Which Minox 35 To get?

I need (er want!) a Minox 35 camera. With all the models out there it's hard

to sort them all out.

 

I will be using it with HP5 B&W film only.

 

I prefer to use a yellow filter. Will the Minox close up with a filter

attached?

 

I want the best lens they made. I normally make 10x15 inch prints from 35mm

negatives.

 

The first thing I would do is send it to DAG for a full CLA.

 

Which model or models should I look for?

 

Thanks!

My Minox 35ML, with aperture priority exposure option, gives me close to full manual control. A 32mm slip-on filter fits it. No, it won't close with the slip-on filters. It might close with other filter mounts. I'm not sure DAG works on the electronic cameras; email him first. The lenses are pretty well equal, to my limited knowledge, but an expert might weigh in on this. I personally think 10x15 prints is pushing the envelope, mostly because it is a very, very lightweight and small handheld camera. A tripod sort of limts the Minox 35 experience.

 

Even if it doesn't fit all your criteria, it's a great camera and you'll love it for reasons you haven't thought of yet.

I had to go through 3 of them to find a working one and was amazed when I did. They are fantastic. DAG does work on them and I think when I decide to get another and find that it doesn't work I'll send it to him.

35ML is my favourite, it has P(rogram) mode and exposure lock features. I also like Minox M.D.C, it has all the features of 35ML

housed in a titanium body, multicoated Minoxar lens<P>

<center>

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/5807352-md.jpg"width=600><P>

</center>

I don't know any filter small enough, that the Minox35 can close with if mounted.

 

If you need other filters for your Minox i.e. pol filter, have a look <a href="http://www.sitecenter.dk/pbekkerh/filters/">here</a>

Get the cheapest one you can. That way when you throw it into the trash it will hurt the least. Make that ...HURL it into the trash....

Hello Bill,

 

I'm a bit puzzled by your recent posts in this and other threads, and I'm wondering what your motivation is?

 

In this particular case, the poster was asking for advice on choosing a Minox 35. If your intension was to steer a fellow photographer clear of these cameras you'd do better by posting something informative: e.g. explain what the problems and disadvantages are, or describe any experiences that back up your advice. Better still would be to offer some constructive suggestions: e.g. alternatives that offer some of the strengths but without the disadvantages. You might, for example, suggest that a Rollei 35S is almost as small, more reliable, and allows a 30.5mm filter.

 

As far as why someone would want a Minox 35, I think the arguments are made very eloquently by several recent threads which include Minox 35 photos. To me it's amazing that a camera that small, light and convenient to use can create photos of that quality. Perhaps you could post or link to some photos you've taken with whatever you think is a good alternative?

 

-Anthony

Hi Anthony,<P>I didn't mean to be ambiguous about my dislike for Minox 35mm cameras. IMO they are not just unreliable, but that their unreliability is undetectable until you've finished the roll and find it blank.<P>I carried various Zapp Minox's for 40 years without ever loosing a shot, but now,30 years after I tried their little 35mm cameras, I'm still bitter. The Olympus XA is virtually the same size and weight, and not only more reliable, but when it does fail you'll know it.<P>For the last three years I've carried a 3 MP digital Minolta Xt instead of any Minox, with better results and no problems.<div></div>

Thanks for all your help! I am postponing my Minox 35 purchase due to winning a black Rollei 35 S at a good price on ebay. I underbid the camera and got lucky.

 

While I carry a small digial with me, I want to have a small ff 35mm that I can keep loaded with HP5 and keep it with me most of the time.

 

So far in 6 months in Iraq I have met only ONE person shooting black & white. He had the same camera that I brought with me to Iraq - a Leica M4-P. He was using Tri-X, I was using HP5.

 

Of couse I offered him a couple of rolls of HP5 so that he could upgrade his kit!

Rollei 35S is one of my favourite too<P>

<center>

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/5807451-md.jpg"><P>

</center>

I use Minox 35ML far more than the Rollei 35S, because of the weight.

Minox 35ML =180 g, Rollei 35S =350 g, nearly twice as heavy, like a brick in pocket.

