Reliability - A user M4-P, M4-2 or M@ versus bessa RF

[mark_fisher2]

I am saving up for my first Leica body. I love using my FED 2 (no, really) and would dearly like to have a reliable rangefinder without a leaky shutter, etc. My choices are those in the title. Please don't tell me to save up more money for new. Given the option to buy a new body and still need to use my old screw mount lenses or buy some non-Russian lenses.........

Which one am I better off with for long term reliability?

This is my first post and tried to find something in the archives. Some were close and helped considerably, but I need some help to "push me over the edge".

[mark_fisher2]

Oops -- M2 not M@.

[michael_darnton1]

I don't think there's even a tiny bit of question about reliability--

get some sort of Leica, not the Bessa, if that's your concern.

 

<p>

 

When I made the leap, my choice was going to be between a Leica IIIf

and some old M (I didn't even think Bessa, though I followed it for a

while to see what it was). Finally I decided that for the difference

in price, I'd rather have access to the full Leica M lens line,

though that's not what I've chosen to buy, in general, and I have a

lot of Voigtlander lenses. It's nice to have the option, and there

are several real Leica lenses I eventually plan to buy.

 

<p>

 

My first choice was an M4-2, which I think is highly undervalued--an

M4-P would have been OK, too. Recently I picked up an M2 for a second

body, but would have preferred an M3 if I'd found one for the same

good price. Keep them cleaned, and they'll run until 35mm film is no

longer available. I don't think you can say the same for ANY camera

with a battery and a specialized circuit in it--try to get any

electronic camera fixed after the manufacturer has decided he's not

interested anymore in stocking the chips for it! But my IIIa Leica,

made in 1938 is still chugging along, and can be fixed if it breaks.

That's the ultimate issue in durability.

[albert_smith]

Simply based on history, I would opt for the Leica M. There may in

fact be nothing wrong with the Bessa, but people are routinely using

Leica M cameras that are 40 plus years old, and a teenaged Leica is a

youngster. The long term track record isn't in yet in high enough

numbers to project reliability over time for the Bessa. I would be

surprised if someone that bought a Bessa today would be using it in

2040 though. Additionally, Leica still supports the older cameras

for the most part, at least better than many other companies. Many

of the "wonder plastic" models out there are deemed un-repairable in

only a few years, but I can still send my 1966 M2 to Leica for

servicing and repair. When you are considering "reliability",

consider the longevity of support from the manufacturer.

 

<p>

 

The main reason that I would have recommended the Bessa would be as a

way of seeing if you like the rangefinder camera without breaking the

bank. Since you have already found out that you do like these

cameras from your experience with the FED, there is no reason for

another intermediate step... go for the Leica.

[bobtodrick]

Ditto on the above. I regularily use a 45 year old IIIg, and have

used extensively an early 70's M4 that I only got rid of in a moment

of weakness (that 300mm Nikkor was calling). We sell the Bessa where

I work, and though the lenses are great deals, I would personally

pass on the body. Made by Cosina, it is the same basic chassis as

the Nikon FM10, and various others. These cameras are all entry

level and not made for hard use. I would be interested in hearing

from anyone who knows if, in fact, the Bessa's have been 'beefed'

ukkp at all.

[jackflesher]

I second (or third or fourth by now) the advice to get an M. I think

the M4-2 and M2 are a bit under-priced right now, and make good

values. A user M4-2 or M2 can go for as little as $500, and with a

$200 CLA, you'll probably be good for several thousand rolls!

[Rob F.]

Yep. I've got 40 years and counting on my M2. It had it's first CLA

recently. though it has never broken down on me.

[peter_hughes1]

I hate to be the lone dissenter here but I have never found old Leica

bodies to be reliable. If what you want is a magnificent instrument

with a superb feel, buy an old Leica. If what you want is

reliability, buy the Bessa. If you want both, save your pennies and

buy a new M6 TTL with a three year Passport warranty.

[peter_hughes1]

I would just like to add, in all good humor, that logging onto a

Leica discussion board and asking if you should trust Leica is a bit

like going into a fundamentalist christian church and asking if you

should trust the lawd.

[michael_darnton1]

I do hear a lot about Leicas with problems, but that's not been my

experience. As we should be aware, the only people who complain are

the ones with trouble--if there's no trouble, there's no noise. I've

had, over the last 35 years (the M4-2 "jump" I referred to above was

to re-entering after a 15 year photo hiatus) a IIIf, IIIa, two M3s,

an M2, and the M4-2. Compared to other cameras I've owned they've

been relatively tough and trouble-free, and when something went

wrong, it could actually be fixed. The only repeat problems I've had

have involved keeping RFs adjusted, and that's very easy to learn to

do at home, and I recommend learning. I'm not tender with my

equipment, either. From my personal experience, Leica's reputation

for durability is well-earned. As for track records--so the Bessa

hasn't been on the track long enough to have one, but the Nikon it's

a version of is not a professionally targeted camera, if that means

anything.

