[Leica] BESSA R3Aor M7

[neal at nairobisafari.com (Neal Friedenthal)]

>Bill Marshall billgem at hotmail.com
>Mon Jan 3 09:31:39 PST 2005

>Neal, your comment about R3A rangefinder being close to M7's .72 mag needs 
>some elaboration. Here's my 2 cents. The effective 
base length of the R3A even with its 1:1 mag is 37 mm. The M7 has an EBL of 
49 mm or 1/3 greater - not close. There are certain 
lenses that you just can't focus precisely on the shorter base length of the 
R3A & others that you can't focus as precisely as on the 
M7. The R3A is close to the EBL of an M7 with .58 mag, but even there the 
longer physical base line has certain mechanical 
advantages that can't be addressed by higher mag, e.g. the effect of the 
range of tolerances will be magnified on the shorter base 
line. 

>The 40 mm frame lines may work well for you with a 35 mm lens (although not 
>everyone would concur), but the .72 M7 includes 28 
mm framelines & an R3A can only accomodate a 28 mm lens with an external VF. 

>This is not intended as a knock on the R3A, which is a fine camera in its 
>own right. I own an R2 with CV lens & am very happy with 
it, but the question here is regarding a comparison of the R3A & the M7, and 
there are ways in which the two just don't compare. The 
Zeiss Ikon, on the other hand does have 28 mm framelines & it has an even 
longer base line & higher mag than the M7, yielding an 
EBL of 55 mm or 50% greater than the R3A. In this regard the ZI is a 
legitimate alternative to the M7 without loss of features. 

>Cheers,
>Bill

Bill,

Mia Copa, you are right. I was writing from memory and thought that the 
comparison was with the .72 finder not the .58 which of 
course is the one that the R3a approaches. Even with that being the case and 
the limitations of the shorter base I have not had any 
focusing problems with a 50mm f1.5 or an 85mm f2 (Yeah I Know but I love 
those Russian lenses).  I never meant to infer that the 
R3a was the equivalent of the M7, it's not, but it makes a good inexpensive 
backup to the M7 at about 1/5 the price or an alternative 
for a camera that is not going to see a great deal of use. I usually keep a 
50mm on the R3a and the 40mm would make it an ideal one 
lens walk around set up.  The Zeiss Ikon is an interesting alternative and 
I'll take a look at it when it comes out, but again at a $1500
+ price tag it is a much more serious investment.  The other thing that i 
like about the R3a is that you can use it in situations where 
you might not want to risk a more expensive camera.

Neal F