Would you buy a used Zeiss Ikon or brand new Bessa R2A

[timeUnit]

After a long foray into SLRs I have an itch to get back to rangefinders. My main reason is that 35mm lenses for the OM-system (which I prefer) are mediocre at best. Unfortunately it is my most used FL. I recently bought a 35mm f2 Zuiko and it is not exactly sharp at f2. It is quite big though! I really bothers me that a shorter FL is bigger than a 50mm. But, I digress.

So here's the skinny.

Due to current exchange rates, buying a used Bessa (unless found in Sweden, which is rare), is not a very good deal. A new R2A would cost about 6000 SEK (~700 USD) including VAT, while used R2As seem to end up at about 5000 SEK either from UK or non-EU countries when VAT is taken into account. I think this is a lot due to the SEK losing value against EUR, USD and GBP over the last year.

However, I've seen Zeiss Ikons in decent shape at around 7000 SEK (~850 USD). The Ikon is a "better camera" in many ways, although I know I will miss the thumb grip on the back of the R2A and the Ikon is slightly heavier. I want a lightweight camera.

I've owned a R3A before and also a Zeiss Ikon. As I recall, the R3A was a fine camera but it is many years ago now. The Ikon was great too, but it was such a nice looking camera that I found it a bit "delicate". The Bessa felt more sturdy somehow. Like something I wouldn't worry about tossing into backpack (I do that a lot with my OM2).

Buying a new Bessa would be cheaper than an Ikon and include a warranty. On the other hand, that camera is discontinued, so I am unsure of the long term support.

I will most likely not use the camera with longer or very fast lenses. I imagine a 50mm f1.5 or f2 will be in my bag later on, but primarily I will be using a 35mm f2–2.5.

AE is something I want, else a R2M would be an option too. Leica M7 too expensive an no 1/2000 shutter.

I mainly photograph my family and want to continue shooting BW film for the look and for the archival properties.

Thanks!

 

[ray*j*gun]

Easy decision IMO .... the R2a new. I have had 2 Bessa's and both were excellent to use and held up well (although I do take very good care of my gear). One of the few bodies I regret selling was my R2s which was the NHS version and I stupidly sold it too cheap. Good luck!

 

[Ko.Fe.]

😕 Two recent $50 lenses I have were perfectly sharp Vivitar 28mm in Ftb and OM-Zuiko 50 1.8. If I want it sharper where are plenty of SLR macro lens.

1/2000 for family? Maybe if it is circus acrobats dynasty 🙂
I never used it on R, well, once for curiosity. High ISO, bright sun, large aperture - filters, because it doesn't affect view and focusing as on SLRs.

I have no problems with meterless cameras for family pictures on b/w film.
But, honestly, if I would buy non-Leica RF it will be Bessa for sure.

 

[KenR]

A couple of years makes a big difference in the exchange rates. I opted for a Bessa 2A because it and the lenses were so much less than the equivalent Zeiss kit. I liked the Zeiss stuff but felt that at twice the price, it wasn't worth it. Now, at aproximately the same price, I would probably opt for the Zeiss.

 

[YYV_146]

The Ikon isnt necessarily better made than the Bessas. Both are products from Cosina and I wouldn't bet on one being significantly better than the other. That said, the Ikon is a great body and I would buy one if I were to shoot film again.

I own an R3M and it has served me well, though...

 

[Pioneer]

I own both Bessa cameras and a Zeiss Ikon.

The Bessa is a nice camera but my Zeiss Ikon is a better one IMHO.

I am not certain where anyone would get the impression that the ZI is delicate but mine has been anything but. Of course my Bessas have also been reliable so it probably boils down to what makes the most sense in your case.

 

[noimmunity]

My Ikon is in for service. Over 8 years it took 40,000 frames (conservative figure), in various conditions in the city and the backcountry.
The service is because the shutter speed dial popped off, and, finally, the rangerfinder became a bit unaligned.
I've had an R3A and still have an R4A.
Haven't owned an R2A, but have used one.

Used versus new wouldn't be my deciding criteria.

I'd pick the Ikon for the viewfinder.

The real challenger to the Ikon, precisely in terms of the VF, would be the R3A, which offers unparalleled 1:1 ratio for both eyes open shooting.

Other things I like better on the ZI:
shutter sound
film loading
lighter side grip (and its feel in the hand)
possibility of service in both Germany and Japan
ergonomic placement of exposure lock button
the longer base length for RF accuracy

 

[noimmunity]

The Bessa is a nice camera but my Zeiss Ikon is a better one IMHO.

I agree completely.

But if you need wide (R4A) or 1:1 viewfinder magnification ratio (R3A) than I think the Bessas are your choice. But not the 2A mentioned by the OP.

 

[froyd]

I normally advocate for the Bessa R2a vs Ikon (I owned both) but that's when the price difference is higher. With $150 to set them apart, I would say it's a coin toss.