I own at least one of all the Minox 35 cameras, including the CD range. I have also run a film through most of them. I have a Rollei 35TE, untested and a Contax T2, untested and a Minolta TC-1 which I still use.

 

The problems with many Minox 35mm cameras is that they have been sitting unused for years. They do not like this and need cleaning. This is a modest task and usually costs under 50GBP. As the cameras can be had for half of that this seems a crazy price, but does assure you of years of reliable use. I have had many Minox cameras repaired by Andrew Britton and only one ML and a GT-E where not repairable. The ML needed too many parts and the GT-E was possible dropped in Hamburg harbour as the salt damage to the circuit board took a year to make the circuit useless.

 

The later serial numbers of the 35ML and some returned for repairs have the MDC type shutter. Much improved and more reliable.

 

The ML and MB have LED and not a swing needle meter. The ML has aparture and shutter priority, In image quality the ML, MDC, goldtop, GT-E, GT-X, GT-S and GT-E II are a match at any enlargement size I have looked at. Subjectively I have few prints that have matched the colour, sharpness and wow impact taken with the 35ML. None have bettered the camera.

 

My Rollei 35 experience is hampered by having too many needing service , the lack of cameras sold with manuals and too few sold complete. Also there is a difference between an 80EUR Minox that works and a $200 Rollei that isn't fully functonal.

 

Martin's telling point about using a 35ML more often even with the excellent and optically better Rollei 35SE available has been reported by others who own both. The difference needs close viewing of large prints. The heavier Rollei becomes too heavy to carry.

 

By comparision the results from the Minox 35EL, PL and GL do not have the wow factor of the 35ML. Good for a 35mm camera but flat compared to the later models.

 

The Minolta TC-1 is the camera that I wish Minox had made. The built in flash is not as good as the external hot shoes flash choice for the Minox and Rollei cameras but is supplied without compromise to the cameras size and weight. The problem I have is the 28mm lens gives a fish eye view with buildings bending. However it has enable me to take the whole view that the MDC failed to do (38mm lens) and to take photographs in enclosed places e.g. a party that would mean taking the Minox outside to include what I wanted. So I still use it to see if I can get used to it. In handling the range finder and controls are simple and effective. It has a first rate viewfinder and only the Ixus II is a better camera to strap down in a shirt pocket. But that is an APS.

 

The Contax range also have better lenses than the Minox but are larger and heavier cameras. Smoother lines to slip in and out of your pocket than a Rollei and many like the Contax more than their Minox or Rollei 35mm cameras.

 

The full range and details can be viewed at http://www.submin.com/35mm/collection/minox and all the manuals are online to read.

 

I would advise you to find a shop that has a second hand GT-E and ML in for you to compare the handling and viewfinders. The choice for me would be the Goldtop or the ML. The GT-E II will loose its soft texture coat too quickly and look like a cheap toy even with modest use. Failing that watch out for both cameras and get a sample of both with the aim to sell the one that does not interest you after you have compared them. If done carefully you can source in EUROS and sell in US$ at an easy profit. Downside is that the camera is then metric focusing. DAG can change the dial.

 

In the CD range I like the CD150 for its small size and note no difference between the CD155 and happily take the shorter telephoto for the gain in size reduction of the camera.

 

Walter Zapp was not involved with the design of the 35mm range. He did design for Minox after he was forced out in 1951, but not on the cameras. Walter Zapp owned and used a Minox 35ML. I now own that camera.

 

Gerald

10 years ago I bought a 35ML with colleagues monies from retirement liked it so much that when shutter started to stick I sent it to Minox HQ for a full 200GBP refurb and 2 year guarantee. Well worth it. I only shoot B+W, Tri-x developed in xtol 1:1 with superb results up to 16x12 from apertures in the range f5.6 - f11. I also have a virtually unused 35GT bought last year for 35GBP, just as a back up. I put a few films though it just to keep it ticking over - but the results are not quite as sharp as the ML. Back in the 80's I had a Rollei 35s and Olympus XA both exhibited poor control of exposure and were quickly ditched. My wife and I have 4 Canon EOS bodies with various lenses now to cumbersome, for ageing fingers, even the recent lighter models. But the Minox allows continued enjoyment with quality.