Rangefinder alternative

Friends,

I've Leica free for a couple of months now, don't miss it terribly,

mostly because I don't have much time for photography at all these

days.

 

I do do a fair bit of travel and carrying my Nikon SLR tends to be a

bit bulky, so I was thinking of getting a decent old rangefinder

just to carry around for fun w/ some Tri-X or something. No, I'm not

looking for a Bessa R2 or Hexar RF at this point.

 

I never used the really old rangefinders, e.g. Contax or Canonet,

but I'm curious to try one out for fun. Any recommendation on what

I should try/buy? Which of the Canonet are "the best"? (Hence, I'm

not expecting Leica quality here but something manual, fun and with

decent quality)

 

Stay cool, Leica friends!

 

Cheers,

Patrick, what's the upper limit on the amount you wish to spend?

 

Have you considered a Leica Screwmount?

Try the Minilux. Excellent quality. Great travel camera.

Couple of hundreds, tops. It is not the money really. Just like the notion of carrying something traditional, manual when walking around places on biz travels (seems to be the only time I get any moments over to think long enough to handle a manual camera given two kids under 15 months at home).

 

In a perfect world I would yet again get a M6TTL and this time with a 35/1.4 ASPH, but I don't feel like spending the money for the amount of use this piece will get.

 

I guess some type of old Contax would be an alternative (this is where Christopher Chen jumps in :-) )

Patrick,

 

What about one of the Kiev Contax IIA or IIIA clones? You can get one for under $100 on the auction site. Apparently some aren't too bad as the Soviets basically shipped the Contax tooling to from Dresden to the USSR. See http://www.cameraquest.com/zconrfKiev.htm.

 

Regards,

 

Steve

I once owned several fixed lens rangefinders. The one I kept is the Canonet GIII QL17. Not necessarily the best, but the best compromise between size (with Olympus as the smallest and Yashica as the largest), optical and build quality and handling.

 

Sharp lens but you won't like the bokeh - very similar to typical Nikkors with that same sort of doubled or cross-eyed look to out of focus areas.

 

Funny you mention your plans. I've been thinking about which Leica would be ideal for me. I'm leaning toward a III-series with collapsible lens. As little as I use my Canonet the film loading hassles of the Leica III-series wouldn't be that great. I just figure it would be a more rewarding experience to work with such a fine gadget. Going to a Canonet seems like a step backward. But everyone should try a good ol' fixed lens Japanese rangefinder at least once.

Old Contaxes are great when they're 100 percent but it's hard to find technicians familiar with them, and they are very heavy.

What about a Retina or a folding rollfilm camera and some FP4 or Plus-X? People love Canonets but I never had much success with them and they seem to be cleaned out of thrift stores around here. Look at the Olympus write-ups on www.cameraquest.com

I have some very crisp negatives (Plus-X) from the '60s and '70s from an Argus C3...

Patrick, you should try either a Konica S3, rather hard to find and expensive, or an Olympus 35RC (cheap) I have acquired one of each, and while the Konica has a faster lens, for a really nice package, It is hard to beat the Olympus. It has a really bright rangefinder/ viewfinder, and all the f-stops and shutter speeds are plainly visible in the viewfinder. You will have a choice of manual, or auto operation. It also will operate off cheap zinc-air cells that are sold for hearing aids (6 for $8.00). You can set the ASA speeds manually, a nice feature you cannot get in the newer cameras. I paid $25.00 for mine at the flea market, & only needed to replace the light seals. Go to Steve Gandy�s website and read all about them. I almost forgot to mention the Olympus 35RC feels real solid just like my Rollei 35, and almost as solid as my Leica. It�s from the age of small all metal rangefinder cameras.

 

For what you will pay for them you will not worry about losing it,or having it stolen. Mine sits under the front seat of my car, or in my briefcase every day.

The Contax II is a large heavy camera and often not in reliable condition because of the shutter straps. After 60 years or more, it's not unusual to find that the fabric straps have broken.

 

The Contax IIa is a smaller camera and more reliable. Generally, it will need a routine cleaning, lubrication and adjustment. Once completed, it should give you years of reliable service.

 

The IIa shutter curtains are aluminum and hence not prone to drying out, cracking or pinholes.

 

I've been using one almost exclusively for the past 15 months and really like it a lot.

 

Take a look here at my thoughts on this camera:

http://host.fptoday.com/melek/zeiss/contax_iia.html

 

With just one exception, all of the lenses for the Contax I, II and IIa are interchangeable.

Hi Patrick,

 

I have some experience with these before I went over to Leica and have owned / used a whole bunch. It is not a Leica, and esp. a Contax / Kiev is basically 'another Leica system'. However, if you just need one lens, these cameras are nice. But when you later want to upgrade to a Leica, they soon become obsolete except for a Rollei 35 maybe or a rangefinder 'to fool around'. They are all quite cheap compared to Leica, spending 50-100 USD gives you a very good photographic tool.

My experiences:

I had some problems with the canonet where the lens became loose. Otherwise it is a nice camera. The Oly 35 RD I liked better because of the build quality. The lenses are about as good as it gets, I did not make a test, but I never had a situation where I needed a better lens.

