Heretical question - Leica glass on Bessa R2 to start, M body later?

I realise that I may be asking to get burnt on the village green, or

at the very least tarred and feathered, but here goes anyway.

Basically I simply can't afford to drop 1500 quid on an M body, so am

considering a Voigtlander Bessa R2 with a second hand Leica lens as a

pale imitation until I can! Does this make any sense as a decent

introduction to Leica-ish rangefinder shooting? I carry and use an

Olympus 35RC at the moment and find it great fun, so want to take

another baby step. Comments?

They lecia-centrists here will tell you not to. But the rest will probably agree that a R2 is a fine place to start.

IMHO, I think a Konica Hexar RF would be a better body. You can find the body for $600 USD, and the excellent 50mm M-Hexanon lens for another $250-$300 USD. The Hexar is much better engineered than the Bessa R2. I think the R2 is a bit overpriced (still cheap compared to a Leica body), when you can get an excellent deal on a used Hexar RF.

Gavin

 

I think that what you suggest is a very good idea, and when you come to upgrade to a Leica body your loss won't be so great.

 

Regards

 

Bruno

It's the glass. The camera is just a light tight (sometimes) box. Sure, they're a pleasure to use, but it's still the glass that delivers the results.

 

Add another reference to the urban legend that the GBP = $$$.

 

A little used, recent M will cost far less than $1500, much less than GBPs. I bought a NEW M-7 for 15 large $$$, but with no warrantee. Sure, I drop 'em, but I don't destroy 'em.

 

Go for it.

 

Steve

Gasp!

I'm planning to do similar to what you're doing, to get a Bessa R2 and use VC glass until I can afford an M body and Leitz glass. While the R2 is not really that close to being in the same league as the M's when it comes to build quality and reliability, not too much difference can be discerned in quite a few respects. In fact, for glasses wearers, the Bessa's .68x viewfinder magnification provides for much easier viewing of the 35mm frameline than does Leica's .72x magnification. Of course, though, Leica's .58x viewfinder is even better for glasses wearers who want to use wide angles, but at the cost of noticeably smaller image magnifcation. Some think the .58 to be to possess too little magnification for the 50mm, but I would imagine it to be ideal for the 28mm and the 35mm focal lengths. Oh, and with the R2, one needs an external finder for a 28mm, though I bet one could manage pretty well just guesstimating, using the edges of the regular viewfinder as a makeshift 28mm frameline. So, in short, I would go for it and get a Bessa R2 from Stephen Gandy at Camerquest.com

Gavin:

 

Although I can't personally vouch for the reliability of the Bessa R2 since I've never used one, I think you're on the right track. If you like a 50mm lens, my suggestion would be to look for one of the older, black 50mm Summicrons. I'm referring to the non-tabbed version with the optics preceeding the current one. It's light weight and very sharp. Good shooting.

 

Dennis

Wow - seriously fast answers! Can I add another wrinkle? Although I still speak in the old money sometimes, I live in Japan so should really have written Yen. Voigtlanders are the same price as the UK here, whereas anything with a Leica badge carries more of a brand name goods premium than in the West - yet more pressure to err on the side of conservatism. Maa! I <i>want</i> an M body, but <i>need</i> to eat. Need outweighs want. :o(

You'll find an R2 and one of the 1969-1979 era 50mm Summicrons a great intro to rangefinder photography. And, if you want a 35mm lens, the VC 35mm f2.5 is a sharp, fast focussing, and compact lens.

There's nothing heretical about that question at all. IMHO, Leica's cameras are not particularly competitive - It's only the glass that makes the system. Realistically, I think that the Bessa-T, Bessa-R2, and Hexar RF are all VERY reasonable bodies to consider. Frankly, you might never wish to trade up. Personally, I'd Recommend the Hexar RF with the 50mm Konica Hexanon lens, for $800 or so as a great starting point. IMHO, that Konica lens is better than ANY Leica lens that could be had for a sub-$1000 price point.

 

I feel that a Hexar RF, with a Bessa-T as a backup, are all the M-bodies that I will ever need (along with my trusty old Minolta CLE).

I sold my Leica M4-2 as there was no reason to keep it when the other bodies met my needs.

 

The Hexar RF, BTW, seems to me to be the best constructed of ALL these makes, including Leica.

douglas and stephen said it best.

 

(as much as i love my m6ttl) the camera is realistically only a film transport system. if there is a difference it is the glass.

If you're considering the Hexar RF, it might be helpful to know that Stephen Gandy (of Cameraquest.com) evaluates the Hexar viewfinder to be dimmer, and hence a bit more difficult to focus, than either the M6/M7 or the Bessa R/R2. Many, including Gandy, have said the M6/M7 and the Bessa R/R2 have viewfinders equal in clarity and brightness.

 

Also, there's one very distinctive advantage that the Bessa R and R2 have over the M6 and earlier M7's, and that's fact that the Bessa R/R2 viewfinders do not flare.

While I enjoy Gandy's site and have spent many hours reading everything there. It should be noted that he is one of the largest sellers of Voigtlander gear in the US. I'm not saying that he is lying about anything, in fact he seems to be as accurate as anyone. But it's something to think about when reading his comments.

I had no confidence with the Hexar RF. It had a new RF assembly installed because the previous owner/borrower had messed with the RF adjusments (DIY), so I sold it. Konica fixed it for free. The RF is extreemely (sp?) fragile, which would go off (generally vertically) even after a bike ride or shipping between Konica and me. Yes, it focused properly with n Noct' wide open with a Pol. up close.

