Impressions of Bessa R3A vs. Minolta CLE

[alan_wilder1]

My search for an inexpensive Leica backup that frames 40 and 90

lenses led me to initially consider the R3A. I really liked it's

design concept, newness and near perfect ergonomics. Unfortunately,

the vertical RF alignment was a somewhat off at infinity but

progressively became perfect by 0.7 m, therefore there was no simple

fix. BTW, I've also seen this in some Leicas too but in varying

degrees. My only other gripe was the meter over-exposed by at least

1/3 stop and contrast of the stationary RF image was a bit washed

out making coincidence in poor light harder. The merchant was kind

enough to take the camera back for refund but didn't want to

exchange probably due to the hassle. My next option was a used CLE.

Even with a few cosmetic flaws from prior use, the camera's meter

and shutter are spot on. RF alignment and contrast also appears

good. Shutter noise unlike the R3A was almost as quite as my MP,

just a slightly higher pitched metallic sound. The inclusion of 28

framelines gives great 40 frameline visibility even when wearing

spectacles (like a 0.58x M7). Build quality is noticably better but

in fairness the Bessa's not at all bad. It's a smaller package than

the Bessa or Leica making it ideal for travel. Since I plan to use

it with a 40/2.8 Sonnar and 90/4 Macro Elmar M, RF base length

shouldn't be an issue. The lack of metered manual or AE lock is a

hassle but I suppose repairability and the parts issue may be the

biggest concern. OTOH, if the camera works great now, so maybe

malfunction is unlikely.

[george_shihanian]

As a longtime CL user, I too, recently looked at an R3A. I didn't find it to have any of the bad issues you experienced, and it felt very light, but also had a solidly built feeling to it. I thought its size would be more noticably bigger, but maybe the lightness took away some of that concern. I still don't know if I'll get one, because I do like the option of using 28 and 24 mm lenses, but I am a big fan of the 40mm Summicron-C. So I'm still deciding between an R3A, or just get another CL as backup. I generally dislike using lenses that need an aux. viewfinder, so I don't want to go that route with the R3A. With the CL, I just "assume" and interpolate a bit that edge-to-edge in the viewfinder will give me roughly 28mm, or, close enough. I did have a CLE, but I hated the on/off switch. It just felt too flimsy.

[cameron_sawyer]

George, may I suggest the CV 28/35 minifinder. This thing is so small you don't really notice it's there, until you need it. Then you have very usable 28 AND 35 brightline framelines for your CL, which in total gives the CL everything you could ever want (the little CV 28/3.5 is a great match with the CL).

[fred_mueggelhopper]

Alan; can you tell us a bit more about the 40 Sonnar?

What mount and what it originally was used with? Thanks.

It sounds interesting>

[alan_wilder1]

Fred, the Rollei 40/2.8 Sonnar is sold new from Adorama and B&H Photo. It is LTM and comes with an M bayonet adaptor for 50mm framelines which also happens to actuate the 40 on the CL and CLE.

[bill_marshall1]

>". . . what it originally was used with?"

 

Fred, when Rollei released the 40 Sonnar 2 years ago, they did so with their own M-mount Rollei 35 RF, which was built by Cosina & is a special edition of the Voigtlander Bessa R2 but with 40/50/80 mm framelines.

[bill_marshall1]

> "I am a big fan of the 40 Summicron-C, so I'm still deciding between the R3A, or just get another CL as a backup."

 

George, you might look at the Rollei 35 RF as a third alternative. Made by Cosina for Rollei, it's essentially a Bessa R2 with 40/50/80 framelines & sells for the same price as the R3A. Its advantage for your purposes over the R3A is that it uses the .7x magnification VF of the R2, so there is plenty of room around the 40 mm framelines to adapt to a 28 mm lens. Stephen Gandy says that the R2 framelines approximate the FOV of a 28 mm lens, so it should work just fine for you.

[icuneko]

Wouldn't it be nice if for the New Year Konica-Minolta would re-introduce the CLE with manual metering and re-run the limited edition screw-mount version of the Hexar 35mm f/2 lens (of Hexar AF design) in M-mount?

[________1]

"meter over-exposed by at least 1/3 stop and contrast of the..."

 

That's well within usable tolerance. The idea is to tweak the ISO dial till you find a setting that works for the particular film/developer combination you use. Irrespective of whether you do the processing or the lab does.

[bill_marshall1]

". . . what it originally was used with."

 

Fred, I forgot to mention that the Rollei 40 Sonnar was originally developed by Carl Zeiss & is manufactured by Rollei under license from Zeiss. This lens is an updated version of the 40/2.8 Sonnar that originally appeared on the fixed focal length Rollei 35S under this same license from 1974-82 and then on various commemorative editiona over the next 15 years or so. The Rollei 35 series sold over 2 million with 4 different lenses & became a legendary camera; the 40/2.8 Sonnar was considered the best & sharpest of the four lenses. In some ways, the release of the interchangeable lens Rollei 35 RF with the 40 Sonnar is the final commemorative issue in the series.

[bill_marshall1]

> ". . . the Rollei 40/2.8 Sonnar is sold new from Adorama and B&H Photo."

 

Alan, I just stumbled across the fact that Robert White in the UK is now selling it for 249 GBP, which converts to $467 USD. I don't know how much difference the shipping would make, but at that price, it is $80 cheaper than Adorama, which had been the lowest price.

 

www.robertwhite.co.uk

[alan_wilder1]

Bill you're correct, Robert White just recently raised the price on this lens. I purchased mine (chrome version) from Robert White on 12/17/2004 for 199 pounds which with additional UPS shipping converted to $444 making it a bargin compared to domestic prices. The downside is the lack of a USA warranty on overseas purchases. Sadly, the lens is now out of production.

[bill_marshall1]

Alan, I agree it's a shame that it has been discontinued - superb lens. Congrats on getting such a great price! I thought that I had vaguely remembered it selling for even less at Robert White, but . . . Well, the memory is the first to go. I didn't even have that vague recall when I originally posted on this thread.

 

At that price, I wouldn't be bothered by the lack of a domestic warranty. There's very little that can go wrong with a lens & in the rare case that there is something wrong, then it has to be mailed back across the pond. It's nice that it comes with a 2-year factory warranty. Now if it was a camera body, for me that would be a different story. There's a lot that can be wrong with a body.

 

Cheers

[alan_wilder1]

I wouldn't let the higher domestic price dissuade it's purchase. For those Rollei 35S, Contax T & T2 fans, the lens has a certain unique look. While not as technically perfect as modern Leica lenses, imaging is quite pleasing and very flare resistant. The cuurent price is still well below the 50/2.8 Elmar. ONTOH it's the same price as the 40/1.4 Nokton and this may be a better value than the Sonnar. Don't own one so I can't compare.

[bill_marshall1]

I wonder how Cosina packed all that into a lens barrel only 30 mm long - only a hair longer than the 2 stops slower Sonnar, a compact lens in its own right. Will all f/1.4 lenses now be so compact? Or did they make some compromises?