Bessa 3m 1:1 magnification

[nolanr66]

I noticed that BHP has the Bessa 3M for sale and am curious about it. I realize that production has stopped on these camera's. However it has some features that do appeal to me such as the 1:1 magnifcation, 1/2000th shutter speed which makes 400 speed film pretty good for outdoors. And of course the cost is $799.00 compared to $4300 for a Leica with a .72 magnifcation.

It just started me thinking why this reasonably priced camera tanked? To me it seems that people would want the camera. Apprently they did not but curious why it did not sell in pretty good numbers. Any thoughts on it. Just to clarify I do not own one and have no plans to buy one. I have never actually seen one in the real world which does not say much since there are no camera stores around any longer.

 

[cuthbert]

I think because of snobism in the RF field (where if you either are Leica or you are nobody) and partially because well...it looks kind of ugly to me. Zorki 4 ugly.

On the other side the similar Zeiss Ikon looks better IMO, but it's pricier.

 

[mnemosyne]

I noticed that BHP has the Bessa 3M for sale and am curious about it. I realize that production has stopped on these camera's. However it has some features that do appeal to me such as the 1:1 magnifcation, 1/2000th shutter speed which makes 400 speed film pretty good for outdoors. And of course the cost is $799.00 compared to $4300 for a Leica with a .72 magnifcation.

It just started me thinking why this reasonably priced camera tanked? To me it seems that people would want the camera. Apprently they did not but curious why it did not sell in pretty good numbers. Any thoughts on it. Just to clarify I do not own one and have no plans to buy one. I have never actually seen one in the real world which does not say much since there are no camera stores around any longer.

The Bessa is a good camera, and you are right that dollar for dollar it compares quite favourably with a new Leica M. So why didn't they sell more of it? Some food for thought:

• competition: the question is not whether to spend 800 $ on a Bessa or 4300 $ on a Leica, but whether to spend 800 $ on a new Bessa when 800 $ can buy you a used and serviced Leica M3 (which offers a finder that is comparable in magnification to the Bessa R3). Hundreds of thousands film Ms have been built over the decades and they are in ready supply on the S/H market; so the market for new RF film cameras is obviously very small; Leica can apparently live with selling maybe 100 or 200 cameras a year. But for a manufacturer with a much lower pricepoint like Cosina this is much more difficult (economically)
• resale value: the 800$ used Leica will hold its value more or less, should you decide to sell it a year or two down the road, while the 800$ new Bessa will maybe fetch you half of what you paid when it was new
• repairability: for those who see these cameras not as something to buy and sell and short order, but use for years or maybe decades a different aspect comes into play: Leica film Ms have been around for some time, their design is simple and proven and they can be serviced or repaired by a lot of independent repair folks. Parts are in ample supply. There are even specialists for all kinds of jobs (like restoring 60 year old M3 RF prism assemblies etc to factory new). OTOH, should you ever need service for your Bessa R, I wish you good luck finding an independent repair person willing to work on these cameras. They were a niche product plus very late to the party in the analog age, so unlike your favorite classic Nikon, Canon, Hasselblad, Pentax, Mamiya or whatever branded SLR from the 1960s or 1970s, there is no independent repair or service infrastructure. In the US you have Stephen Gandy (importer of Voigtländer) who will service and repair Bessas (provided you have bought yours through him), and that's it (probably). Outside of Japan and the US you are more or less on your own. For even the most primitive service like a rangefinder calibration you would have to send the camera to your domestic distributor who in turn would send it around the world to Cosina factory service in Japan. Ouch.

 

[nolanr66]

I did see a Zeiss Ikon rangefinder several years ago at Keeble and Schuchatt, Palo Alto, Ca and it seemed very nice to me. It did not seem like it was a real solid built camera compared to the price that it had.. The Leica they had seemed very solid but it was of course almost $5K for the body.

I watched a video last night on you-tube where this guy Edwardo borrowed a Bessa 3A and went around taking some photos on the street. He did not appear to like the camera. Still it would seem the mechanical model would have been popular unless it was just an unreliable camera. At this point in film camera's to me anyway is it seems you need to stick with something that can be serviced from time to time. Leica fits that bill as far as I know. A repair on a Bessa may be a difficult thing to have done. I have a few Nikons but am only using the FM2n these days and it can be serviced.

 

[darkosaric]

Main competitor to new Bessa camera is not new Leica M, but old (but not too old) Leica M (like M6) that also costs more less the same.

Edit: I see that mnemosyne already wrote the same thing

 

[nolanr66]

Thanks for your comments Mnemosyne. Valid points. I think on resale value you really need to compare used vs used or new vs new. So if you buy a new Bessa and sell it a year later for $400.00 then you lose $400.00. If you buy a new MP for $4300.00 and sell it a year later then how much do you lose. I do not know but I bet it's more then $400.00. I doubt somebody that wanted a camera like a Bessa would say forget it to buy a beat up old M3 for $800.00. Most people could not get a decent photo from a meterless camera crippled with a 1/1000th shutter speed anyway.. I realize people in this forum certainly could but the average person out there needs some features.