 

With all the positive aspects of the RF, I have no probem letting it go. It's with the body, not with the 50/90 Konica lenses I have and use.

Lets see... the C/V Bessa series.

 

Keep in mind this same camera sold with an SLR mirrorbox AND medium zoom lens for $189 at places like B&H.

 

Bessa-R's are selling for under $300 (rightly so), and the R2 ought to be as well.

 

So, the Bessa-R2 is a camera with the guts of a $99 body in a slightly better outer skin (magnesium castings) and with a RF popped on top in place of mirrorbox and pentaprism.

Around where in Japan do you live? If you live in Tokyo, there is a store with a reasonable priced leica in shinjyuku. it is called the "camera box". I will let you know the address if you want it.

Compared to the other "vintage" RF gear that I have, Canon and Nikon, the Leica viewfinder "blows them away". That viewfinder what you will be using to view, focus, and frame the pictures taken with that lens.

 

Go into a camera shop and handle the older Leica's. You can get a User condition M3 DS for about $650 on EBay that has been CLA'd. The rangefinder patch of the M3 looks like it has been cut with an Exacto knife; the edges are that defined. If you are not big on wide-angle lenses, the 0.9x M3 finder is incredible. If you plan on using 50mm~135mm, and occasional 35mm, you cannot beat it.

 

With that said, if you shoot a lot with wide-angle lenses, the lower magnification finder of the Hexar (0.6x), R2, and other M series have advantages over M3 "Eyes". Price is comparable on user M2, used Hexar, and new R2. The Hexar seems to fetch $600 in EX/EX+ condition and the R2 is less than that new. The R2 and Hexar will not be as quiet as the Leica's. I have not used them personally, but you should before you buy.

 

One other thought. These are all limited production cameras. I doubt you will lose much buying them, keeping them in good shape, and then selling them if you do not like them or want to get something different later.

oh yeah, I should also mention that there are other places, too. Where you can get a Leica M4-P, M6 for around Yen 150,000. Look for the magazine called "cameraman"(all in katakana) �J??�}? skip to the last section and there are some really great bargains listed there, too.

I use a current Summicron 50/2 on a Bessa R2, it's a very nice combination. I get the

benefits of Leica glass, and I can upgrade the body if I want to later. Don't let all the

"pale comparison," "cheaply made" BS get you down-- I would be defensive if I

dropped big $$ on a camera, too.

 

And if one more Leica M body user says that the Bessa is overpriced for what you get,

I may be forced to point out kettles and pots and shades of black. 8)

Consider an R2 with a CL, CLE 40mm lens. The later is $250+/- with hood

and caps. The frame lines on the R2 are set with an external switch so the

35mm frame lines work very well. The 40mm is the value /performance lens

of Leicaland.

The reason people say the Bessa bodies are overpriced is that they're not much more than a clever bit of niche marketing. As Charles pointed out, you can get the same basic body with a mirror box and a zoom lens for less than $200. So how does Cosina justify the near $600 list price of the R2?

 

If you want to see what a $600 camera should feel like, I second the recommendation for the Hexar RF. I've used mine to shoot weddings, and though I've never dropped it, it does get bumped around a bit and I've had no trouble with it at all.

 

If you can get the R2 for a good price, then jump in, it's still a nice camera. I just wouldn't pay retail for the thing.

Gavin, you're being practical, not heretical. A Bessa body with Leica glass is perfectly sensible to me. In fact, if you have qualms about the cost of the R2, get the "plain vanilla" Bessa R (for LTM lenses) and you're set. Or buy LTM glass, a BM adaptor and you're ready to hit the road.

 

The thing with Leica bodies is durability, but for the short life span we're granted, a Bessa will do. Get it in olive green with a black lens!

I'd recommend the Hexar RF as well - you can find used Hexar RFs going for about the price of mint/new Bessa R2's and there is absolutely no comparison in terms of build quality, features and basic functionality. My Hexar had a slight vertical misalignment, however it never got any worse than slight, and I was able to focus fine with it and nobody would know any better by looking at the photos. I don't know how common it is among Hexars, but the benefits of the Hexar body vastly outweigh any vertical alignment issues (imo).

 

Maybe the Hexar's viewfinder is a little dimmer than the R2, but I had no problems focusing the Hexar, even in dim lighting conditions.

 

The Hexar has a very quiet stepless electronic shutter that goes from many seconds up to 1/4000, the Bessa has a harsh sounding double copal shutter that has B, 1sec to 1/2000 sec in discrete steps. The Hexar shows the suggested shutter speed in a bar along the side, and you can use it to gauge the contrast range in a scene (very handy, especially with slide film), while the Bessa has 3 LED's: to little, too much, just right.

 

All that being said, the Bessa R2 is a decent camera. It has a fairly substantial feel (though not particular more substantial than consumer grade metal Nikons from the 70's and 80's). And is quite a bargain compared to a Leica (though as others pointed out, not a bargain compared to the SLR's it is based on). But it is no bargain compared to the Hexar.

 

A tidy and inexpensive little kit would be the Bessa R2 with the 40mm Summicron-C, or the CV 35/2.5.<div></div>

If this is your first time venturing into the RF world, I second the suggestion to just get a Bessa-R. They're fine if you don't abuse them, and you can put whatever glass you can afford on them.

<p>

I just picked up a Russian Jupiter 8, 50/2 for $16.00 on Ebay...like new condition. It's a surprising good lens.

<p>

I'm just suggesting that before you spend any serious cash, make sure you're comfortable with an RF.