A couple of question on the Voigtlander R3A and Leica lenses

film_man · Apr 7, 2015

Hello,

I'm new to the wolrd of rangefinders and just got myself a Voigtlander R3A with a 40/1.4. Lovely little camera and I'm liking the rangefinder experience. I have a couple of questions on it thought:

First, I find that the shutter speeds are nearly impossible to see on the R3A in the finder. Is that what is to be expected? If I place my eye to see the shutter speeds I can't see the patch, if I see the patch I can't pretty much see the shutter speeds. This is even worse in bright light and more difficult with the extreme speeds (ie the ones to the edge of the finder). I don't care for it that much but it would be nice to know what the camera is trying to do when I use aperture priority. I generally find the finder a bit cramped, I should probably have gone for the R2A to get a bit more space around the 35/40 lines.

Second, I already have a Leica R8 with a 50/2 Summicron and would like to get a similar look with the R3A. I can mount a Leica 50/2 (obviously M mount) without adapters on the R3A. Correct?

Thanks!

splash_fr · Apr 7, 2015

You can mount any m mount lens on the Voigtlander. But remember that you don't have frame lines for every focal length in camera! That's why there are different models (R2/3/4A).

Enjoy,
Gerd.

film_man · Apr 7, 2015

Ok thanks Gerd!

mnemosyne · Apr 7, 2015

I had an R3A for some time and later a R2A and always found the readout of shutter times/metering on them a big PITA. The finder of the Bessas is nice and bright, but your eye has to be 100% centered to be able to see the frame lines, RF spot and shutter times correctly. I can imagine when you use this camera a lot and on a daily basis, at some point you will get used to it and learn to position the eye correctly in relation to the eyepiece. For me it was difficult, as I tend to use all kinds of cameras like SLRs, view cameras, TLRs etc, so when I picked up the Bessa once in a while, I could never get used to it, especially as the idea behind RF cameras is to make the process of taking a picture easy, quick and intuitive. Moving your eye around in quest of the frame lines was kind of detrimental to the whole RF idea, IMO. It was one of the reason I finally parted with the Bessas and went for a Leica M2. It has no shutter times to read (which helped me to discover the liberating experience of taking pictures without worrying about shutter times and exposure too much), the framelines are very easily visible and the RF secondary image is always "there" when I put my eye to the finder!

Regarding your second question, yes, you can mount and use the great majority of Leica M lenses on your Bessa. There might be some very rare exceptions with lenses with very deep sitting rear element or collapsible lenses that cannot be collapsed. Also, the Dual Range Summicron 50 from the 1960s will not operate correctly on the Bessa, IIRC. Cameraquest web site has some detailed info about the compatibility with M lenses (scroll down here to "What lenses DON'T fit")

Summicron 50 lenses for R mount have changed in design and optical properties over time and so have the Summicron 50 lenses for M mount. Erwin Puts should have some information as to which M and R designs are related and could give you a similar look, at least in theory.

film_man · Apr 7, 2015

Thanks very much for the info mnemosyne. I do like the overall rangefinder experience but as you say looking around for the frame lines is not very nice. I think a R2A would be better for me as when I'm shooting with a 50 the framelines would be more in the centre. Anyway, I'm on my 4th roll with the R3A so I'll wait a bit and see how it goes.

Thanks for the info on the Summicron lenses. From what I have read so far it appears the R is the same as the non-ASPH M lens or something like that, I will look up the info you suggested.

John Koehrer · Apr 7, 2015

It seems that there were at least three different designs of the 50mm M lens besides the asph, and two of the R lens.

Each of the M lenses have their own following so the direct comparison is a bit subjective. For a chuckle check out
RFF and "which 50 Summicron should I buy" threads. The question over there seems to have multiple lives.

mnemosyne · Apr 7, 2015

film_man said:
Thanks very much for the info mnemosyne. I do like the overall rangefinder experience but as you say looking around for the frame lines is not very nice. I think a R2A would be better for me as when I'm shooting with a 50 the framelines would be more in the centre. Anyway, I'm on my 4th roll with the R3A so I'll wait a bit and see how it goes.

Definitely don't give up too quickly, use it for a couple of months and see if it works out for you. Some, like me, never get used to it, but others do easily or never even notice. I found the bottom 40mm frameline on the R3A especially difficult to see, but had little problems with the 50mm lines (I don't wear glasses or at least I didn't at the time I owned the Bessas). For me the 50 was the ideal focal length for the R3A finder. Don't forget to try to shoot with both eyes open and see if you like it. IIRC, the 35mm lines on the R2A are a bit easier to see than the 40mm lines on the R3A. I must say in the end, the thing with the rangefinder patch secondary image was probably more annoying than the frame line thing. When you shoot a lot with rangefinders, you tend to see the frame already around the scene before you raise the camera to your eye and are not really so dependent on the frame lines unless there are some critical elements at the side or corner of the frame that. At least that is my experience. But at the time I used the Bessas I was still new to RFs after shooting SLRs and TLRs for decades.

film_man · Apr 7, 2015

John Koehrer said:
It seems that there were at least three different designs of the 50mm M lens besides the asph, and two of the R lens.