[jay_.]

I would look for a late-number (2,000,000+) non-TTL M6 in nice shape,

which can be had for $1100-1200. An M4-2 or M4-P in 8+ or more

condition will still fetch $800-900 and probably require $200-300 in

service due to its age, and you still don't have the built-in meter.

Also, typically you will not be able to recoup the CLA cost on a

resale.

[michael_darnton1]

Chip chip chip. Maybe someone can remind me, but isn't there some

earlier Leicaflex, or was it an early M6 version, that if the meter

dies, you're sunk, because Leica had them, used them up, and now

there are No More Chips, sorry? That's if they still keep making the

battery. That's why I'm for a manual camera, when the discussion is

about the long term.

[andy_piper2]

I have used all 4 of your choices. Some thoughts:

 

<p>

 

The only mechanical knock on the Bessas is that in my Bessa-L (the

first, non-finder, non-RF body) the secondary 'light-tight' shutter

curtains would occasionally 'pre-fire' on their own and stick half

open, locking up everything. A sharp tap (or 6) of the camera face down

into the palm of my hand would eventually release the shutter. I

learned never to cock the shutter until just before shooting. I believe

all the V'landers have the same shutter. The Bessa L and R will only

accept screw-mount lenses, never M-mount. The Bessa-T will accept M-

mount lenses (and screw-mount via adapter) but has no viewfinder

(although the RF window will approximate a 135 view if it's anything

like the original Leica screw-mount design.) The shutter has more of a

metallic 'clink' or 'snap' than the Leica's rubber curtains.

 

<p>

 

The M2 is probably at least as reliable as the later M's - but the

loading and rewinding are much more clunky. The M4-2/Ps have crank

rewind and drop-in loading while the M2 still functions in these

regards like a 1930 Leica standard or A or whatever.

 

<p>

 

The only real difference between my 4-2 and 4-P is in the finder: The

4-P has more brightness and contrast but consequently also suffers from

the occasional RF patch 'white-out' and disappearance of the right-side

90 frame lines - all of which effects stem from the same slight

redesign of the VF optics. The 4-P also has the 28 and 75 frames, an

issue only if you do or will use those focal lengths. Frames aside, I

generally don't notice any practical difference once I start shooting.

 

<p>

 

The ultimate question in reliability among the M's is partly age and

partly previous servicing. Since an M2 is 20+ years older, presumably

it has 20 years less life-expectancy going forward. But a good CLA now

and then resets the clock to some extent.

 

<p>

 

The M4-2 supposedly had early mechanical teething problems. But mine is

from the first batch of 2500 and rolls right along. The theory is that

the ones with problems already broke and got fixed sometime in the past

20 years.

 

<p>

 

IMHO ALL Leica M bodies will leak light around the shutter curtains if

you let full sunlight shine in the front with the lens off for anything

more than a few seconds.

[mark_fisher2]

Wow -- what a response! Everyone told me what I probably already

know, but I was too cheap to realize. And yes, it did occur to me

that asking the Leica group what they thought of Leica might bias

things a bit. Maybe something subconciousness looking for the answer

I wanted?

 

<p>

 

Thanks all -- Mark

[nesrani]

If reliability is a real requirement for you, you will probably need

two bodies at least. At that point the Bessa RF becomes the most

reliable camera, because you can buy 5 or 6 of them, probably, for

the price of two M bodies, use two and still have several brand new

backups.

[godfrey]

Although the Bessa-R does not have the feel of a Leica M, I

suspect they will last a very long time with proper care. However,

you cannot use Leica M lenses on the Bessa-R so if you're

contemplating buying some Leica lenses in the future it's

probably not the best purchase. The Bessa-T would likely be

better for that, since it is M-Bayonet and can use LTM lenses with

an adapter, but then you have to deal with a separate

rangefinder/viewfinder setup. Not a bad deal, frankly, but it's

more trouble than a Leica M's integrated finder.

 

<p>

 

If you decide to go with an M body, I would recommend the M4-P.

It's the model just prior to the M6, has the electronic flash hot

shoe which is quite handy, and is much younger than the M2/M3/

M4. They also sell for reasonable prices and most don't need a

CLA just yet. I obtained mine by trading a Rolleiflex 3.5F Xenotar

for it (about $900 depending on how you want to figure it); I've

seen slightly more beat up looking examples in excellent user

condition for as low as $700 on occasion. I would take an M6

next, simply because having the built in meter is a great

convenience and you can occasionally find a good user in the

$1100 price bracket.

[haim_toeg]

Last Saturday I bought a M4-2, black in mint condition with MR meter,

both recently serviced, with boxes and all, for the equivalent of

$1000.

[karl_georg_wolf]

Hallo Haim,

 

<p>

 

good buy.

 

<p>

 

Keep us informed how you are getting on with the thing, please Which

lens/ lenses do you have to go with it?

 

<p>

 

Best wishes

 

<p>

 

K. G. Wolf