Re: [Leica] Interesting: Cosina/Voigtlander Bessa-R

[Stephen <cameras@jetlink.net>]

 It would be difficult for me to disagree with you more on most of your comments.

Gaifana@aol.com wrote:

> Wow. Based on the pictures, it's cute. The rewind crank is reminiscent of the
> older Canon LTMs. But (and this is the big but) what makes it worth $680?
> (remembering someone's comment about low-spec SLRs with rangefinders "glued
> on") This is really a product looking for a market.

A product looking for a market ??
I feel the Bessa is ideally positioned.  At roughly 1/3 the price of a M6 I
believe  it will pick off a substantial amount of would be first time M6 buyers
who are not so sure they want to invest $2000 or more into a body.   It has the
distinction of being the first mass produced LTM Rangefinder with a TTL meter.
Yes, I know about the Yasuhara,   but in all practical terms its low hand made
production is almost like it is not being made.

> I won't say it's a bad
> camera until I see one (because I've prematurely disliked things before), but
> I have a few questions based on the pictures. It seems that any objection
> leveled at the Hexar RF could be applied to the Bessa, but I guess we'll have
> to wait and see.

A friend of mine just bought a Hexar. He has a very large Leica collection, and
thinks it is a camera Leica should have made.  He loves it.

>
>
> Rangefinder?! I think putting an RF on a Bessa body is great, but except for
> the projected framelines, it looks pretty Canonet-ish. This is probably a
> function of having the shutter dial so tall (otherwise you'd probably raise
> the top cover enough to make the camera too big). Same goes for the base
> length, which can't be extended much, since again, the window would end up in
> an inconvenient place.

The Canon GIII-QL sold over a million copies, per the Canon web site. Today it
remains one of the best low cost RF bargains. What is wrong with looking like a
Canonet ??

>
>
> They probably could have (and should have) used a 1:1 finder, since 30mm BL
> and 21mm EBL is not a lot of focusing accuracy, even for f2 lenses. Consider
> what you can get with equal and greater EBL, in fixed-50mm rangefinders. Some
> with 1:1 finders, field-and-parallax correction, and 50mm BL and EBL
> rangefinders cost under $200. And the optical performance of some of these
> leaf-shutter models lack nothing, even against top-flight LTM lenses (I can't
> say that they're better than the Nokton, but I use the 50/1.8 Canon black as
> a benchmark - and the Canon lens lacks nothing that you can detect without a
> Focamat, APO-Rodagon, and a 25x enlargement - except good bokeh).
>
> I would be kind of worried about using something like an 85/2 or 85/1.5.

you should also be worried about using a 85/1.5 on a .72 M body.

Per Ken's later post, the VF is 1:1.  the Bessa R is made for shorter, slower
lenses, much like the Leica CL and CLE -- which are not great for the likes of
the 50/1.1 or 75/1.4 either.

Your comments seems to miss what the camera is entirely,  a lower cost
alternative to the M system with great lower cost lenses.   The
Cosina/Voigtlander line has become a best seller in Japan.  It's a camera and
lens line that Leica should have made as a lower cost alternative to the M.

>  Is
> that why it's shown with a 35/2.5? That probably also explains why the 75 is
> a 2.5. People who have gripes with the Hexar RF's 69.7mm BL and 41.5mm EBL
> would probably have anuerysms about this one. Of course, the faster M glass
> isn't available in LTM anyway, so maybe this is a moot point. Maybe it's
> worth paying a lot of money to get a better rangefinder mechanism (about
> $700-1400, depending on which M-type body). With a 35mm lens that's not much
> of an issue, but I can't see how you could hook a 90mm on this baby with any
> expectation of accuracy.

why complain about the 90 when it's not designed to handle a 90/2 ??  It makes
just as much sense to complain that the M6 can't RF focus a 200 mm, something
that it is not designed to do either.

> Materials. (I'll preface this by saying that I love the black paint) I know
> the photo may be a prototype, but why did they cover the back with that
> crappy plastic material? It looks like they took the back off a point and
> shoot. And the non-matching aluminum-colored winding lever sticks out.
> Finally, why didn't they sink the obviously-stamped hot shoe into the top
> cover? The lettering is nice, but was it really too expensive to stamp (or
> mold) the name on? And writing "Voigtlander since 1756" is quaint, but in
> light of the fact that this has very little in common with older
> Voightlanders, which, if you'll recall, was the Cadillac to the Zeiss Ikon
> Chevrolet, it's almost insulting.

Geez you like to complain, even before you see one. .   Crappy looking plastic
material ?  Have you owned a Bessa L ??  it has what is probably the same plastic
surface --  an expensive way to effectively provide a very grippable surface.
Within the bounds of an inexpensive LTM camera, I love my Bessa L.

> Upshot? Who knows. Too much of this new RF stuff is vaporware anyway. I'd
> like to hear this one, look through the finder, kick the tires; the Bessa-L
> is not very quiet. The body may breathe some new life into some orphaned LTM
> lenses, but I don't think I'd cancel a Hexar RF order for one. The extra $800
> spent on the Konica body equals greater focusing accuracy, motor drive, a top
> shutter speed four times as fast, autoexposure, indestructible epoxy-coated
> titanium body, M lenses, M lenses, M lenses...

perhaps you prefer the Hexar, but not every one.  Not everyone wants what the
Hexar is, not everyone wants to get away from the classic all mechanical RF
formula.     Both are aiming at very different markets.

>
>
> And why should Yasuhara feel threatened? This is no no way comparable, spec
> for spec. Speaking of Yasuhara - who's selling them?

on this point,  you really don't know what you are talking about.   The
Voigtlander is a well made mass produced  camera with great optics, while the
Yasuhara is hand made in extremely low qualities, without a lens line, and
without a light tight shutter.

Of course this is not to say you are not entitled to your opinion on the
Voigtlander, or anything else, but it would be nice if you at least had first
hand knowledge before making insulting comments about   this manufacture,  which
- -- more than any other, is responsible for the current and ongoing  Japanese
Rangefinder renaissance.    If the Bessa L were not such a success, it's doubtful
if the Hexar M (or soon to be new Nikon rangefinders)  would have made it to
production status.

Stephen Gandy


>
>
> << According to my sources in Japan, Cosina will announce its Bessa-R
> rangefinder body later next week.
>
> Its specs are as follows:
>
> Mechanically controlled vertically-travelling leaf focal plane shutter,
> speeds B, 1 - 1/2000
> Leica screw mount
> Rangefinder magnification 0.7x, rangefinder base about 30mm.  Effective
> base 21mm (arrrgh!)
> Parallax-corrected selectable frame lines for 35/90mm, 50mm and 75mm
> lenses.
> TTL exposure meter, LED displays in the viewfinder.
>
> http://www.cameraguild.co.jp/retinahouse/nikki/000108nikki002.JPG
> http://www.cameraguild.co.jp/retinahouse/nikki/000108nikki003.JPG
>
> The retail price is projected to be 69,800 JPY or approximately 680 USD.
>
> This will nail Yasuhara's coffin, I'm afraid.
>
> Ken Iisaka kiisaka@pacbell.net
> Lost in Mill Valley in Marin County, California
>
> </XMP>