Voigtlander Bessa II viewfinder sucks

summicron1 · Jan 18, 2016

Great results from this lovely machine at Arches National Park and Dead Horse Point, but anyone got a better way to view what your are shooting when wearing glasses?

I end up peeking up and down and around the frame. Kind of a pain. Guess I'm spoiled by modern viewfinders that are so big and clear. What were designers in the 50s thinking? The owner's manual speaks of an auxiliary finder, anyone got one to spare?

Sample fotos. Across 100, D-76 1:1.

ruilourosa · Jan 19, 2016

Clean it, it will be better!

You can use any optical viewfinder or rangefinder in your camera (acessory) shoe. Or rubber band a cell phone to it with the zoom close to the 6x9 /105mm, there are even phones that wor as a rangefinder... amazing!

Cheers

Rui Lourosa

02Pilot · Jan 19, 2016

The VF is not a strong point. The accessory finder is a Kontur, which is a bit unconventional but works pretty well. The tricks are two: finding a Kontur made for 6x9 (less common than the 135 50mm FOV and MF 6x6 versions), and more difficult (if your Bessa doesn't have a shoe - most don't), finding the accessory cold shoe for the Bessa. This is a pretty rare piece, going for close to $100 all by itself. I have one, but it came with the camera.

bunip · Jan 19, 2016

there is the voigtlander brand finder that you can find looking for "KONTUR SUCHER" on the auction site in germany. The 6x9 type is the rarest and usually sells for 50-100euros, but if you are not in hurry you can wait and buy it for 20-30. this finder is built for your model and it let you compose very well as soon as you learn how to use it. It is very unusual: it's a black box you look through with one eye; inside it you see only the finder bright lines that delimitate the image frame on a black field. with the other eye you look at the picture's subject and in your brain the two different images are linked in one framed image. so you use it with two eyes both opened. sorry for my rusty language.
cheers paolo

darkosaric · Jan 19, 2016

If you look viewfinders in single use cameras (for example fuji quicksnap): they are huge and nice. So it is not about the price - it is about wrong design.
Maybe you can find some single use camera (or some other 1$ plastic camera) and make the viewfinder yourself - it is the cheapest option.

Theo Sulphate · Jan 19, 2016

Very nice photos!

Patrick Robert James · Jan 19, 2016

I used to have a Bessa II. Don't know why I ever sold it. I have a Bessa RF (original pre war) now and the viewfinder is worse. I also wear glasses which doesn't help as you have discovered. I often focus then push my glasses up to look through the viewfinder with my naked eye. I do this with a lot of cameras. I can't see worth a damn, but composition doesn't require sharp eyeballs. The other cheap option is to double sided tape a finder on the top. There are a lot of cheap finders out there, you just have to figure out the equivalent focal length in 35mm, which is what I should do myself. I think a 50mm finder might do it off the top of my head but it might show a little less than the actual frame.

Hope that helps you.

summicron1 · Jan 20, 2016

Kind of a pricy auxiliary finder -- I think the lifting the glasses trick is best, actually, since this is hardly a sport camera. May keep an eye out for that sucher, but not sweat it.

Thanks for the suggestions all.

bunip · Jan 20, 2016

there is another diy option, cheaper than buying the 6x9 voigtlander sucher: you can buy the voigtlander 35mm sucher that often is sold for less than 20 euros ( i saw some going for 7-10), unscrew the rear lens, detach the black film that give te image frame and put inside a new one with the 6x9 frame. I can send you a contact print from mine, if you decide to follow this way. this kind of finder is to try: you love it or you hate it. composition is perfect; the bad news are that every time you put away the camera you have to detach the finder unless you have a dedicated bag.

darinwc · Jan 20, 2016

What is the equivalent fov of the 105mm on 6x9? Is that just a normal 50mm on 35?

darinwc · Jan 20, 2016

Answered my own question.. It is about equivalent to a 45mm lens. Assuming the usable frame image is 56x84.

nosmok · Jan 20, 2016

And of course the correct "normal" lens for 35mm is 43.5mm... We all suffer for Oskar Barnack having a 127 film camera sitting around when he bodged up the ur-Leica. That 50mm lens is normal for 3cm x 4cm 127 film frames, it's tough to find a 35mm finder in 43.5mm FL; at least 35mm and 6x9 have the same aspect ratio.

