Voigtlander Experiences?

rfshootist said:

IActually neither the camera nor the lenses are cheap, not at all in the sense of cheaply made and not cheap in the sense of little money.

A Leica makes CV look so however, because it is totally overpriced, even if one can admit that it is built with much more effort.

Only for a part of the CV-Leica price gap you get more built quality and QM, most of the gap is paid for a 50 yo ineffective hand production process executed in a country with very high labour costs.

Click to expand...

All very good points. I'd just note that Leica M cameras are built in Portugal.

Biogon Bill said:

All very good points. I'd just note that Leica M cameras are built in Portugal.

Click to expand...

Thought it was in Solms

Corporate headquarters are in Solms. Although some work is done there, the bulk of the manufacture is done in Portugal. Although not true for the M Cameras, Leica now even does some manufacturing of other cameras in Asia.

Biogon Bill said:

All very good points. I'd just note that Leica M cameras are built in Portugal.

Click to expand...

As for the quality one should add, that the choice of good material and small tolerances undoubtedly create a high product value, but this does not guarantee a reliable and fault free camera.
And so even a Leica is not free of partly serious design flaws (like the flary M6 finders for example) it CAN break like other cameras too and it DOES break sometimes, and even the QM is far from perfect. There are faulty (especially lens) samples slipping through the QM as in any other company, some of them so strange that a CV would get beaten like eggs for it.
So the word of the "best RF camera at all" must be seen with all necessary differentiations and relativizations if it comes to a decision if Leica M or not.

At least when the product image does not play the key role for the photog.
Otherwise forget all what I said.

Regards,
Bertram

Well said, Bertram.

I'd add to the flary M6 finders, the poor eyepiece seals on the M7 that resulted in repeated complaints of dust inside the finders.

I am a user of Leica M6 -AND- Nikons. I've used the FM series for many years and I now like the cheapo N80 for its small size, spotmeter, and AF (use it w/ prime lenses mostly). I use the Leicas about half the time and the Nikons about half the time, and I work on projects like the one you describe.

I have also owned non-Leica RF cameras and in my personal experince I've found the Leica rangefinders to me much more resistant to misalignment. None of my M's have ever had misaligned rf's and I travel a lot and use them professionaly. On the other hand, my Bessa T had a vertically misaligned RF from the time it was new (still focused ok, though) and the Konica Hexar RF was also misaligned vertically, and Konica could not fix it after two tries. Well maybe it was fixed when it left them but by the time I got it it was worse than when I sent it in (vibration in transt?)

I find very little difference, if any, in the way folks respond when I shoot with an M versus a Nikon F3 or FM with a prime lens, like a 35 or a 24. It's much more to do with your attitude than with the differences in noise between the cameras. And believe me, I've shot all sorts of quiet religious rituals.

Another factor to consider is the use of the long lens. Many folks use then succesfully on rangefinders but I find it hard to compose and focus within the tiny framelines. I much prefer to shoot the longer lenses on the Nikon for the reaons stated above and because you're so aware of how much (or how little) DOF you have. I often work with two M's with, say a 35 and a 50, and an FM or F3 with the 105 or 135 Nikkors (The 100mm Series E is a very nice lens too).

One well known advantage of RF's is that you can see outside the framelines - you can see a moving subject, for instance, before it comes into the frame.

I use the Leica for all the obvious reasons, but also because I'm very comfortable with it, because I've been shooting with RF cameras for many years. You can do your project, I think, very well with your Nikon equipment but of course this is a personal choice. However, you won't find much difference between the sound of an FM and a Bessa, IMO.

One final thing: I would not hestiate to get a used Leica M6. You can get them in nearly new condition now from good sellers for around $1200. The CV lenses are great. What I would NOT do is jump into an important project with a piece of equipment I could not use intuitively.

good luck

I will use my Leica M4-P and M2 on occasion. I find them particularly useful for candid work using available light indoors using high speed film. These cameras are very reliable, because of their mechanical simplicity, and because of this I will take them when I travel.

My M2 is a particularly handsome camera, but the M4-P is very unobtrusive and looks like a cheap little point and shoot, which adds to it's advantage.

Even though I am very fond of these cameras I can see no justification for the cost. (Resale values still seem good, so if you do buy one it can be resold fairly easily.)
Cost of repair of such a simple camera, by Leica, is nuts. Ridiculous to the point that I've undertaken my own repairs.

At this time, however excellent these cameras are, Leica is not value for money. If I had to replace these units I would certainly consider other options. Many of the alternative suggestions posted are interesting.

Good luck

I have a R. I can tell you it is loud (even louder than G1). The problem of R (and all other CV rangefinders) is the short frame base. I have heard CV converted a SLR body to rangefinder.
But R is very low cost. R is full manual, it is fun to use it.
Does Zeiss Ikon has loud shutter noise?

Over on CVUG, (cvug@cameraquest.org) Sebastien reported some camera noise test results that were recently published in a French magazine:

"The noisiest by far is the Leica M8 (58dB), followed by the Leica MP and Zeiss Ikon (both 54dB), the quietest being the Leica M7 (53dB).

Unfortunately, Cosina/Voigtlander rangefinders are not included in the review."

Tom Hoskinson said:

Over on CVUG, (cvug@cameraquest.org) Sebastien reported some camera noise test results that were recently published in a French magazine:

"The noisiest by far is the Leica M8 (58dB), followed by the Leica MP and Zeiss Ikon (both 54dB), the quietest being the Leica M7 (53dB).

Unfortunately, Cosina/Voigtlander rangefinders are not included in the review."

Click to expand...

Thanks for the info... but what is the difference of 1dB?

dxphoto said:

Thanks for the info... but what is the difference of 1dB?

Click to expand...

Decibels are on a logarithmic scale with each 3 dB being a doubling of power on the scale, but humans hear about 10 dB as an approximate doubling of perceived loudness. 1 dB change is just enough for a person to hear a noticeable difference.

If you know densitometry, 0.3 optical density being about 1 stop, or doubling the amount of light, and 0.6 being two stops, then just move the decimal for sound and make a 3 dB change equal to a doubling (or halving) of sound output.

Lee

The Bessas are a good bit louder than a Leica, but they are good for the money. I have a straight R and have often had yearings for one of the later, undoubtedly better, versions but they all miss one thing (as does my Leica MP): the R has a self timer. It might not sound much, but we have a trick that lets us take vertical, elevated pictures into archaeological trenches and which can also be used to photograph views from about 7m off the ground. We have a normal 5m surveyor's levelling staff with a tripod head mounted on the top which you hold up above your head with the camera aboard, fired by the timer. It is surprising how heavy the average camera gets at the end of a 5m lever, but the R is so light that it works a treat. I know you can get accessory timers that screw into the shutter button, but an integrated timer is a lot less easy to loose.

David.