Each of the M lenses have their own following so the direct comparison is a bit subjective. For a chuckle check out
RFF and "which 50 Summicron should I buy" threads. The question over there seems to have multiple lives.

Well I've got the 2nd version of the R so it appears that the closest match is the non-asph (as if I had the money to get an ASPH!) M with the built-in hood or the one before. They even look the same.

film_man · Apr 7, 2015

mnemosyne said:
Definitely don't give up too quickly, use it for a couple of months and see if it works out for you. Some, like me, never get used to it, but others do easily or never even notice. I found the bottom 40mm frameline on the R3A especially difficult to see, but had little problems with the 50mm lines (I don't wear glasses or at least I didn't at the time I owned the Bessas). For me the 50 was the ideal focal length for the R3A finder. Don't forget to try to shoot with both eyes open and see if you like it. IIRC, the 35mm lines on the R2A are a bit easier to see than the 40mm lines on the R3A. I must say in the end, the thing with the rangefinder patch secondary image was probably more annoying than the frame line thing. When you shoot a lot with rangefinders, you tend to see the frame already around the scene before you raise the camera to your eye and are not really so dependent on the frame lines unless there are some critical elements at the side or corner of the frame that. At least that is my experience. But at the time I used the Bessas I was still new to RFs after shooting SLRs and TLRs for decades.

Oh yes I'll definitely keep it for a month or two and put more film through it. I've been playing with it with the 50 framelines on and I can definitely see it being much better. I'm also finding how to position the camera so that the patch and speeds are visible and the trying with both eyes open this afternoon it is getting comfortable. So I'm not writing the R3A off just yet! I'm waiting for the first rolls from the lab so I'm curious to see what the 40 does.

noyart · Apr 8, 2015

How do you like the lens? Been looking for a 40 for my r2a. I'm running around with a Industar 53mm I think it is shot 3 rolls haven't had them developed yet.

John Koehrer · Apr 8, 2015

film_man said:
Well I've got the 2nd version of the R so it appears that the closest match is the non-asph (as if I had the money to get an ASPH!) M with the built-in hood or the one before. They even look the same.

Three different M mount 50mm formulas, none that are Asph.
In my world, it don't make me no nevermind but lots of people are pretty dedicated to one version or another. :confused:

FWIW the version 3 is referred to as the "Bokeh king"

I doubt that most people would be be able to see the difference though.

film_man · Apr 9, 2015

John Koehrer said:
Three different M mount 50mm formulas, none that are Asph.
In my world, it don't make me no nevermind but lots of people are pretty dedicated to one version or another. :confused:

FWIW the version 3 is referred to as the "Bokeh king"

I doubt that most people would be be able to see the difference though.

Well I like the Summicron look from my R so the choice is fairly easy on which M to buy, I can't buy the ASPH so I'll go for the newest one I can afford

film_man · Apr 9, 2015

noyart said:
How do you like the lens? Been looking for a 40 for my r2a. I'm running around with a Industar 53mm I think it is shot 3 rolls haven't had them developed yet.

Waiting for the rolls to come back from the lab! If It is anything like the 40/2 Ultron I had in Canon mount I'm sure I'll like it.

guangong · Apr 9, 2015

From my experience with the r2a that I purchased when first offered, the exposure info is totally whited out in all but the dullest of lighting. My experience with diodes for under-over exposure as with the m6 is not much better. Bought the voightlander because I droped my wife's m5 shortly after she bought it (forty some years ago)and was not allowed to use it again until recently (wives never forget). My advice...get an m5...cross the pointers and presto!...perfect exposure.

jho · Apr 10, 2015

I love the Cosina Voightlander 40mm f/1.4, it is a perfect match for the R3A. It does vignette wide open but it is not excessive and I like the character that it adds, goes great with a roll of neopan 1600 or pushed tri-x. I would highly recommend it.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

film_man · Apr 10, 2015

Got the film back yesterday, yes the 40 is a very nice lens. From f/2 it is ridiculously sharp and . I'll keep shooting with it for a while and then see what I get but I still think a 50 is needed as the 40 is a just that bit wider than I'd like.

Xmas · Apr 10, 2015

John Koehrer said:
Three different M mount 50mm formulas, none that are Asph.
In my world, it don't make me no nevermind but lots of people are pretty dedicated to one version or another. :confused:

FWIW the version 3 is referred to as the "Bokeh king"

I doubt that most people would be be able to see the difference though.

There were four optical /2 formula in M 5cm before the Apo/asph
The fourth came with detachable hood then with built in.
Many people prefer the third optical version.

The 40 mm CV is an ok lens unless you got GAS.

film_man · Apr 10, 2015

Xmas said:
The 40 mm CV is an ok lens unless you got GAS.

...or you don't want 40mm.

Xmas · Apr 10, 2015

Of course

A couple of question on the Voigtlander R3A and Leica lenses

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency