Leica Glass, Bessa R2

[rmillard]

Has anyone posted any pictures using Leica glass mounted on a Bessa

R2? Is it really mostly about the glass, not the body?

[bobtodrick]

It's always about the glass, not the body! Put one of the recent 35mm Summicron Asph limited editions in LTM mount on a $20.00 garage sale Zorki and it will take sharper images than most non pro glass out there.

[joshroot]

The body is just a light tight box. Lenses always make the image. That having been said, it won't help you if you are using a body that you are so uncomfortable with that you miss the shot because of trying to get everything set up right. So in that sense, it's all about the body.

[philip_kecher]

"It's always about the glass, not the body" is a true statement only to a point.

 

The body still has to do its part. The lens mount needs to be in perfect alignment with the film plane. The distance between the lens mount and the film plane must be exact to avoid out of focus errors. The shutter must work within 30% tolerance of the stated speed. The film advance must be accurate. Etc, etc.

 

Will a Bessa R2 produce stunning results with Leica glass? Only if it does its part!

[andrew_schank]

I think it depends on the lens and type of shooting. Compare shots taken with a 90mm Elmarit and an M3 at wide apertures, especially near the minmimum focus, to the same shots taken with a Bessa R2 if you want to see what difference the body can make. I can nail the focus very close to 100% with my M3, but when using the same lens on my CLE Minolta (with a smaller rangefinder base similar to the Bessa), my accuracy is definately not as good. The wide angle lenses won't be as critical of course. Also, the Leica shutters are smoother and more free of vibration than the Bessa R2, which can help at reducing camera shake at slower speeds.

[jschweigl]

Not to forget that the Leica sits in my hands as if it has been always there, right feeling, right weight and the R2 feels somewhat uncomfortable, way too light. Might also influence the results. I wouldn't want to use one with a 1.4/75 or the Noctilux.

[grg]

Robert. I agree with the responses above. But, did the TTL get crushed by a pack of elephants running through the streets of NY? If not, then please do call me so that I can dissuade you from doing what I think you are thinking about doing. :) Gil.

[jsbc]

Yes it is mostly about the glass, not the body... only if the body does it part... ie working shutter speed, good VF etc

 

In fact, with the Bessa R2, you may have more accurate shutter speeds than probably 50% of the outstanding M3's. And yes, you can even frame your 35mm Summilux without a separate viewfinder.

 

So far, no complains about the film-to-flange distance.

 

Some may say the M's have better ergonomics. No dispute there except for the cluttered framelines. But it is the images that matter. Although I have neither cameras, I would prefer to use current Leica glass on Bessa R2 bodies and get the photos right than to use older LTM glass on M7's with its silent shutter and get low-contrast, flare-proned shots determined by AE. But this is just my personal preference.

 

Johnson

[rmillard]

All of the responses posted thus far have been thoughtful and make explicit many of the thoughts that were lurking in my mind when I posed the original question. But part of the questions remains unanswered: Has anyone seen any posted photos using the Leica glass/R2 combination?

[douglas_green1]

You can get REAL, high quality stuff like a Minolta SRT or a Pentax K1000 for those kind of prices at garage sales.

 

And yes, it IS about the glass. The Cosina/Voigtlander Bessas are great, BECAUSE they allow the use of Leica M glass at reasonable cost. BTW, I use a Bessa T, with a Russian 5-turret finder. When I put a 50mm Summitar collapsable on it, it is quite the retro conversation starter, but it is ALSO a superb photographic tool.

