IIIf or Bessa T for cycling

[john15]

For several years now, my usual bicycling camera has been a Rollei 35

which has endured the rigors of bicycle touring very well. I have the

opportunity to buy a IIIf at a very reasonable price and thought that

it, too, would be a good cycling/travel camera. however, the IIIf

will require a CLA and probably a lens upgrade and, if the new lens

is a VC 35, then a seperate viewfinder will be needed also. OTOH, I

can buy a new Bessa T from Rich Pinto at Photo Village complete with

finder and a used Summicron 40 or new CV 35 for not much more than

$500, somewhat less than the IIIf when the cost for the CLA is

factored in. I'm curious to know of other's experience with this

camera.

[claudia__]

I have a IIIf and a Bessa R. The main drawback of the IIIf for something like hiking and cycling is the bottom loading which is a little tricky and the fact that you have to cut the film tongue to a longer length. It is much easier to load a camera that has an opening back. But I really like the look/feel of the IIIf.

[Troll]

Keep the Rollei 35. Unless you're going to use several interchangable lenses, the Rollei is much better as a go-along camera. The lens is every bit as good as the Leicas, especially stopped down to f:5.6 or more.

[peter_white2]

You won't get better images with the IIIf than with the Rollei 35. But you will get to carry more weight and bulk. The Rollei 35 is the perfect camera to carry along for a ride.

[patrick_jelliffe]

If you want to upgrade from the Rollei, you might want to look at a Yahica/Kyocera T4 with the 35 Zeiss lens. Great features, weather proof, and a 90 degree finder for candids.

 

Cheers

[johnmarkpainter]

To those who might not know.....

 

The Rollei 35 while excellent in image quality, doesn't have a viewfinder....fine if you don't

need to focus accurately.

 

jmp

[peter_white2]

The Rollei 35 certainly does have a viewfinder. What it doesn't have is a rangefinder. But, for carrying on a bicycle, where presumably you'll be shooting during daylight and can generally use f:5.6 through f:11, there's not much need for a rangefinder with a 35mm lens, given its depth of field. I've never missed sharp focus when zone focusing with the Sonnar.

[jorn ake]

I like Jay's idea (expressed some time ago now) of carrying along an old Leica accessory rangefinder along with your Rollei 35. Not too much extra weight.

 

But you want a new camera. So buy the Bessa and go.

[ronald_moravec1]

Stay with the Rollei. Bessa r if you need interchangable glass. 111f for utmost reliability. All you do is trim back 19 sprocket holes. Make a template to fo this. 111f has no meter.

 

Rollei glass is as good as Leica as was stated.

[mark_scheuern]

I have a IIIf and a Bessa R and like them both. The viewfinder on the IIIf is tiny but an accessory viewfinder will solve that and, as you say, you'll need one anyway for the 35 mm. If you go with the IIIf, make very sure it's in good operating condition and that all it needs is a CLA. Mine needed a new shutter (it had the original and the cloth was very cracked and leaky) and, while it works great now, it was an additional expense. I love the the IIIf but I think the safer bet would be the Voigtlander or perhaps to stay with the Rollei.

[john15]

I have no intention of parting with the Rollei 35. In fact, Iam about to buy another. I have become very fond of these compact cameras simply because they are so easily carried. For cycling, the lack of a rangefinder is, IMO, not such a bad thing as road vibration seems to cause these to go out of alignment quite easily. Anyway, such was the case with the M6 that I used for awhile as a bicycling camera. Scale focusing, even at close distance and wide aperture, is simply a matter of practice. The IIIf in question may possibly need a shutter curain replacement as well as a full CLA. The shutter works at all speeds but it is very loud and rough sounding. Perhaps I will give Don Goldberg a call for advice. Thanks all. John

[gib]

go with the Bessa T and the 35mm CV Classic f2.5 lens - I have used the T101 version and the 35mm lens and viewfinder as a travel set and it is compact and easy to use. I got good shots with it. I have a IIIf with a collapsible 50 Elmar 3.5 - the film loading might drive you a bit batty while cycling. The Bessa loads very easily.

[mike_elek]

John, if possible, try to get a quote on service of the IIIf. Unless you can purchase the IIIf very cheaply, the cost of service might be more than waiting for a better camera to come along. The IIIf is an excellent camera, though for cycling, I really like the idea of using a Rollei 35.

[c_d5]

A Bessa T,

 

- VC 15 or 12

 

- VC 21 or 24

 

- VC 35, 50, 90

 

Fit everything in your bag.

[link]

John,

 

I have a more radical idea. Many years ago I went on a bicycling trip to Europe and

borrowed my Uncle's Kodak Retina IIIc. This camera was cool because it had a

rangefider and folded to a small package when not in use. And to my surprise, the

lens is suprerb! There was even a little light meter built into the top of the camera

which worked then. I don't think these cameras are very expensive in the used market

today. It was just a great bicycling camera.<p>click below to view a sample from way

back when...<P>

<a href="http://www.brucealangreene.com/photoswebfolder/twogirls.html">bicyling

with Kodak Retina IIIc </a>

<P>

[john15]

Bruce: Two Girls [Paris]:a Very fine photograph as are the others on your site. Nice Stuff! Mike Elek and many of the fellows who hang out at the Classic Camera Forum are very keen on the Retina folders and, as I now see, for good reason. I handled a IIa at a local camera store a short while ago and found it to be a very lovely little camera. Would have bought it except for the $400 price tag which I thought a bit steep. These classic can be very addictive. John

[frank_reidelbach]

Hi John, I also used a Rollei 35 (S) for several years at horseback riding. Nice camera, still have it. While the Sonnar is a sharp lens, very often focussing was wrong (lack of rangefinder) and you see every error. Another issue is hard not shaking camera when shooting with 1/30 or 1/60. This camera is too small to hold it correctly when shooting. Also the meter is not state of the art and somewhat unreliable. Also the 40mm is hard to arrange with. No right wideangle, nor a standard lens. Now I have a Bessa-R. With the Rollei I managed 70% technical correct photos, with the Bessa 90%.

[jim_simmons]

In the '70s I spent 3 summers working for the Manhattan council of American Youth Hostels, taking kids bike camping all over New England, the Maritime Provinces, and NYC-to-Vanvouver BC. Dropped into a small pannier pocket for all three trips (6-10 weeks long each) was a Leica CL with 40mm Summicron. Not much bigger than the Rollei, has rangefinder, TTL meter, M lens mount. I still have the camera and it still takes fantastic pictures. I'd recommend this as a nice compromise between your two mentioned choices.

[dan flanders]

Take it from an old geezer who's been a two-wheel nut since the late fifties, take along the cheapest camera you can get decent images with. If you pack it so it won't get damaged the pix will be gone before you get it unpacked. If you carry it ready, Murphy's law deems that in a crash you'll land on it!. Road rash on you hide will heal, but on a camera, it's terminal!

[dave_rutherford1]

"Rollei glass as good as Leica"!!!! Absolute nonsense.

Recently did a head to head with a Rollei 35, Nikkormat with non-ai Nikkor 50/1.4, and a IIIc with Elmar 50/3.5 from the 1930's. Nothing fancy. Fuji 200 and one-hour development. Same shot and f stop with each lens, shot from full open to stopped down, landscapes, buildings, people, gardens. The old Elmar blew them both away. Side by side, I could just step into the photos by the Elmar. You can get lost in them as your eye moves over them.

Rollei glass is NOT as good as Leica glass.