However the Bessa did not sell and it's gone. Of course everything died except a few hangers on. Good point on the Leica selling low volumes and Leica being ok with that. I suppose the mark up is enough to keep it going forward. I do hope the Leica 35mm continues on down the road however. To rich for my blood but it does make me happy to know that something is still going on in the film world.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

I tried two Bessas, including the R3A when it was new. They're overpriced in my opinion based on their build quality and the RF patch on both went out of alignment easily and often to much frustration. Lastly for "quiet" rangefinder photography they simply aren't. I went user M bodies and have not looked back. Their buttery smoothness, quiet shutters and build quality have them a number of notches above anything Bessa IMO. No comparison, at least for what really matters for me.

 

[gone]

I owned several Bessa R cameras and an R3a and R2a. No, the build quality isn't as good as a Leica. But the Bessa R is a fantastically capable LTM shooter w/ a great meter. Very reliable. The R3a turned out to be not suited to my eyeglasses, but the R2a was darned near perfect. Same great meter as the R, and it was fun having AE and an exposure lock for M lenses.

Yes, the shutters are noisier than a Leica. But they're fine once you get used to them. If you use them in a half case they're a lot quieter. It's not like they sound THAT loud. For what I wanted, the $500 R2a was an even more capable camera than a used $1400 Leica M7, which I also owned, and I was not that impressed with the M7 compared to my old DS M3.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I don't think I'll add something new here, but my own experience and observations.

Actually, it was one of the last film cameras in production to be "tanked". It was not overpriced for new RF camera and it was sold successfully during rangefinders renaissance which appeared while film shooting was still relevant with mass market. As of now the rangefinder lust is partially migrated to digital platform. With used Cosina-Epson made RFs and used Leica RFs on acceptable price range and elite pricing of new digital Leicas RF. Plus fake and cheap RF like mimics from Fuji. X series.
On remaining market niche for film RF cameras no shortage of used cameras is observed.

Why used Leica M cameras are as popular as new or used Bessa? As of now where no huge difference in the price between M and B. I stated with like new Bessa R. After one year of travel, daily use it was loosing paint, rubber exterior looks like crap and shutter blades started to show some wear. It was no local service available and local official representative ignored request for spare parts. I went with like new Bessa L, but it has constantly jumping shutter. I decided to try Bessa T, it came unused, LN and after second film it has VF mount loose. Now you know why I would never try something like 3M. Heck, if only they could balance them right, instead of placing lugs in the place where it is forcing camera to turn up....

I went with used M4-2. No batteries to be worry about, shutter sound is the kiss and it worn out nicely and slow. It is all metal. Handling of it next to sexual touching! . And it is supported locally and by known repair shops which aren't at another continent of origin. Leica M is classic approach, which is matching classic RF concept. Recently I paid $725 for shipped M4-P in user condition. It has slightly fogged VF, which isn't as bad as it needs cleaning right away. One second speed was off. I left it at local camera store for one hour and speed was fixed at no cost. So, with no parts, no service, no repair manuals for Bessas I was not confident of buying it new at $700 price tag. But buying used Leica M for same price was not a big deal. Once you'll get film M into you hands you will realise why they are still number one for those who want RF camera for daily use and years to come.

Cheers, Ko.

 

[nolanr66]

good points all around. It comes down to the camera was popular and hung in there longer then many other 35mm camera's and then finally dropped off the market when it's time came. I did not intend this to be a used Leica vs new Bessa forum but I can see that it does apply. I have to admit I would rather own an $800.00 Leica (which I have never seen) over the $800 bessa. Anyway thinks for the posts. As I said I am not looking to purchase anything but was just curious why that model did not hold up in the long run.

 

[gone]

Well, $800 is too much for a Bessa of any kind. No argument from me on that one. I paid $500 for my R2a back in the day, and it was worth that. It's inevitable that any discussion of Bessa cameras goes to a Leica comparison. That's who they competed with, although they were on opposite poles and sold to vastly different markets.

The market for 35mm rangefinder cameras just would not support two players. Leica wasn't going anywhere, their customer base is very loyal, and that's why the Bessa went the route of the dodo.

 

[Huss]

I had a Bessa R3A (the auto version of the R3M) for a while. I bought it in perfect shape for about $400, and sold it for the same amount. So that was nice..
It is a very nice camera and with the same lens on it will take the same shot that a Leica with that lens would. The reason I sold it was that I also use Leicas and realized that there would not be anytime that I would pick to use it over a Leica. Aside build quality, Leicas are just so pleasant to shoot. The Bessa felt clunky with a loud shutter and just did not, to me, feel like a camera that I would want to use. In case you think I may be a Leica snob, I'm not. I love using Nikkormats, Nikon FM2s etc as well as Leicas, and my $20 Nikkormat feels more satisfying to use than my Bessa did. Just in the way it is built, handles, the way the film winds and the shutter fires. Same for my FM2n and FE2. And all these cameras are now much much cheaper than the Bessa.
Interestingly enough, the guts inside the Bessa are the same that are in the plastic "nikon" FM10, made for Nikon by Cosina. Which is the same as the Vivitar V3800 etc

The one thing I really really liked about the Bessa is the manual setting for the VF frames. Because that meant that I can use any LTM-M adapter on an LTM lens, as there was no auto keying between the adapter and the camera body. So a 28mm adapter can be used on a 50 mm lens and you can pick the correct frame lines.

 

[kivis]

Cv stated they are going to concentrate on lenses. simple answer.

My sweetness: