Rangefinders on a Budget

I'm new to rangefinders - having used (and still use) great Canon

manual focus SLRs with a wide range of lenses. Since I will be doing

reportage and indoor church service photography, I've been advised to

find and use a rangefinder. What camera/lens set would fit a budget

of $100 to $900. On the internet, the Canon rangefinders, Russian

Leica copies, and Bessa R seem to be the best economy models in terms

of price, as compared to Leica M and "genuine" Leica screwmount

cameras. Would a beat-up Leica M3 or M4 fit the job? Which cameras

are more convenient to use than others? Any advice would greatly

help. Thanks!

Why not consider the option of a recent non-motorized SLR body and a

fast 50mm lens; you will get far more versatility from that with nearly the same degree of silence as with a Leica. Canon rangefinders in the economy class are pretty limited to the Canonet series: a 40/1.7 fixed lens. Think about an Olympus OM body and Zuiko 24mm/2.8 and 50mm/1.4 lens or a Pentax or Minolta equivalent. Most of the size and noise differences between rangefinders and SLRs are eliminated with a motordrive out of the "picture". And don't forget a tripod.

You can but a functional Leica or Minolta CL with a 40mm f2 lens for $600.00 or less on Ebay. I just picked one up for $416.00. I don't think this camera is ideal for everyday professional use, mostly because it has a "toy" look to it. You should be able to come uup with a Leica M2 "user" body for around $600.00. By using screw mount to bayonet adapters you can buy the new Voigtlander lenses that are as good as or better than the older Leitz/Leica lenses that are in your budget. A new Voigtlander R-2 body will cost you close to $500.00, and judging by the Voigtlander L that I bought with a 15mm lens it is a very decent camera. But it's a lot noisier than a Leica, not ideal for church photography! In the long run, Leicas are not expensive. I was on an assignment yesterday photographing a judicial candidate forum when I was offered (subject to negotiation) $1800.00 for a well used 30 year old Leica M2-R hanging around my neck. I'd paid $375.00 for it with a Dual Range Summicron brand new, thousands of rolls of film ago in the 1970's. I showed him my black paint first model 28mm Elmarit and his tongue was hanging out. Offered $1800.00 for that too! I don't know how you can consider expensive something that grows in value at a rate exceeding inflation while it's earning you money! I doubt that Bessas will do that. If you opt for the Bessa, get the Bessa 2 with bayonet mount so it will be fully compatible with the Leicas you'll end up getting. Make low-ball bids on several M2 bodies on Ebay. Tonight there were two Leica combination cases on auction. I'd bid $39.99 on each. The first one went for $81.00. The second I got for $36.00. The bargains are out there!

The Rollei 35s are a nice introduction to the viewfinder world. No rangefinder

so you will have to scale focus but the 35S has a very sweet 40/2.8 lens.

 

I lucked out and bought a user M2 with a 50/2 but, with all the online auction

sites, the user stuff is starting to go for ridiculous prices. Best advice? Be

patient, try as many camers as you can and wait for a good one.

Hi, Joseph:

 

Assuming that the noise is the main consideration, I can't agree with the SLR option. I have owned and used Minolta X700 and Olympus OM1n cameras and presently own Leicas M3 and I think that even the noise of the tiny OM1n is clearly louder than the M3's, very specially in a silent environment like a church. And keep in mind that even a M3 will be heard by people close to you though the noise is not really disturbing (IMO, of course). I have used M3 in churches and have noticed that people's attention gets more attracted by what you do than by the noise of the camera. If you can use moments when people is singing or the priest speaks loud enough, only those who can see you and/or are within a two-rows distance right in front of you will notice your activity.

 

The real problem could be the price though. I'm not fully familiar with prices in your local market but I think that for a job like the one you plan to face you will be in need of two lenses, at least: trying to minimize costs I'd choose a 50mm f2 Summicron and a 90mm f4 Elmar, I guess. That plus the M3 body might well exceed the $900 margin you mention.

 

If you will work in a reduced environment and can handle the job with only one lens, cameras with leaf shutter could be of help at a lower noise level, of course, and well within economic reach. The archive in this site has a good amount of information regarding this issue, specially at the "Leica versus . . ." section.

