!Nomad64 Posted August 15, 2011 Share #21 Posted August 15, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) I was just looking and there m3s available for reasonable amounts of course I would need to buy a light meter as well. Not necessarily, but if you badly want one, then rover the evilbay. If you steer clear of collectible items chances are that you'll get one in good working order for less than 100€. I did. Many say M3 is best for focusing It is! The only things that come quite close are the M6 and MP a la carte both in 0.85 version. But beware, you might develop addiction. After some years with the M8 at first I felt lost. The viewer looked immense. Now that I'm accustomed with it I can't quite focus anymore with the M8. I have to keep on the 1.25x magnifier all the time. Cheers, Bruno Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 15, 2011 Posted August 15, 2011 Hi !Nomad64, Take a look here why not a bessa or a zeiss. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
sblitz Posted August 15, 2011 Author Share #22 Posted August 15, 2011 at my age, magnified view screen could very well become addictive .... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveO Posted August 15, 2011 Share #23 Posted August 15, 2011 I've heard that the Leica M3 was the best Leica ever built. You could probably get one and a CLA for around $ 800 which is much less than the Zeiss Ikon and not much more than the Bessa. DaveO Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gyoung Posted August 15, 2011 Share #24 Posted August 15, 2011 True. I have an FM3a and it is similar, although interestingly a 60mm Elmarit on the front is a very effective "silencer"... Regards, Bill I have been pondering the idea of gertting an R lens or 2 + leitax to use, maybe thats the final straw. Maybe there is money to be made selling 'blimps' a la film cameras Now where's that old tea cosy.............. Gerry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
!Nomad64 Posted August 15, 2011 Share #25 Posted August 15, 2011 I've heard that the Leica M3 was the best Leica ever built. True. Any further model was either simplified or made in a cheaper fashion, with the only possible exception of the MP which is basically an improved and modernized M2. But I'm not exactly sure it's any better than the M3. You could probably get one and a CLA for around $ 800 True. If you're lucky enough you won't even need the CLA. which is much less than the Zeiss Ikon and not much more than the Bessa. DaveO True. That was my original point. Cheers, Bruno Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomasw_ Posted August 15, 2011 Share #26 Posted August 15, 2011 FWIW, I have tried....3x....to like the ZI RF; each time the RF went out of alignment with little use or actually arrived in the mail out of alignment. It was a pain. The brightness of the VF is the best, even brighter than any of my 4 MPs; yet the contrast of the patch was prone to wash out -- I lost too many frames while composing because of it. YMMV, as some report that their ZIs are hearty warriors -- but I can't report anything like that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
moberg Posted August 15, 2011 Share #27 Posted August 15, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Another point that may or may not be important for your photography style is that the cloth shutter of the leica allows you to hand hold your camera at much slower shutter speeds. Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
digbyhp Posted August 16, 2011 Share #28 Posted August 16, 2011 at my age, magnified view screen could very well become addictive .... If that's important to you, it may be a reason to check out the Bessa R3A - 1:1 VF magnification, with a RF patch as large and bright as an M. Of course that means the framelines are no larger than 40mm. As to the reliability of Bessa vs Leica, neither seems to have a clean score-card. Reports of Bessa RF mis-alignment when new are somewhat common, but then, for example, look up a thread by Andy Barton on his new MP a-la-carte with the same problem. I've also seen on the forum sporadic reports of electronic failures on M7s, back-focus on M9s etc.etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted August 16, 2011 Share #29 Posted August 16, 2011 Besa are just consumer grade Nikon turned into RF cameras with the same marginal mechanics. Zeiss made a little better, but still not Leica. Supposedly the Zeiss RF /viewfinder is better than Leica. The RF base on Besa is too short for fast lenses and tele lense and there is no work around. Just as there is none for a short bellows on a view camera. It is what it is or a car engine that is designed for economy. You will pay 10X the price for a Leica and the pics will only be focused better if you use fast lenses and tele lenses. Yes the machine is way better made and will last a long time, if you will ever use it that long. I have seen wedding cameras with a million exposures on them. Besa expected life is 25/50000 pictures if you are lucky. But 250000 is a roll a week for , well you figure it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sblitz Posted August 16, 2011 Author Share #30 Posted August 16, 2011 i went to adorama yesterday and put an m3 in my hand and while i didn't buy it i was sorely tempted. they has some used bessa but it felt like a toy. interestingly, the m3 and an m6 were priced the same. something about the m3 felt soooo much better. anyway, beginning to think that i will most likely end up with an m3 or m2 when i can pluck one up for under $1000. not a collector so i am more than happy to pay less if it has a blemish or two as long as the mechanics of the camera are fine. thank you all for your comments and keeping this thread on track. it is much appreciated. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted August 16, 2011 Share #31 Posted August 16, 2011 Just a word for the M2. Cheaper, often younger, doesn't need goggles for anything that isn't a 50mm. Superlatively clear framelines - 35-50-90 - and built like a tank. I am one of many here that has one and you will pry it from my cold dead hands. It's personal taste, but I think it looks better too Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sterlinstarlin Posted August 16, 2011 Share #32 Posted August 16, 2011 The M3 is my least favorite M. The viewfinder can be a nightmare as it ages, turns black! I've never had anything go wrong with my four M2 bodies, and my MP is the best camera I've ever used. The framelines alone pretty much render the M3 useless for my taste. I use a Nikon S3 when I want to shoot with a 50. