The lenses seem to be pretty good. As for a standard - lotsa users rave about the 50/2.5 Heliar (if I'm not mistaken). Check out an excellent Stephen Gandy's site www.cameraquest.com
>From my non-user experience and these rare occasions I handled the camera (a few R's) - very nice viewfinder, very plasticky feel, terrible shutter. As loud as my MX, and causing as much vibration as an SLR. This disqualifies it as a rangefinder camera for me. A rangefinder is supposed to be quiet, and vibationless so that the shooter could handhold it at slow speeds. I must say that at first I was very enthusiastic towards the camera, but from the first (but not the last - I thought maybe it was the particular specimen I handled) time I took in my hands I was VERY dissapointed. I think that if you can live without the 1/2000 speed you'd be better off with a Canon P with a dedicated lightmeter or the Voigtlander meter and Voigtlander lenses. The camera has a worse viewfinder than the Bessa (more flare prone but at the sametime it offers a 1:1 view - you can shoot with both eyes open), but everything else is MUCH better - no vibrations (and I mean NO), quiet shutter (not as quiet as Leicas but close), ultrasmooth film advance, and very solid feel. Wow, that was a long one. Regards, Lukasz -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 8:56 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: OT: Voigtlander RF Bodies - any good? Yippee - I've picked up a reasonably priced flight to Tokyo so plan to obtain one of those rather endearing R Olive bodies and a couple of appropriate lenses; maybe a 35 1.7 and something else. Any good? Kind regards Peter