 

Good luck, Joseph, and best regards

 

-Iván

The Russian Leica "clones" tend to run fairly loud and would not suit your needs for a church camera. If you can try one at a local store; your might get a low noise one. The loudness varies between model and serial number. My quietest Russian camera is a 1956 Zorki 3c; my loudest is the spring motordriven Leningrad.<BR><BR>A canonet is a good low cost rangefinder camera; if you can live with the shorter 40mm lens. At F2.8 and below; the lens is very sharp. Mine cost 20 dollars; but the meter is shot.<BR><BR>Leica M3's are really quiet. My beater M3 was about 600 bucks of of Ebay with no lens. All the shutter speeds are good; and the rangefinder patch is easy to see. Leica glass is usually real great wide open.<BR><BR>The Bessa R of mine is about the same iritational loudness as my Zorki 3C. It has a nice viewfinder ; but the meter LED's are way too bright on mine! The rangefinder baseline is short; ok for 50mm lenses; abit dicey for my 85mm F2 and 105mm F2.5 LTM lenses. The zorki actually has a better rangefinder accuracy than my Bessa R; but the Leica M3 blows both away for low light accurate rangefinder work. <BR><BR>The Leica M series is harder to load; and will require some patience before mastering.

The Canon rangefinders I'd seen on the internet were copies of the Leica screwmount cameras. They had designations such as IIF, IV, a trigger-wind VI-T and VT, and a Canon 7 with a selenium? meter. Does anyone have any comments on those?

 

Thanks again!

Hi Joseph,

 

Have you looked at this site?: www.cameraquest.com/classics.htm

 

There are write ups on the Canon 7, Canon QL17, Olympus RD, Minolta 7S II, among others, all of which are highly recommendable.

Joseph, I have recently joined the wonderful world of RF(leica for me!) photography getting myself an M6 and 50cron as well as the 35ASPH cron after being blown away by the 50(not the cheapest way but in the long run I'm betting it's worth all the doll). Having done quite an extensive research online as well as reading many extremely helpful posts on photo.net leica's forum prior to my purchase, I feel there's a few suggestions I can offer.

First I would recommend the 35mm focal length for indoors, but often it requires you to be real close if you're taking environmental portraits, but do covers indoor/architecture nicely. The 50mm (leica's cron if you can afford) is simply out of this world. However, since you may not want to spend so much, perhaps looking into the latest or second hand Voigtlander (Bessa-R or R2) will be more appropriate. The bessar-R2 'feels' quite nice, not up to leica standard of course, louder(like mech SLR), viewfinder is bright (very important!) Price difference here is not much between R and R2.

Leica IS overpriced. (lost my rubber rect hood cap today and it's 40bucks a pop in Aus!)

 

"Apparently" the 50mm f1.5 Nokton is impressive (no real experience with it) as well as the 35mm f1.7. Both offer that extra 1/3 of a stop which may help in indoor. As for reportage, I think one cannot go wrong with the 50mm or 35mm... I find 50mm is tigher and more 'composed' and 35 more 'snappy' (snap-shot moments with pre-set ready to fire) I personally went with the 50mm first because I was most comfortable with the 50mm focal length on my SLR (FM3a) than the others. It is quite an underated focal length I believe. (Lusers:I'm not sure if the 35mmf2ASPH is sharper than the 50cron? My test rolls don't seem to be too impressive with the 35mmASPH than my 50cron, both latest)

 

As for LTM screwmounts (which I'm now interested in), I don't think they're too user-friendly compared to the modern Ms or Bessa-Rs with meter built in. It's more of an 'artpiece' than a worker's tool.

 

M3 and M4 would be fine if it's a good deal, but again, no metering built in, which I consider as a disadvantage since I believe the philosophy of a rangefinder is avalible light and ever-ready...but if you're used to metering externally then it shouldn't matter.

 

All this, depends on how 'serious' you want to get into rangefinders... if you just want to test the water, then go for something cheap, but I'm guessing that you may either fall in love or totally hate it for its eccentric 'qualities'. I love my leica!

 

Make sure you check all shutter-speeds as well as range-finder accuracy like 'infinity test' for the 2nd hands.