The Oly 35 RC is a bit different than the RD - the RC has a 'real' shutter dial while the RD has everything to be set on the lens barrel which you need to get used to. The Revue is mostly the same as the Canonet / Olympus but has AE only.

For the Contax/Kiev you need an external meter; these cameras are very heavy and slow to use, a bit like the LTM cameras (no wind lever). However they are heavily built and feature very good optics.

The Rollei 35 is a bit strange to use due to the ergonomic design, but the optic is superb and the camera once you know how to use it incl. guesstimating (no rangefinder) is a capable tool.

I also used some russian Zorki (non-LTM ones) stuff, but cannot recommend these. The same goes for the cheaper models like the Yashica 35 ME, the Minolta E and F models and their clones.

For what you want maybe the Rollei is the best choice, followed by the high-end fixed-lens rangefinders of the 70s. For more information also have a look at the cameraquest sites if you do not know them.

If you want more detailed descriptions please mail me -

 

hope this helps - Kai

 

PS: If you like to buy one, I would like to get rid of some manual stuff I still have: Since I have my Leica(s), I do not use them anymore - and I have some 12 cameras lying around right now. So if you want to:

A Kiev 4AM (late model with the 53/1.8 Helios), a Olympus 35 RD, a Revue 400SE (which has a 40/1.7, but shutter priority automatic only) and a Rollei 35 TE. Just mail me if interested.

The Contaxes are all pretty heavy (although excellent), with Kievs you have to get an older one to get a decent one - and still heavy.

I've tried all sorts for this, and now have a bunch of cameras all of which do this sort of job, but with differeing degrees of functionality and portability (and cost!).

First up: Leica CL. The best compact camera ever made, IMO, but too expensive, prone to failure and it tempts you to carry a spare lens or two. A screw Leica is similar, except you'll need a separate meter or use your experience.

Next, Rollei 35S. Superb lens, fully manual control - only real downsides are the odd handling and the lack of a rangefinder - vvery nice indeed, though.

The most compact candidate - the Olympus XA. Pretty decent lens (not up to the previous two, but not at all bad), aperture priority only - all in all, a nice camera, and recommended when weight and size are critical.

There are loads of others out there, but one that's cheap and has a great lens is the Ricoh 500G - I keep meaning to try one myself.

Patrick,

 

Why not make the jump to MF? The old folder MF cameras can be had for what you are talking about. I am waiting for mine to come in, a Hapo 66e (made by Balda). Some Agfa Isolettes can be had in teh same price range. In this price range you wioll find them CLA'd.

 

Happy snaps...

 

Chip

Please forget all the Leica-copies, you wont be 100% happy with the feel, and if you are not happy you won't carry it around and hence no photos, and then the +/-100 USD you spent will be really expensive because the camera won't get used.

 

On Contax I or II rangefinders, I studied those as well in the past, and today there is no contest. The Leica SM, e.g. IIIC or IIIF (forget the older ones for actual use) is easier to service, more durable (i.e. less faulty second hand cameras, the Contax I or II you would always(!) have to CLA before using them). Read the Ivor Mantele "Using and collecting classic cameras". He has some very good advice in choosing between Contax and Leica.

 

Nikon/Canon SM: cannot comment because I haven't used them. I'm probably just being an old fart, but I don't like Japanese cameras (purely illogical reasoning and irrational thinking, but so what?)

Try the Olympus XA. I just bought one for $100, and it's tiny enough to carry around in a jacket pocket. Takes great pictures, too -- surprisingly so.

 

More info:

 

http://www.cameraquest.com/xa4.htm

Patrick:

 

You've certainly got my # re: the Contax! You know what I've had

to say about the Contax in the past (i.e., I think they're much

better than LTM Leicas w/some caveats) as well as what other

people say/have said on this forum, so there's no need for me to

repeat all that. I've got a couple extra Contax IIa bodies (+

lenses) sitting around, so if you want to actually try some of this

equipment out for yourself, feel free to contact me off-list & we

can get together sometime (assuming you can get away from

the new baby!).

Patrick,

I have owned and/or experimented the following range finder cameras:

- Leica Minilux zoom

- Rollei 35 s

- Leica Screw Mount

- Leica M2

 

My main objective was to identify a camera being simple to use, relatively lightweight, small, but with a very good quality.

 

My feedback on them is:

- Minilux Zoom: very small and confortable, VERY good zoom lens; its limit is that it does not have many manual control, so in some situations you cannot shot (400 ISO in a very sunny day!!!).In addition it's expensive. Sold it

- Rollei 35: very small and "dandy", good lens, but I can't accept not having a focusing system. Sold it.

- Leica Screw Mount IIIc with Summar 50 f2.0 collapsible: Wonderful camera: reasonably small (especially with the lens collapsed), VERY robust, extremely elegant, very silent and soft shutter, great range finder (contrasty and precise) and wonderfull and romantic lens. With 400 ISO film I shot my best pictures at home in available light, very much better than those taken with my Contax SLR and 85 f1.4 planar!!! I strongly Advice it also because the price is a good deal. It's not within your budget, but you'll definitely love it.