The VF of the ZI is very big, but the VF of the R2a certainly does not feel small. Direct comparison makes for a marked difference, but in use I never felt the R2a lacking. By the same measure, the R2a VF is better than Leica, but of course, size isn't everything.

The weight difference is equally negligible in actual use, with a lens attached, but the ZI definitely balances better.

I agree with Pioneer that the perception of the ZI being more delicate than a Bessa is unfounded. I don't abuse my cameras but both the Bessa and the ZI did equally well for me in terms of reliability.


In the end I think it will be the little things that should guide you... do you prefer the ZI AE-lock mechanism or the R2a? Do you need 28mm framelines? Which style meter read-out do you prefer? The ZI meter is hard to see and off to the left side. For me this is a boon because I dislike the distraction of in-camera meters, but it might not be for you.

 

[jsrockit]

Easy decision IMO .... the R2a new. I have had 2 Bessa's and both were excellent to use and held up well (although I do take very good care of my gear).

But have you had the Ikon to compare it to? 😀

 

[pirx70]

Hej!

I've owned my Zeiss Ikon since 2009 and the photographing experience is sheer bliss. Cannot say anything of Bessa, I had dismissed it as having shorter RF base, and the rectangular modernist design of ZI appealed to me much better (plus that I am also a Kiev II user, and Zeiss Ikons design does allude to the looks of Contax II). But sometimes I wonder, as I mostly use medium format, if a pocketable camera like Contax T3 wouldn't suit me better for fast 35 mm "shooting" instead. But when I do use Zeiss Ikon most is for photographing my parents, mainly with the Sonnar, and it excels in that role. Anyway, if you should be looking for a 35 mm lens, I have a mint Color Skopar II I don't use any more for sale, and I'm based some 200 km north of Göteborg.

 

[jonmanjiro]

Zeiss ikon every time !!! The viewfinder is glorious. I've owned several Bessa R2A's and I much prefer the Zeiss Ikon. It's just a much nicer camera to use.

 

[kuvvy]

Zeiss ikon every time !!! The viewfinder is glorious. I've owned several Bessa R2A's and I much prefer the Zeiss Ikon. It's just such nicer camera to use.

Yep, got to agree with this. Have both the Bessa and ZI in the store where I work and tried them both and the ZI is nicer and the vf very clear and impressive. Would buy the ZI but my wife might kill me.
The Bessa isn't that awful tho. I have owned the original Bessa in the past.

 

[thegman]

I used to have a ZI, my first RF in fact, but now I use a R3M. I'd say the ZI certainly *feels* better made, whether it actually is or not, I don't know.

I think either is an excellent choice, my instinct is the ZI is the more graceful and pleasant camera, but ultimately, either one is great.

Being able to buy new, with warranty, for some people/products it's a good idea, for some, it makes less sense, it's just about how you feel about that safety net.

 

[timeUnit]

1/2000 for family? Maybe if it is circus acrobats dynasty 🙂
I never used it on R, well, once for curiosity. High ISO, bright sun, large aperture - filters, because it doesn't affect view and focusing as on SLRs.

I use it a lot on summer days to get to f/8 in bright sun. Since I only use 400 speed film I often end up on small apertures. However, I realize now that with a rangefinder I can use a ND-filter to overcome the 1/1000th limitation on M7. Still though, it is an expensive camera and kinda heavy. 🙂

 

[timeUnit]

Thank you everyone! Lots of good thoughts. Since writing the OP the 7000 sek Ikon turned into a 9000 sek Ikon. So things are leaning more towards the Bessa. In the long run, nothing is stopping me from upgrading to Ikon or M7 later.

 

[leicapixie]

TimeUnit if in the future you are wanting a Leica-M, wait longer, save more and get what you really want!
I am one who did not like using the ZI.
Chasing the Rfdr rectangle,
was not my ideal.
The Cosinas are nice but they are not, nor ever will be Leica-M.
I am sure they are good cameras.
The lenses are more than simply OK.
I have used in my lifetime, i am 71, almost every make and format.
I worked for various Ad. and news agencies.Often had to use their cameras..:bang:
Buying, selling, re-selling, buying not in my lifestyle.
A well used Leica M, a good lens and you are set.

 

[jsrockit]

Something to keep in mind... Bessas routinely go for 1/2 to 60% of new price on ebay. They don't have a great resale value, so if you buy new, and need to sell later for a Leica, you will lose a significant portion of the value of the camera. Buy used.

 

[Jockos]

If I were you, I'd buy a used bessa and ask the seller to declare it as an old, low value camera, to dodge the customs. As if 30% income tax wasn't enough!

Personally I'm not to fond of the bessa series, had a R2M and currently have a R3A. Much prefer the M3.

 

[timeUnit]

Anyway, if you should be looking for a 35 mm lens, I have a mint Color Skopar II I don't use any more for sale, and I'm based some 200 km north of Göteborg.

PM sent! Check your inbox. 🙂