How about the Konia Hexar? Fixed lens 35mm/f2.0 of exceptional quality.

Given what you say you want to do--a mainstream commercial job--I'd say the Bessa R2 is the right camera for the price. A used Leica M-something would be nice, but risky, given that you'd probably have to quickly have a CLA on it, which wouldn't leave much money for lenses. Canon, Russian, and the Bessa R will all tie you into screwmount lenses, which I don't think is a good long-term situation for a working camera, though some manage with them. Certainly don't mess around with discontinued, non-interchangable cameras, or you'll find yourself spending money all over again when you grow out of what they offer.

The Canon P is probably the best and most usefull of the Canon rangefinder cameras. I has a single stroke lever advance and a modern rewind crank. It has frame built in frame lines for 35, 50 and 100mm lens. It has a hinged back and is easy to load. The 50mm 1.8 and 1.4 are considered two of the finest lenses ever made. The 35 f2 and the 100 f3.5 are also great lenses. The later black or black/chrome lenses are the best. The Serenar lenses tend to be inferior to the later Canon lenses. The camera is of superior craftsmanship and rivals any Leica ever made. The camera is quiet and compact. There is no built in meter. The focusing is easy with a large circular split image. It will accept the new Voigtlander lenses. I have two of them and use them extensively. I

I'll vouch for the Rollei 35, as John has above. I carry one with me in my briefcase as it is compact (truly does fit in a pocket with the lens retracted), yet with a great lens. Sharpness and contrast up to par with non-asph Leica glass (the Sonnars and Tessars - NOT the Triotar). Though quirky (as if a bottom load Leica isn't), the build quality will keep a Leica shooter happy. Spend a month practising your focus-estimation and you'll be extremely happy with the results. The enclosed photo was shot at sunrise (windowlight) wide open (f3.5) at 1/15.<div></div>

Okay - I give up. My last photos all came up with the clickable heading - why does this one just have the photo POP up. Apologies to anyone offended by nudity.

Nice photo!

If you are indeed worried about noise and you can get by on only one lens,I would highly recommend Konica Hexar (the original black SILENT version, alt. a silver one that has been altered to be silent). They are truly silent, excellent AF, and an outstanding 35/2.

 

Otherwise, the only really quite RF out there is Leica but that won't fit your budget.

 

If this is a limited project, rent or borrow a Leica.

I mainly use screw-mount Leicas. A IIIc or IIIa--maybe even a IIIf--

would be in your price range, possibly with a few lenses. Among

Russian cameras, I'd suggest the Kiev as being better made

and quieter than the Leica copies. (Actually, my Kiev 4a is

virtually as quiet as my Leica IIIf, although with a 'Contax wheeze'

on the slower speeds). The lenses aren't Leica compatible, but

they're cheap and VERY good ( with the usual cautions about

Soviet quality control).

Joseph,

 

Your best bet is a used Leica M3 or M2. For a wide angle get the Voigtlander 28mm f/1.9. For a normal get a Canon 50mm f/1.8 black and for a tele get a Canon or Nikkor 85mm f/2. Have the M3 cleaned & adjusted by Don or Sherry. If you have the money get a Leica 50mm f/2 Summicron instead of the Canon 50mm. Later on you can replace the 85mm with a Leica Tele-Elmarit 90mm f/2.8.

 

To start just get the M3/M2 with the best 50mm lens you can afford. I think you can get a user M3 with a 50mm f/2 and a CLA for $900 but it will be tight.

 

I shot a concert at my church two weeks ago and used the 85 f/2 and a Canon 50mm f/1.2 at f/1.4. No flash allowed. I used a Leica IIIg but an M3 will cost you less.

 

Yesterday I shot a baptism where flash was allowed so I used a Hesslbald 2000 FC/M which sounds like a bomb going off; no one minded.

 

I allso used the IIIg with the Nikkor 85mm with a small flash at f/5.6.

 

A Leica IIIf would work but you would have to have it serviced before using it and that will cost $200- $250. Get the RED DIAL version as the shutter is better.

 

When you can use flash, slower lenses are fine but for existing light you have to have fast glass.

 

Canon made some rangefinders with a 35mm f/1.7 which are very quite. You can't change lenses on them.