You could always trade the Bessa for an Ensign folder-- the Selfix and Autorange finders are beautiful, big and bright. And the Ross Xpres is no slouch in any of the examples I have. From reading this site I gather others haven't been so lucky.

(edit) Wait, wait! The Zeiss Ikon 426 finder, issued with the top of the line 35mm Contina scale focusser with the Pantar lenses, has a 45mm brightline ! Should be perfect for your Bessa II, it's bright and easy to use with glasses, has parallax adjustment for CU to infinity. You can't have mine, but they do pop up on a semi-regular basis. The also-present 30 and 70mm lines don't get in the way too much.

flavio81 · Jan 21, 2016

I read many times that the Bessa II suffers from flatness problem and that the front standard is flimsy.

I've handled one on sale recently and the front standard could be better, to be honest. The build quality could be better, as well, compared to the Ikontas and to the Ensigns.

Sirius Glass · Jan 21, 2016

I agree nice photos. In 2005 I looked not from the same view point a Dead Horse Point in photograph 2 and saw Jeeps driving on that road. That got me started on off roading. I have been on that trail many times and on a trail on the other side of the river looking back.

02Pilot · Jan 21, 2016

flavio81 said:
I read many times that the Bessa II suffers from flatness problem and that the front standard is flimsy.

I've handled one on sale recently and the front standard could be better, to be honest. The build quality could be better, as well, compared to the Ikontas and to the Ensigns.

I have a Bessa II and a Super Ikonta C 530/2. The Bessa standard is not quite as solid, and indeed mine required a bit of tweaking to get it level; once I did that, however, it's been no problem at all. The pressure plate springs are weak, but this is easily resolved by adding a few strategically-placed bits of closed-cell foam behind the plate. The Ikonta is more functionally built, though not as elegantly designed. I went into a bit more detail here: https://filmosaur.wordpress.com/2015/10/24/meet-the-camera-zeiss-super-ikonta-c-5302/

Sadly I've never handled an Ensign for comparison.

summicron1 · Jan 21, 2016

flavio81 said:
I read many times that the Bessa II suffers from flatness problem and that the front standard is flimsy.

I've handled one on sale recently and the front standard could be better, to be honest. The build quality could be better, as well, compared to the Ikontas and to the Ensigns.

I dunno -- i have both and I think the Bessa is solid enough -- I don't see/feel any play or flimsyness, and the negs look sharp -- on mine the pressure plate has enough spring I think it is pushing the film nice and flat.

Your results may differ, but the scans from this one, anyway, seem good. I admit I tend to not be as picky as some folk, however.

One area this shines is the viewfinder, whatever its troubles, at least you can see through it. The Zeiss Super Ikonta C I have is a later model with one of those Galelaen (sp?) finders with a semi-mirror front element to reflect the bright frame -- it is not enclosed, since it folds, and over the years the reflective surface has oxidized or something, to the point you can barely see through it. The camera is mint, but barely usable as a result.

smolk · Feb 13, 2016

02Pilot said:
The VF is not a strong point. The accessory finder is a Kontur, which is a bit unconventional but works pretty well. The tricks are two: finding a Kontur made for 6x9 (less common than the 135 50mm FOV and MF 6x6 versions), and more difficult (if your Bessa doesn't have a shoe - most don't), finding the accessory cold shoe for the Bessa. This is a pretty rare piece, going for close to $100 all by itself. I have one, but it came with the camera.

I happen to have the 6x9 Kontur - bought for a folder which happened not to have a shoe. But also, it is specific for the Voigtlander, as it is situated off-axis. So it really is not helpful for any other make.

The Konturs are really amazing accessories (I also have the 6x6 and 24x36) for the simple logic that underlies them, but the 6x9 is pushing it if you wear glasses: the frame is really at the edge of what you can see (the size is similar to the other Konturs, but these dealing with smaller frames, are easier to use). On the other hand, you use them for framing, not for focusing, so I tend to focus with my glasses on but frame without with the viewfinders I use.

Because the off-axis aspect, I doubt that other viewfinders will work well, unless you attach them underneath to the tripod socket - as I have done for my DeMaria LaPierre Telka III.

Voigtlander Bessa II viewfinder sucks

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency