With someone on the budget...

[ike k]

Which is better combo? Leica M body with Voigtlander lenses or Voigtlander body with

Leica Lenses? Am thinking M6 ttl with CV 35/2.5 or Bessa anykind with 35/2 cron. Thanks

for any advice!

[Bill Blackwell Images]

If I couldn't have both I would always chose to by Leica lenses and settle for an aftermarket body. The quality of your images always comes down to you and the glass (in that order).

[jorn ake]

Spend money on the glass and save on the body. A Bessa R2A with a 35mm ASPH f2 Summicron. If no money for an ASPH (I got mine for $850 mint,) then one of the previous f2 models. Then a bit further down, a Summaron 2.8 in good condition w/o fogging. Later when you save up for an M, you can use the Bessa as your second camera with a 50mm f2 Summicron.

[rich815]

VC lenses are no slouches even compared to Leica lenses. It depends on the look you want for the results you desire. Few would be able to tell the difference between the two lenses you mention in real world shooting. Build quality is always an issue, the Leica lenses being much better built than the VC. And the Leica bodies likewise. Some people like the feel of the Leica body better than the VC bodies, and some think the feel of the lens and its use is important as well. Which are most important to you? Leica body will be much quieter and have a smoother feeling in use. It's not as simple as "Leica lenses are better so go that route..."

[Jochen_S]

Buy used!

 

No M6 can feel better than my badly beaten up M3 in my hands. I've never been impressed by the Voigtlaender bodys, especially not by their rangefinder base length.

 

I can't say nothing about the lenses; maybe I'll buy CV glass sometimes or go nuts and get the latest Leica stuff. At the moment I hope my old crons are doing the job.

[albert_smith]

There is another way to think about it. If you <B><I>really</I></B> want a Leica body, and you <B><I>really</I></B> want a Leica lens, and your funds are such that you are thinking about doing with less than what you <B><I>really</I></B> want, then wait.<P>

 

From one budget person to another, it is often a false economy to buy less than what you want, because you may end up getting what you want eventually, so there is an extra expense for the "almost what you wanted" step in the acquisition process. Cut out the intermediate step, save a little longer, and get the Leica body and lens that you really desire. This might result in more satisfaction in the long run.<P>

 

If you can't wait, get the Leica lens and the Cosina body. The image is from the glass.

[ronald_moravec1]

CV lenses optically seem equalent to the last generation of Leica lenses without Leica mechanical build quality. Although some of the later designs are better built.

 

The glass makes the picture so long as it will focus properly on the body.

 

Budget wise, I would prefer a used good condition leica lens to a new CV lens.

 

A R2a or R3a cv is ok, but definately not Leica. Older Leicas can need expensive repair work equal to the price of a new CV body, but the Leica will outlive it in the long run.

 

CV has some ok designs, but the quality control can be spotty. This means defective stuff gets to the market.

[frank_scheitrowsky1]

In my experience, there is a much bigger difference between Leica/Bessa bodies than there is between Leica/Bessa lenses. I'd get the Leica body first with a Cosina lens and then save for a Leitz lens later. You are going to need more than one lens anyway.

[jose_luis_berzal]

another vote for the second hand Leica body option, a M2 or M3 will probably give you a better, smoother feeling than the CV bodies.

[rick_waldroup3]

I shoot an R2 and the R3A, and for me they work just fine. They are not Leicas, but then again I did not pay for that Leica quality. I also have the CV 25, 35, and 40mm lenses. They are excellent lenses- very sharp and contrasty.

[kaiblanke]

I got a Leica body (M2) with one Leica and some russian lenses first, no regret. But then I discovered a CL set and my M2's stay at home almost 90% when I grab a Leica. A CL with a 40/90 combination will set you back about USD 700-800, which makes it also a budget solution, although it is 'real Leitz'. Another possibility is a Hexar RF kit - I would like to trade my M2 for a Hexar, I already have the Hexanon 50, and it is a spectacular lens. If the body is only half as good as the lens, it is great value for the money and might be a much better choice than a Bessa - but you have to buy used.

[Rich B NYC]

Ike,

 

I used to own the CV 35 f2.5 (classic) until I traded it in on a 35mm Summicron. My only reason for doing so is that 35mm has become my primary focal length and I wanted a "real" Leica lens.

 

The image quality that I got with the CV (on an M6) was quite good. The images taken with it stand up pretty well to the images taken with my Summicron (ver IV).

 

If you can live without a built in meter, I'd suggest an M2 with a 35mm Summicron in whatever version you can afford. I don't much care for the feel of the Voigtlander bodies.

[al_kaplan1]

There is a lot of good, and sometimes exotic, glass out there. Nikon and Canon made Leica thread mount lenses as well as Angenieux, Schneider, Zeiss, and a bunch of others. So did Pentax, Yashica and Minolta. I'd go for the reliability of an M body.

[braden_barclay]

I agree with Al. Start off with a M body in solid working condition, ideally either a M2 or M3 and build from there. Buying one of these bodies may leave you with enough money to buy a good Leica lens. The Voigtlander lenses are definitely excellent, but the Leica body is the basis for the whole system.

[dan flanders]

Have the best of both worlds: a good user M and a Summicron C (or any of its clones) The forty will allow close-in shots as well as exhibit normal perspective and is one of the best lenses Leica ever produced at half the cost of alternates. The combination can be obtained for about the same outlay as the other suggested combinations.

[ben z]

"From one budget person to another, it is often a false economy to buy less than what you want, because you may end up getting what you want eventually, so there is an extra expense for the "almost what you wanted" step in the acquisition process. Cut out the intermediate step, save a little longer, and get the Leica body and lens that you really desire. This might result in more satisfaction in the long run."

 

That's been my experience too.

[john_morris4]

I started, on a smaller budget, with CV for both body and lens: a Bessa R with CV 35 f/1.7 (Ultron). I enjoyed them enough that I tried some more CV lenses, and also some old Leica and Canon screw-mount lenses.

 

I have an M2, now, which I'm using with some CV and Canon lenses. The poor little Bessa R has barely been used in the past year because the M2 works better for me and I enjoy it more. I frequently take pictures of people in fairly low light, and I find the M2 to be notably easier to focus in low light (I can see in the pictures that the focus is more accurate, too). I also like that the M shutter is quieter than the Bessa, and that the whole camera is enough heavier that it's steadier at low shutter speeds. The newer Bessas have M mounts and automatic exposure, but I appreciate the Leica rangefinder enough that I likely won't ever get another Bessa.

 

The CV lenses I use, on the other hand, satisfy me. The make pictures that please me -- they're far more reliable at this than I am. They're plenty sharp enough -- better than my scanner and my comparable Nikon SLR lenses -- yet they're not harsh. If I'm using them near wide open, it's usually hand-held with slowish shutter speeds, so even a Leica 35mm ASPH or 50mm f/1.4 ASPH lenses would be hard for me to justify (especially for my budget).

 

You're priorities might be different, of course. You may really want automatic exposure, or an extremely sharp and contrasty modern Leica lens. Or you might really like a Bronica RF645, and just haven't realized it yet.

 

The good news is that it's hard to go really wrong with any of this stuff. You could have a great time with a Bessa and a CV 35/2.5, or a Bessa R and a little black Canon 50 f/1.8 (extremely light and cute). So don't worry too much about where you start.

[pensacolaphoto]

Several advises above are reasonable and could be considere by you. I would look for the best buy possible for the best quality items available for your budget. A solid M body may be a good start, but not necessarily the only way to go. Maybe you find a great lens first and then your budget shrinks when it comes to getting the body.

[johns1]

Ike,

 

Whatever you gotta do, somewhere along the line you MUST have either one

35 or one 50 in clean Leica glass

 

The body is a sexual thing, meaning the main advantage to the Leica body is

the feel of the thing when you click the shutter. Other compatible bodies will

also advance the film and flash the shutter appropriately, although perhaps

without the same smoothness of the Leica.

 

But nothing equals the performance of Leica glass.

[dan flanders]

I don't pretend to any knowledge of CV or Hexar bodies or lenses. I am assured by knowledgeable parties whom I respect that they are excellent products. However, there is very good reason to expect a product that has rendered exemplary service for up to seventy odd years, many of which are still going strong and highly sought after, to be preferable to a modern product costing approximately the same, but which has not achieved a track record of any particular consequence. Those acquaintances of mine, with whom I have discussed such matters, regard the the newer less costly items as temporary back-ups to their first line equipment. Obviously this is an issue that can only be proven by more time, but it would appear that there is little or no expectation that the older tried and true products will not last as long as silver based photography provided they are properly maintained. (Hopeably I haven't tripped into a double negative trap with that final statement! ( ;^]

[rich815]

<i>"But nothing equals the performance of Leica glass."</i><p>As someone who owns 4 Leica lenses, numerous Contax lenses (both SLR and G) and lenses for LTM from VC, Canon and Nikkor I can categorically say that that statement is a load.

[malcolm_tentt]

{The body is a sexual thing, meaning the main advantage to the Leica body is the feel of the thing }

 

Aha, well that about explains a lot of things I've been reading here.

[pak_wan1]

Ike,

 

I sympathise with your dilemma. I think everyone in this forum has a story on how they started.

 

I'll forever remember when I bought my first Leica. I really had a tight budget, but I really wanted a Leica. I had all Canon gear, and started processing myself and figured, that if I didn't get a Leica now, I might never ever get to own one. So here's my story.

 

(For you though, it sounds bleedingly obvious but I would buy the most expensive component first in Leica. If you are buying new, this will be the lens. I only own one Leica component new.)

 

I started with a Cosina Voightlander 15/3.5 and Bessa-L to supplement my Canon gear because I wanted something wider, much wider. But I ended up liking the process so much I was convinced that I had to buy a Leica. During this time I sold the 15/3.5 because my ex and I got it very very wet on Bondi beach.

 

I couldn't afford new, so I bought a s/h M6 Classic. It was quite beat up but functioned perfectly. It has developed some wierd problems since, like sticky slow shutter escapement which selects wrong speeds unless you hold the camera upside down (!!!) , but it was a start.

 

I chose to buy a Leica lens new, so I bought a new special edition 50/2 'cron with screw thread (1000 of these in the world apparently, mostly for the Japanese collector market)! They couldn't sell it (it was brass and the screw mount compromised the close focus), so I got it *cheap*. To mount it, they even threw in a Cosina Voightlander 50/75 screw to M converter.

 

I used this for a year or two and got more and more addicted to the system. I simply had to round it out with something wider and something longer.

 

Then I bought two second hand lenses, the 35/2 pre-asph (a functionand 90/2 pre-asph that were about one third brand new price. As with any second hand transaction, learn what to look for. To top off the system I ended up buying the Cosina Voightlander 15/3.5... again.

 

I'm of the opinion now though that the journey no matter how you get there, it is worth it.

 

The moment that I remember the most was the moment that I said,

 

"I'll buy it."

 

The shopkeeper who is now a good mate, looked at me and said

 

"You're shaking! Welcome to the club."

[Dave16]

Leica with leica for me.

And I couldn't afford my M6 or 2.8 50mm Elmar when I bought them.

 

Justify the purchase?

Of course.

Honestly afford them?

No way!