Leica IIIf, Leica M3, or Bessa-R2?

Sorry it's a bit to read but I would really appreciate a response...

 

Im a student and working photographer, i already have a large Canon SLR outfit for "work"

but i dont really want to be lugging around all that stuff when im just out and about. It's

also not very practicle to use an eos-3 w/power drive booster and a 85 f/1.2 lens for

street photography... its to big and intimidates people. so i want to get a rangefinder for

"non-work" photography. Ive narrowed my decision down to the following 3 RF's : the IIIf,

M3, or Bessa R2. My main factors in purchasing one of these is...

 

1. Size : It needs to be able to fit in a pocket or hang from a neck strap without being

much of a nuisance.

 

2. Intimidation : I don't think any of these will really intimidate someone on the street but

that is why i want it... its doesn't scream "professional", I want to walk up to people and

take pictures without them thinking I work for Time magazine or something.

 

3. Price : I'm willing to spend between around $500 and a $1,000 for the body and one

50mm lense. That's all I need.

 

What I've heard

IIIf - Is a pain to load and advance, prone to expensive repairs, but it smallest especially

with a 50mm collapsing lense.

 

M3 - Expensive, and a bit of a trouble to load...

 

Bessa R2 - The only real reason im not just buying this camera is size... i haven't found a

place where i can hold one and get a feel for it. But it sounds like its alot bigger than an

IIIf or M3. Does anyone have pictures of someone holding a bessa R2 or it next to a IIIf

or M3.

 

please tell me your opinion on which camera body to get and possibly which 50mm lense

would be best with it... f/2 or faster...

For the money.....

 

R2 and a Collapsible Summicron.

 

You could consider a CL and a Summicron 40 but they aren't AS reliable. THe Leica CL is

quiet 'enough' and looks like a Point & Shoot. It is the smallest and lightest option.

 

jmp

does a Collapsible Summicron work on a Bessa R2? <BR><BR>With my Bessa R; some collapsibles hit the non standand Bessa's insides. Some lenses will not collapse all the way.

There is something wonderful about how all the bottom-load LTM cameras fit in the hand. Very compact, dense, solid, smooth.

 

But, why a IIIf? More money for nothing you need. The IIIc has the same viewfinder, same construction quality. The downside is that it doesn't have flash sync (who cares?), and no self-timer. The IIIa is even cheaper, but the RF and VF windows are farther apart. Do budget for a clean, lube, and adjust on any III series, and it probably needs a new beam splitter mirror in the RF ($75 more).

 

If you like the physical feel of the III series Leica's, also consider the Canon bottom-load LTM rangefinders. Same feel, same quality, but a single-window combined rangefinder-viewfinder, with three different magnifications. A lot faster to operate, and the default 1x VF setting even lets you work with both eyes open if you're right-eyed. Any model will do for your purposes (II*, III*, or IV*), differences are in flash sync, 1/1000 speed, and rarity. The IIB, IIF, and IV-SB are probably the cheapest models, being common. Even the very best model (better viewfinder), the IV-SB2, should be under $375 with a lens on eBay. They will also deserve a CLA, and are perhaps more likely to need a new shutter curtain.

 

The biggest downside of the Canon would be that if you want to use the felt-less reloadable cassettes (or magazines, as Canon called them), you need to find the somewhat rarer Canon ones.

 

The Canon 50/1.8 lens is darned good, and you would probably still have a budget for a user-quality collapsible Leica 50/3.5 Elmar for when compactness matters.

i love my IIIf but be warned that you need to be sitting down to load it because you need both hands for the spools and a lap to hold the camera. it is possible to juggle both spools in one hand and the camera in the other but it is a drop risk. you also need to precut the long tongue on the film in advance (altho i do carry a small scissors.) given that drawback, with a 35mm lens it is a very petite package. and very very quiet.

bessa r with 35/2.5<div></div>

a bit bigger<div></div>

Leica equipment is really stretching your budget. I like my 111f, but it needs an aux finder and most of the ones you find are needing some kind of repair and you can end up spending as much on repairs as on the camera, if not more. Same for an M3.

 

I have two suggestions

 

1- Bessa R 2 and the 50mm 2.5 New with a warrantee, but will not work for 50 years as the leicas do. Time will tell. They will have a meter also.