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wizard Posted August 16, 2011 Share #33 Posted August 16, 2011 ...Really disliked the handling and in the case of the Bessa the crack of doom shutter and agricultural wind mechanism. It really feels like the cheap camera that it is. Well, true, a Bessa body ain't a Leica, that's for sure. But my Bessa R2 has never let me down so far (been using it for more than five years now), it does have accurate TTL metering, and the finder is bright and clear. And as long as you use a Leica lens on it, the results are indistinguishable from a Leica. In fact, I much like the R2 coupled to my version IV 35 mm Summicron lens. That combination has produced some of the nicest pictures I have taken so far, so don't underestimate the Bessa. Cheers, Andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Double Negative Posted August 16, 2011 Share #34 Posted August 16, 2011 Build robustness and the Leica name aside - you can't go wrong with an Ikon. Darn good camera and in a few ways better than the M7 even. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archiver Posted August 19, 2011 Share #35 Posted August 19, 2011 As much as I like my Ikon for the brighter viewfinder, offset metering pattern and lighter weight than a Leica, there are some other issues with it that keep me coming back to my M7. - the steel shutter has a damped but still pronounced metallic k-chak which can draw a bit of attention. The snik of a Leica cloth shutter is more discreet. - the Ikon's shutter is strong enough to make the camera jump ever so slightly. Some say that the Leica's heavier body makes it more stable. - while the Ikon is a lot lighter, it also lacks the solid rigidity of a Leica body. If you squeeze the top plate downwards, you'll see and feel it flex. Nothing like that happens with a M, of course. Having said all of this, I am happy to carry the Ikon when I am walking for long distances, particularly mountain trails or the bush. The shutter sound is not an issue in that environment, the much faster shutter speeds give more potential to use wider apertures in bright light, and when you're walking around a lot, every ounce counts. I have the handgrip for my Ikon and it makes it so much better to hold. The rubber covering seems to wear pretty easily, and I plan to re-cover it with Black Beauty from cameraleather when the covering wears down. For that reason I kind of wish I had a chrome Ikon, as I could then use an interesting colour like dark red, bottle green or mid brown. Colours on a black body don't do it for me. And the price of the Ikon today! I don't know what was happening, but when I bought mine in Hong Kong in 2008, I got it for the equivalent of about a thousand Australian dollars. It's double that now, probably more. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted August 19, 2011 Share #36 Posted August 19, 2011 I raised similar issues in this thread: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/customer-forum/195768-thoughts-zeiss-ikon.html I think I'll get an older Leica M body. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Lmax Posted August 20, 2011 Share #37 Posted August 20, 2011 I'm surprised about the ZI-prices mentioned above. I got mine at 990 € last year, brand-new, licensed dealer, full warranty. In fact I did not give money, because the dealer traded in R-gear (no, no, I keep my SL2s,but had to many lenses). Why ZI? I have and use M3/5/6, all three wonderful cameras. But for some puposes I wanted an AE-camera and were not willing (nor able) to afford an M7, such simple. And I had/have very good experiences with Zeiss-glass (35 and 28). Compared with Leicas: - not build like a Leica, strange shutter-sound (at lest 'special', if you know Leicas) + far the best viewfinder I know, easy loading, fast shutter, very good long-base-rangefinder I don't like 'religious wars', so I use Leica- and Zeiss-bodies, Leica-, and Zeiss-, and Voigtlaender-lenses, why not? Beste regards! Lenn Excuse my English, probably needs CLA.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paterson Posted August 27, 2011 Share #38 Posted August 27, 2011 Bessa Voigtlander cameras and Zeiss Cameras are basically the same camera, both are built by Cosina in Japan. The differences are cosmetic, the shutter and electronics are identical. Only Bessa Voigtlander offer a fully mechanical models the R2M, R3M and R4M. I own a R3M, love it, great camera, not as robust as my Leica MP but is a great performer. P:) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archiver Posted August 27, 2011 Share #39 Posted August 27, 2011 Bessa Voigtlander cameras and Zeiss Cameras are basically the same camera, both are built by Cosina in Japan. The differences are cosmetic, the shutter and electronics are identical. While the Ikon is built by Cosina in Japan, there are several differences between it and the Bessa. If the shutters of the Bessas and Ikons are the same, they have definitely damped the shutter of the Ikon. Even though it has a fairly solid click, it is much quieter than a Bessa. Both are sourced from Copal, but the implementation is different. The rangefinder baselength of the Ikon is much longer than any Bessa and even any Leica, allowing for greater precision in focusing wide aperture or long focal length lenses. The Ikon has different rewinder placement from the Bessa, which does not allow the Ikon to use a rapidwinder/leicavit type device. Putting the rewinder on the underside of the camera puts the viewfinder at the very end of the body, giving the camera that extra long baselength. The rewinder also has a flip-out lever, and is ratcheted. It won't spin backwards and is superfast to rewind. The Ikon's viewfinder is the biggest and brightest of any current production rangefinder. And yes, that means it is bigger and brighter than a Bessa's. The framelines are particularly bright. Those are the differences I am sure of. I do not know about the electronics specifically. But I hardly call a damped shutter, superlative viewfinder, ratcheted rewinder and longer effective baselength 'cosmetic' differences. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Holy Moly Posted August 27, 2011 Share #40 Posted August 27, 2011 When you don't want to think during a sunny day of burned holes in your shutter cloth - Bessa When you shoot not so often and don't remember the film loaded last month - Bessa When you want to nail the exposure by a dedicated knob at the back and recompose - Bessa When you need accurate 1/1000 + 1/2000 - Bessa When you don't like an external finder for you 24 and 21mm lenses - Bessa When you like high street strolling with a top brand camera in front of your belly - Leica ZI 50mm Planar: Amor - off duty.... | Flickr - Photo Sharing! Bessa R4A 21mm Color Scopar: L'arbre de heron | Flickr - Photo Sharing! JU52 | Flickr - Photo Sharing! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.