🙂) other cameras over the years I've been here and they have not really impressed me.
I did have an M4 briefly. And I did like it pretty well. But when I need to raise some cash, I sold it with no regrets.
I do miss the R2a I owned and will probably replace that one. Which will not replace but compliment my R.
Rob

 

[Chrisrw]

I have very limited experience with cameras. My first modern RF was a Bessa R2. I haven't handled any of the other CV bodies. I lusted after a Leica and eventually sold it after buying an M5. I absolutely loved that camera, but it was a bit large and heavy to carry around. But the solidness and smoothness of its build and function was superb and a real pleasure to use. I missed the R2, but I then lusted after an M4-P ( I've handled Leicas in stores but never used one) and would have gotten one here had it not sold before I was able to finalize the sale of the M5. I probably would have waited for another M4-P to show up, but I found a new R2 on Cameraquest. I missed the lightness of the R2. The size and grip are perfect for my hands. I can carry it on a wrist strap all day and still fit it in a large coat pocket if needed. 1/2 the cost of the used Leicas I was eyeing.But if money weren't an issue, I probably would have bi-passed all of them and gone straight to the M9 and/or M7. But I really love the R2 and don't bother looking at used Leicas anymore. I am sure some day in the future if I can afford one, it would be fun to own one again.

 

[noimmunity]

When shooting a 28, 24/25, or 18/21, the R4* is a real pleasure, and I prefer it to the other options. The T was great, too, in a different way, but since I could only keep one, it had to be the R4A.

I had an R3A and loved that too, but needed the funds to buy a ZI.

I have been reading all kinds of threads on how wonderful Leica Ms are, how wonderful Leica LTMs are, how wonderful Zeiss Ikons are, etc, etc, etc. I have even contributed from time to time.

There have to be a few people out there who recognize good value for their dollar. People who do not feel they must spend multiple thousands for a big brand camera. Those who believe that a horizontal, cloth, focal plane shutter is less important than a good photograph. Those who are not suddenly afflicted with camera envy at the site of a celebrity with a camera around his/her neck. Those who still enjoy rangefinder photography even if their income doesn't resemble that of a sports star.

How many of you actually prefer working with your Bessa rangefinder, no matter what the lens mount?

 

[jonmanjiro]

This is a little monkeywrench tossed in whimsy, Pioneer. Apologies + wink.

How many of us like our camera-manufactured-by-Cosina-but-not-a-Bessa in a similar way? Isn't preferring a ZM Ikon to an M7 another way of expressing Bessaffection? (Although my ZM went back home to jonmanjiro, I did enjoy my time with it a lot. And I still very much enjoy my "Fuji GF670" although I might prefer it in black (and still manufactured) as a Voigtlander Bessa III).

Completely agree! The Zeiss Ikon is definitely the best Bessa (and an M7 killer IMO). I'm glad to have mine back and won't be selling it again 🙂

 

[Katie]

I've had both the R4A and R3A. I loved loved the R4a with a 21 lens .... THE BEST. Easy to use, framelines built in - fabulous. I got the R3A and used it with a 35mm and loved it too, but found myself with too many camera bodies... Sold both and deeply regret it now. Trying currently to get an R2A to use with my 35 and 50 (and 21 with VF). Great cameras. Highly recommend. 🙂

 

[Pioneer]

Completely agree! The Zeiss Ikon is definitely the best Bessa (and an M7 killer IMO). I'm glad to have mine back and won't be selling it again 🙂

I do love mine and I sold my M7 and haven't looked back. But the M7 is still being built while the ZI is now discontinued. I wish Zeiss would have stayed with it but I don't think that the entire rangefinder market was large enough for Leica and Zeiss.

I think the only reason the Bessa rangefinder has thrived so far is its unique position. It is a low priced, high value, alternative. And while the ZI was playing the game in Leica's court, Voigtlander has played the game in their own way, in an arena that Leica is not interested in.

That is why I wanted to hear other people's perceptions. There is no doubt that the Bessa is not a Leica. They are not even trying to play in that court. But Cosina Voigtlander has produced some rangefinders that provide high value for the dollar spent.

Some have used them as entry level rangefinders to test the waters before they venture all the way in with a Leica.

Others have decided that the Bessa rangefinder is really the best option for them and stay with it long term.

Still others would like to own a Leica but know they cannot afford one yet, so they are happy with their Bessas in the interim.

Finally there are those who do shoot Leica, but keep their Bessa around because it adds an alternative and unique option to the mix.

 

[traveler_101]

I like my Bessa T quite a bit but I never get the solid feel from it (nor did I from my R2s) that I get from my M's. I really like the light weight and the metering on it however and it has not let me down.... AND its the least expensive way to get into M lenses etc.

I have a Bessa T also -- my first rangefinder camera and somewhat neglected for a while when I went backward (in time and features) to pick up a IIIf. Same response: the Bessa lacks the "solid feel" of the IIIf, but it is an easier camera to use and it takes M lenses 🙂 Plus I am willing it to take it anywhere.

Thinking now of picking up a Bessa L to moor my 15mm.

Looking for another 35mm lens for my T. Will start a thread now on that.

. . .
I think the only reason the Bessa rangefinder has thrived so far is its unique position. It is a low priced, high value, alternative. And while the ZI was playing the game in Leica's court, Voigtlander has played the game in their own way, in an arena that Leica is not interested in.

That is why I wanted to hear other people's perceptions. There is no doubt that the Bessa is not a Leica. They are not even trying to play in that court. But Cosina Voigtlander has produced some rangefinders that provide high value for the dollar spent.

[1] Some have used them as entry level rangefinders to test the waters before they venture all the way in with a Leica.

[2] Others have decided that the Bessa rangefinder is really the best option for them and stay with it long term.

[3] Still others would like to own a Leica but know they cannot afford one yet, so they are happy with their Bessas in the interim.

[4] Finally there are those who do shoot Leica, but keep their Bessa around because it adds an alternative and unique option to the mix.

Thanks for starting the thread Pioneer. I think your market analysis is right on target. I assume when you mention "leica" above you mean a Leica M, not a Barnack. It would be interesting to do a poll with these alternatives.