2- Call DAG Camera Repair. He buys some older screw bodies, overhauls them and resells them. You will pay no more than one from another source and it will be in good working order. He sometimes has lenses too. Old leica glass tends to get foggy inside and needs to be cleaned professionally. This will cost time and $50 to $100. It is hard to find really good old Leica glass. I have a Nikon 50 mm 2.0 for $200. It won`t need repair and the older Nikon glass was made under Leica`s supervision with the rare earths from europe. They are hard to tell from Leica glass. You will be better off in the long run if you buy a Leica, but it will take a bit of scrounging to get set up. SHINE A PEN FLASHLIGHT THRU BOTH END OF ANY GLASS YOU BUY. It needs to look crystal clear. Even slight haze will degrade contrast. Look at Camera Quest web site. He has tons of info on older rangefinder and lenses. You will need to spend a long time there as it is practically a history of 35mm photography and equipment review.

I would opt for the M3 and a Summitar (50mm f:2 collapsible) and a screw mount to M mount adapter. You should be able to find those within your budget in good working condition if somewhat banged up cosmetically.

 

The M3 viewfinder is terrific with a 50mm lens. And the Summitar is a fine lens.

i've been extremely happy with the bessa-r2. super bright finder, light and unobtrusive, great center weighted metering... the things that people complain about in regards to this camera: having to have your eye centered or the patch disappears, louder than a leica, not the same build quality as a leica - i believe them to be either inconsequential, exaggerated, and your point is what exactly, respectively.

 

of course, with that said, i should be receiving a user m3 middle of next week.

Among the three you picked, I would go with M3 for the reason it has the brightest viewfinder and the focus is more accurate for 50mm lens. It's quieter than Bessa as well, which can be important on the street. It's a bid more expensive but well worth it.

 

On the other hand, I think your Canon and a 50mm/1.4 lens can do a very good job as well.

Unless you have six thumbs on each hand the IIIf or the M3 are not difficult to load. The IIIf is a bottom feeder and requires a different procedure than many contemporary lenses, but a bit of practice and non hurry is all it takes. The M3 has a semi drop in but the back is accessible and any potential problems are easily avoided. The rapid load system on later Leicas is fool prooof to klutzes like me but not "damn fool" proof. But hell! neither is anything other than a fully aout P & S. Years ago I acquired extra take up spools for my IIf and I prepare the film by lengthening the leader, fastening it to the TU spool and securing them together with masking tape or rubber band. Just pull out the right amount of leader, drop in the cassette and TU spool, check the sprocket contact, and then wind on a couple of exposures, put the bottom back on and wind on two more frames, and set the frame counter. The IIIf RD has a tab on the bottom plate that helps align the film. From the ergonomic and compactness I believe you will find the IIIf and collapsible lens to be the best selection; M3 and collapsible next. Any lens that sticks out more than an inch is going to be an impediment to pocieting. For over fifty years a III or IIf has been my choice for a pocketable camera. I like the 50 Elmar or the 35 Summaron. The Summaron is particularly handy -- just set on hyperfocal distnce, use the Sunny 16, and fire away!

If you are going to zone-focus and stop the lens down, the IIIf is an option. But for fast-focusing, you must be aware that there are two windows to look through: one to focus, the other to view. They are right next to one another within the same eyepiece shroud, but there is no denying it is slower than where the rangefinder patch is visible in the viewfinder itself. And the IIIf's finder is only for 50mm and has no parallax compensation. I have a IIIf and love it, it is my "party guest camera" because with a collapsible Elmar it fits in my coat pocket without a bulge. But I use it only with flash, at f/8, so focusing is not that much of an issue.

 

The M3 has the largest 50mm framelines of any M-mount camera, but it has no 35mm framelines so if you think you might want to use that focal length, an M3 isn't the best choice going in. Any M3 should be expected to need about $300 worth of overhaul unless it can be proven it had a CLA in the last few years by a reputable repairperson, which means either DAG or Leica, NJ in the USA or Kindermann or Mueller in Canada. The cement holding the rangefinder prisms together in M3's (and M2's) is now brittle with age. A hard knock may possibly cause them to come apart, a very expensive repair.

 

The Bessa R2 has a built-in meter and a nice contrasty finder. For street shooting (vs shooting in a courthouse, church or at a golf match)the so-called additional noise of the R2 shutter is a non-issue. You should be aware that there is no *official factory-approved* repair facility in the US for the Bessa cameras.

 

I would not seriously consider a CL over the R2, because although there is a repair infrastructure for the CL, it is virtually a certainty that it will need repairs. The meter, shutter and rangefinder all have reliability issues. The finder magnification is also quite low, and the rangefinder baselength very short.

 

One camera you might also consider is the Hexar RF. It loads like a normal camera, has a very quiet built-in winder and motor rewind, and it has aperture-priority autoexposure with a hold-lock function, though it can be used manual-metering-style as well. The finder magnification is lower than the sensible 0.72 most Leica buyers choose, which is also the magnification of the R2. There was a smear campaign to scare people away from buying the RF as a modern alternative to the Leica, at the time Leica was still jerking everyone's chain that the M7 was "impossible", but it was total fabrication. Word has it the Hexar RF has been discontinued unfortunately, and since the Konica-Minolta merger we can't be certain how well it will be supported with parts and service or for how long.

