Bessa T

What is it about rangefinder cameras that photographers find attractive? I really don't know the answer despite using one myself. It could be the return to a basic camera, without the layer of technology engulfing it, or it could be the compactness of the type, or the image of rangefinders as being the ideal 'street camera'. Or maybe a combination of all these, or maybe something else.

If it is just avoidance of doing battle with an over egotistical microcomputer that thinks it knows more about photography than you do, and the complete control of the three basic camera functions - focus, aperture and shutter speed, then a basic, manual focus and manual exposure, SLR will do the business. Maybe a Nikon F, or one of it's many later variants, along with a couple of the Nikon fit, Zeiss ZF lenses. What more could one want? Well maybe something a damn site smaller and lighter for a start.

Rangefinders, with their lack of mirror box and associated pentaprism housing, are just that. Combine this with their smaller lenses, and you end up with a very compact, yet highly capable, camera.

For me, compactness is an attraction - I've long since given up going out with a kit bag full of cameras and every possibly accessory I might ever want. These days, it needs to fit in a bum bag or else it doesn't get taken. Wide aperture lenses is another attraction for me - f/2.8 may be seen as fast in modern, autofocus, SLR terms, but in rangefinder terms, it's quite pedestrian. That's not to say that all rangefinder lenses have wide maximum apertures, but the potential is there.

One problem with most rangefinders is the fixed field of view of the viewfinder (very few have zoom viewfinders). The viewfinder usually shows the view of a medium wide-angle lens and contains frame lines to show the coverage of other lenses, selected either manually or automatically, but no rangefinder has frame lines for every possible lens. If you have a lens with no matching frame lines, it's necessary to use the closest available and then estimate the difference. The other option is to use separate accessory viewfinders for each lens. This fact helped me to decide on a Bessa-T over one of the 'R' models. None of the R models had frame lines for all the lenses I wanted so I would have resorted to a separate viewfinder for at least one lens.

Another problems is what you see is NOT what you get. With a separate viewfinder, there will always be a slight difference between what is seen in the viewfinder and what the lens sees. This can be a problem with framing a shot, especially with closer subjects, and also with alignment of objects within the frame. What may seem in line in the viewfinder, will not be in line for the lens. I found this out with the first film I took with my T. In the shot shown here, the window on the far side of this old pillbox should have been centered on the near one. It was in the viewfinder but I forgot to correct for the parallax and this is the result. At least, with the T, the viewfinder is (almost) horizontally aligned with the lens so horizontal alignment of subjects can be done, but vertical alignment can't. With most rangefinders, the viewfinder is offset from the lens both vertically and horizontally so alignment of subjects is doubly difficult.

My own experience with rangefinders started 20 years or so ago with a Minolta Hi-Matic compact. It had a fixed lens and auto exposure so was really a point and shoot, but it was made before autofocus came about and so was equipped with a rangefinder. It was some time after I had sold the Minolta that I looked at rangefinders again. This time, I bought a Zorki 6 and a couple of Jupiter lenses. It wasn't very reliable and wasn't a particular pleasure to use, but it did a reasonable job. That was also eventually sold and it wasn't until the Bessa range appeared that I got interested again. But I couldn't justify buying one as I knew there was nothing it would allow me to do that I couldn't already do, but I kept looking. Eventually I bought a Bessa-L as I wanted a camera with a shorter flange to film distance, compared to an SLR, to use for pinhole photography. I bought a 21mm lens for it and became hooked. Eventually the L was sold and I bought the T, along with 28mm f/1.9 and 40mm f/1.4 lenses.

So what of the T? (This page was supposed to be about the camera but has sort of gone on a bit). The T was the third in the Bessa line to come from Cosina. The first being the L, which had no viewfinder or rangefinder, second the R with a built-in viewfinder and rangefinder, then came the T with no viewfinder but with a built-in rangefinder. Separate accessory viewfinders are used which clip into the accessory shoe on top of the camera. As the rangefinder is separate, it's possible for it to have a magnified view which gives more accurate focussing. The downside is that it's use is slower as you have to focus while looking through the rangefinder then switch your eye to the viewfinder to compose. You tend to get used to it though and it's not much slower in practice. It does make it next to unusable for moving subjects though unless you can pre-focus on a spot the subject is going to reach. Of course, you also need to change the viewfinder when changing lenses. So far, I've only managed to get the two mixed up once and ended up using the 28mm lens with the 40mm viewfinder.

The T was the first of the Bessa line to feature the Leica M mount instead of the Leica thread mount (LTM) previously used on the L and the R. Most of the available lenses still use the LTM, but can be adapted to the M mount, but Cosina is releasing newer lenses in the M mount. I originally bought the 21mm lens because I wanted the viewfinder that came with it to use with a pinhole lens of about the same focal length, but I liked using the lens as well. I've always had a liking for wideangles but the 21mm is probably too wide for general use, hence why I bought the 28mm. I thought I should have something a little longer as well and opted for a 40mm. I chose the 40mm instead of a 50mm, as the step change from 28mm to 40mm is about the same as from 21mm to 28mm. I may end up getting something longer still at some point but it's not high on my list.

The T is not a camera to be used in a hurry, though it's not necessarily much slower than an SLR. It's only the two stage process of focussing and then framing, as opposed to doing both, more or less, simultaneously as you would with an SLR, that slows it down. Some experienced rangefinder users claim to be able to focus by feel so don't need to use the rangefinder for every shot. The 'focussing by feel' is done with lenses that have a focussing lever. With practice, it's possible to approximately focus the lens by placing the lever in a certain position. Obviously, it's not accurate, but with reasonable depth of field it works - apparently! I have to say apparently because I haven't mastered it yet. It doesn't help that I found the 28mm to be too stiff to focus using the optional lever, so removed it.

One thing I've noticed is that the T does attract some looks. I suppose it does look a bit different and the fact I always hang it around my neck (from the left lug only as I can pick it up more quickly like that) makes it quite visible. But in use it doesn't seem to attract much attention. Some people use rangefinders because they consider them to be discrete. I don't think it makes any difference, it's more about how you use the camera. Some also claim rangefinders are quieter. I can't speak for other types but my Canon SLR is by far the quietest camera I have, not the T.

I bought my T, along with the 28mm and 40mm lenses, plus a few other bits, from Cameraquest in the US. Even with the postage, it's still cheaper than buying from the UK importer.

Finally, and this would, I suppose, apply to other Bessas as well, I bought a Mini Soft Release for the camera. If you're not familiar with these, look at the info on Cameraquest or Tom Abrahams' site. It makes a subtle difference to how you press the shutter release. Some claim it helps to prevent camera shake. I'm not sure about that but it is certainly more comfortable as you can use the ball of your finger instead of the tip.

| Top of Page |