[kelly_flanigan1]

The Zorki 3C of mine is more accurate with rangefinder focusing than my Bessa R. With my Canon 50mm F1.2 @F1.2 ; the success of in focus shots is double to triple the amount of in focus shots with the Bessa R. The Bessa R is a toy; a great superb camera when so so focusing is required. Its wimpy rangefinder baseline is a bit of a total joke compared to my Leica M3. Both the Leica M3 and the Zorki 3C have professional calibration of their rangefinders possible. The Zorki 3C film rails to flange can be shimmed to be spot on; the infinity adustment can be made; PLUS the close focus adjustment can be adjusted to track with my 50mm F2 LTM Summicron. My Bessa R only has an infinity adjust; with NO gain adjustment (cam length) of the rangefinder possible. My Bessa R has been adjusted to work well at infinity; but gets progressively worse in rangefinder tracking when focusing closer. The 1956 Zorki 3C; and my 1955 Leica M3 both can be adjusted to focus with a standard Leica lens at all distances; while the toy Bessa seems to have lost this "hi tech" technology from 46 years ago. My Bessa R needs to be realigned after only minor bumps. The damn hot shoe on mine has mine off for 1 year now; this fix prevent the hot shoe from effecting the rangefinder. Now I only have to align it every few months. With BIG aperture lenses; the Bessa R has been a disapointment; the Leica M3 is vastly superior in accuracy; and gives a much higher success ratio. My blueprinted Zorki 3C with my Canon 50mm F1.2 @1.2 is a fun camera in low light; the Bessa R yields way too many out of focus images; it is a random event; the baseline is WAY TOO SHORT for serious BIG APERTURE work.

[jsbc]

The premise is, Kelly, whether you have a functional body to begin with. :o)

 

Anyhow, it seems that the Bessa R has had some QC problems. So far however, I haven't heard many complaints regarding the Bessa T. So I wonder what the real situation is with the Bessa R2. (I'm thinking more about this because I have set my sights on the Bessa-R2S as a backup for my SP).

 

Otoh, so times I think it may just be bad luck. I have had a Hexar RF for 2 years. After a year of usage, the VF ocular lens just drop off while I was in Paris. So no camera for a week. I got it replaced in HK (a month after warranty expired), and lost the damn piece the very next day. Finally got my third ocular piece, and it has stayed on the camera for the past 12 months. Is this just bad luck? Dunno.

 

Johnson

[john_h_osterholm]

I have the R2 and a couple of Leitz lenses - a 35mmf2.8 Summaron and a 90mmf2.8 Tele Elmarit, and the combinatons work fine. I also have an M4-2 and I can not see a difference. I am not a professional, however, and perhaps one could detect differences that I cannot. The focus problem with the R2 is still to be resolved, however. The 50mm Nokton does a fine job also - on both bodies. The R2 meter appears to be accurate - at least as much as the MR4 meter atop the M4-2.

Reegards, John

[tom_abrahamsson]

I have been using the Bessa R2's since March this year and I have used just about every lens that can be stuck on these bodies. Only one that taxes the rangefinder accuracy is the 135's, shot in wide-open mode. I even used the 75/1,4 and 50/1 wide-open with no problems.

At the moment I am trying out a Bessa R2S and a Bessa R2C (Nikon and Contax RF mounts) and I am having a blast with these bodies. Imagine being able to use a 1954 25/4 Nikon RF lens with full metering! Both the R2S and the R2C have 35/50/85 frames in the finders and the 35 finder looks pretty close to a 1:1 view. Larger field than in my R2's. Today I went to the local swap-meet and ended up with a bag-full of Nikon screw mount lenses (35/3,5 very early version, 50/1,4,85/2 and 135/3,5) and these will go on my R2's (or M2's) and run against my Nikon RF versions of these lenses. Unfortunately, I only have a 50/2 and a 50/1,5 Sonnar for the R2C. I did use a R2 with the 35/2 Asph and an old 35/2 (8 element) in the spring and found no problem with either one.

The old Nikkor screw-mount lenses are a thing of beauty. These were the days when they made LENSES. Solid like a rock and great glass although I hate the rotating aperture rings on the 85 and 105. Oh, the 50/1,4 and the 85/2 as well as the 135/3,5 all came with caps, cases and shades and are virtually mint! The 35/3,5 has seen some use both the glass is clean and it is the only 5 digit Nikkor screw-mount lens I have seen # 91046: (it is the first time I have seen the : after the lens# on a Nikkor screwlens!). Looks good on my green Bessa R2 too.

Tom A

[fred_rupert1]

I've used a Summicron 50mm with a Bessa R2 body. It works great. The pix are outstanding.<div></div>