- Leica M2. I exposed some rolls of 100 & 400 ISO films indoor & outdoor with a collapsible Summicron 2.0. Extremely nice camera, very good lens, wonderful shutter and very luminous view finder. On the other hand, for my taste the range finder is a little less contrasty than my Leica IIIc. And the cost is a different deal.

 

To resume I strongly advise to you to consider Leica IIIc, but pls with Summar 2.0. It's a magic lens.

 

Nice pictures

 

Elio

Patrick consider purchasing the Olympus RD that Kai mentioned above if it is in good shape. It has all the good features of my Olympus RC but with a faster lens.

Some of these older, popular rangefinders like the Canonet and the Minolta 7sII are almost just as bulky as a Bessa R2, or an M6. I think they're heavier than the Bessa.

<p>

Unless you go with the Olympus XA or the litte Rollie, you might as well carry a newer model. A Bessa R with the Voigtlander 35mm pancake lens is pretty small.

Patrick....check out this other Camera Quest page if you haven't

already. Lots of 70's compact 35mm cameras. I used to use the

Olympus XA and it really is nice for its size. Warning: after using

a Leica rangefinder viewing system, you won't beleive how bad

other cheaper rangefinder's viewing system are in comparison:

the XA is no exception, but still very usable if you've got

something contrasty to focus on.

 

http://www.cameraquest.com/com35s.htm

Hi, Patrick,

 

I have the G-III QL 17 canonet. I bought it as a learning camera for rangefinder photography. I am returning to photography after many

years (a lifetime) away. So it has been a fun camera for me to use to learn the basics again.

 

PROS: small in size, tab focusing, fast sharp lens, very easy film loading, and cheap (I got mine for 70 dollars in very good cosmetic and mechanical shape).

 

CONS: asa max setting 800, max shutter speed 1/500, fixed 40mm lens, rf image much smaller/harder to see than the one Leica I have had the opportunity to view through (M3).

 

While it may be heavier than the VL R2, price wise we are talking apples and oranges. If I am not mistaken, an R2 with the 35 lens is way above the price range you posted.

 

In short, the canonet is a nice little camera with the limitations you might expect in this price range. It is a big step down from a Leica, but isn't everything ;)

 

hope this helps.

 

I will try to attach a sample photo, but my scanner is cheap and it does not have the sharpness the photo does. It was take at the San Diego auto show using 800 film.

Charly.

Try a second hand M4 or M3..... (:>)))))

I'll second Chip's idea. MF folders easily fit in a briefcase, are light and you get these huge negs. I recommend a Moscow 5 6x9 -- a russian Zeiss Super Ikonta clone. About $50 on the auction site.

I'll second (or third, or fourth?) the Olympus RC recommendation. Great little package for practically nothing on Ebay.

When I picked up the Olympus 35RC at the flea market, I knew I had to own it. As soon as I had it in my hand I realized what a neat little package it is. This camera is a real sleeper, that�s why they sell for so little money. The only possible limitation is the f2.8 lens, but the Rollei 35S is no faster, and does not have near the features of the Olympus. I know because I own a Rollei 35. Like I said in an earlier post, these are all metal cameras, and are very solid.

Patrick,

 

I know the feeling. After years of photography, I found myself with two kids to carry around instead. While I had switched over to Ms years ago, I had a hard time when I thought of dropping either of my M bodies rather than my kids. No questions, kids win, but Leicas cost too much to replace.

 

I go a Ricoh R1 (kids are now almost 5 & 7) and loved it. Small, quick, razor sharp lens and did not cost an arm and a leg. It took a dive off the top of a TV to a hard wood floor and now sits awaiting repair.

 

The R1 was my first auto-anything camera, and I found it OK. Every once in a while the focus would be off, but I could live with it.

 

I agree with the Konica S3, great camera, a bit bigger, but not sure about batteries or repairs. Minilux would be a great choice, if it were not soooo expensive.

 

I have been slowly moving over to digital for almost everything. Just got an Epson 825 printer and love it. There a many good small digital cameras in the 3 to 4 mega pixel range that will deliver lots of quality with a good printer and some very inexpensive software (MS Photo or Adobe Elements).

 

My biggest gripe about digital cameras is the slow auto-focus. Olympus (we own a D100, D230 and a D520) seem to be very fast in the D line of cameras. I have several Nikons and like them, but they are too big to carry everywhere. The D230 takes only 2 AA batteries, a fixed lens about 35mm f2.8, seems fast enough for me, but I still miss the instant press and snap of a manual camera.

 

Any of the Ricoh R or GR cameras are GREAT, small and all have razor sharp lenses. I would really look at digital for the flexibility and cost. I find myself thinking of moving back to film now the kids are older, but without a wet darkroom, I get frustrated. Like many folks here, I am looking for a digital body that will allow me to leverage my lenses and provide me control, not overload me with features.

 

Best of luck with your search and kids.

 

B2 (;->