 

You'll notice that unlike some others, I have not proclaimed which camera you should buy. Nobody but you, after checking them all out, can or should make that decision.

Before you blow your whole budget, consider trying a Konica Auto S2, which should run $50-100. Sharp lens, meter, huge RF/VF with floating lines that correct for parallax, easy loading, lever film advance. It is admittedly bigger than a screwmount, does not have a collapsible lens, but would give you the flavor of street photography. Other compact quality cameras for less than $200 include the Kodak Retina series, Voigtlander vitomatic and vitessa series. If digital does not offend you, the Canon A80 is currently going for about $250 and is much more compact that any of cameras you or I mentioned.

Get a Rolleiflex.

Nick,

 

I have a IIIf RD and when I travel on business I've often taken it with a Summitar and 5 rolls of HP5. It stows nicely in my briefcase. I use a wrist strap screwed into the base plate to carry it concealed in my right hand.

 

Loading does take a bit to get used to; it's not as hard as it might seem. I do trim my film leaders beforehand.

 

Get a IIIF Red Dial. It's shutter is a bit better than the BD versions. It will need a CLA if it hasn't had one in the last 5 years.

M3 and collapsible, rigid, or DR Summicron.

 

Just my two cents.

Hi Nick -- You've gotten a lot of info here, but I see the size issue could use more input. You asked about the R2 versus an M3, and the answer is that they're virtually the same size. So close as to use the same ready case.

 

I too like an inconspicuous camera, but all of these are pretty low-key when compared to today's typical zoom-equipped dSLR. :-) I may carry a Leica M2 or Bessa-T, but I particularly like the very innocent look of the Minolta CLE (the improved successor to the Leica/Minolta CL). And both of these latter two are significantly smaller than a Leica M.

 

Keep reading and researching, and if possible find an opportunity to handle them all.

Best Choice for true photographer - Bessa R2 + 50'cron or Nokton. It's not bigger than the M3

 

Best Choice for hobbyist - Leica M3 or IIIf + 50'Canon, Nikon, Summar, Nokton, or collapsible elmar, or russian equivalent. The smallest most compact.

 

If you really want to go for compact, and something that doesn't scream professional, go for the Leica II or their Russian or Japanese copy. It is smaller than IIIf. Put an collapsible lens on it, you have a very small camera. Of course, you loose slow shutters ability and flash sync. But, you only paying less than US$200

<p>If you really just want 50mm and don't mind more weight than the

Bessa, look for a <a

href="http://www.vermontel.net/~wsalati/CasualCollector/canonp.htm">Canon P</a>.

Either look at it and through it before buying, or get it from somewhere

reputable that claims it's had a CLA, or add the price of the CLA. Easy to

load, superbly made, quiet metal shutter, combined RF/VF with life-size

viewing. (If you wear glasses, don't kid yourself that finder will be any

use for 35mm.)</p><p>Right then, where's Grant to point out that this is

"exciting!"?</p>

Bloody hell!!! After all these years of hard work, devotion, and obsession, I'm relegated to being a hobbyist because I have the wrong damn camera!

 

For less than $150, you can get a Kodak Retina IIIc with Schneider Xenon 50/f2 lens. Kinda heavy, but very nicely made, and it folds up and fits in a pocket. Only major disadvantage is the squinty viewfinder.

Heh heh, Sorry Mike.

 

But, actually your recommendation on the Retina IIIc is a good choice. I am actually looking for a nice clean, cheap, example on ebay right now.

The comments on the split rangefinder/viewfinder of the Leica III series vs the single window of the M and others got me to thinking about something that happens to me off and on with my "new" M2. Makes me chuckle... First of all, having a IIIg as a constant companion for some 40 years, I don't think of the split windows as a big deal.

 

Here's what makes me laugh: Focusing the M is sometimes actually slower for me because shifting to the right with my IIIg has become so much second nature that I find myself shifting my eye over on the M out of habit and see nothing! Can't deny the attributes of the M2, and I enjoy it, but this old fart still mostly reaches for the III...

"I would go with M3 for the reason it has the brightest viewfinder"

 

Nonsense Wentong, the R2 has a brighter finder than any of the older M's. Some say its as bright if not brighter than the latest M6/7. Certainly though brighter than an old M3.

well ended up getting two camera instead of just one [isn't that how it always goes?] a

leica IIIf red dial w/50mm summicron f/2 and a canon IV-SB w/50mm f/1.4, i have yet to

recieve and try them out though but i will post what i think once i get them... cheers