 

If I had you job I would get a Leica M3.

Thanks for all the replies. I've narrowed my choices down to a Canon P or L-1, a Leica M3, and a Bessa R2 (or R). How do these compare? Also, I've looked at Stephen Gandy's Camera Profiles and found a brand called Nicca. Are these any good, and will they fit my budget? Thanks so much!

Yashica bought Nicca about 1960 to gain access to a focal plane shutter assembly line for use in the then new single lens reflex cameras. The last "Nicca" was the Yashica RF which lookes like a screw mount Leica M3 and had a 50mm f/1.8 Yashica lens. The Niccas previously were marketed with Nikkor lenses. The cameras are MUCH better than people here thought 40 years ago when they were dismissed out of hand as "cheap Japanese Leica copies". You could buy the bodies in any pawn shop for $15.00. Probably for that reason many were just discarded when they needed servicing. They're quite sought after by collecters today. Best to leave them to the collecters.

Joseph; the shutter module assembly of the Bessa R /R2 is the same as several SLR cameras shutters; and has the same noise <b>minus SLR the mirror flap</b> . See if you can actually play with one of these cameras before actually buying one maybe mail order; then there are no surprises! Several of my regular leaf shutter 35mm cameras are quieter than the Bessa R/R2 series cameras. If you fall in love with the Bessa R/R2 on paper; and it is too loud; then you bought the wrong tool. <BR><BR>The Leica screw mount cameras and M series cameras are very quiet cameras. The shutter is rubberized cloth; which is quiet.

Joseph:

 

I've owned Canon Ps a couple of times. They are stunning little cameras - exceptionally well-engineered (i.e they had Voigtlander's little 'flip-up' rewind crank 40 years before V'lander - and 7 years before Leica got around to a rewind crank). Biggest drawbacks - the RF patch is rather indistinct (and only worsens with age), and the metal-foil shutter usually has developed a 'squeak' as well as crinkles. Biggest plus - it's essentially an M4 with a screw mount, swing-open back, and life-size viewing. The screw-mount Canon 50 f/1.8 is passable. The P is substantially more compact than the '7' series that followed.

 

Assuming that I had a reliable source for repairs (since Canon hasn't touched them in decades) I'd much prefer the P over an M3 for actual use (mostly the loading/rewind and 1.00 view). I'd probably still have mine if I hadn't been seduced by SLRs, once upon a time.

 

Realistically the Bessa-R2 is probably the best overall buy - IF the shutter is quiet enough (a real question, as mentioned). Metering plus M-mount (which also takes screw lenses) plus 'new' warranty.

 

If you can stretch the budget a bit a Leica M4-2 or 4-P and a 20-30 year old black 50 'cron shouldn't cost much over $1200 - essentially what you'd pay for an M3 and lens unless it was a real 'beater'. And you get fast load/rewind.

Rollei 35 series are very nice camera. The Rollei 35S and Rollei Classics has better lens, 40mm /2.8 Sonnar. The Rollei 35 has

Tessar lens. <p> I have Rollei 35 and a black 35S. However Rollei 35 series are not 'rangefinder' camera, they are viewfinder camera.<p>

I don't used these Rolleis much, because they are rather heavy compare

with Minox GT-E or Minox 35ML, further, since the Rolleis were discontinued, spare parts are hard to come by, expensive to repair.<p>

Contax T is an excellent rangefinder manual camera with Carl Zeiss Sonnar lens.( Again a long discontinued camera)<p>

If I locked up the mirror on my FTbn and used an old Leica 50mm optical finder fitted in the hot shoe, could the noise level be as quiet as a rangefinder? The Canon has a horizontal cloth focal plane shutter, thus having less noise than a metal shutter. Since I will be in one position for the whole church service, I could simply prefocus the camera before locking up the mirror. Any ideas or comments regarding this will be really helpful. Thanks again.

Don't see why that wouldn't work, but are you sure the finder sitting up high on that SLR prism will show the correct field of view?

 

By the way, though I'm a Leica user, my high school/college camera was an FTBn. Though it's still in mint condition, the needle's a bit jumpy with a 1.35v battery, and I haven't found a mercury batter for it yet. Can't tell if it would work with the right battery. Does your meter still function?