Barnack vs. Retina?

Having always wanting a real Barnack camera (after years of FSU struggles) I finally bought a pretty IIIc earlier in the

year... and while taking many good photos with it, I find that I am grabbing for my Retina IIa much more often... part

of it has to do with being so pocketable with a good f2 lens, but it's something more. Just wondering how others who

have these two types of cameras feel.

Kodak's Bantam Special was better than any Barnack (infinitely more beautiful)...unfortunately it was 45mm.

And it was 828.

I value my 1947 Retina IIa greatly, and will happily use it in place of any Leica if I just need a 50mm lens. Like with my Barnacks, I find that an accessory viewfinder makes the camera(s) more useable. Similarly, I value my very well-used Retina 117 just as highly as any of my early Leicas ....

There is a link on the bottom of this page - http://pheugo.com/cameras/index.php?page=compur - for making up a roll of 828 film for Kodak Bantams

The 50mm F2 Xenon is superb. The IIa is a very compact camera, the viewfinder is a bit squinty, as is the Leica IIIc. It is the last of the Retina Folders with the advance (lever) on the top of the camera and the first to cock the shutter as you advance the film. Also lets you set the Shutter Speed and F-stop independantly. It was not worth moving the advance to the bottom to make room for the Selenium meter of the Retina IIIc, and the LVS exposure system is a pain (that can be solved with a power drill). But- the improved eye-relief of the IIIc and later Retina's is worth it. The Viewfinder in the Retina IIC is superb.

 

If you ever work on a Knob wind Retina, remember the thread of the Wind Knob is Reverse-threaded.

I haven't *won* a Bantam Special yet, but part of me really like the Retina and IIIc better. The Deco styling of the Bantam seem a little awkward to me... more like function forced to fall within form instead of the other way round, whereas the Barnack and Retina seem to be designed with form following function. I still want a Bantam, but doubt that it will compete with the other two as a user (especially since I have to slit down film for it).

 

I'm mostly using my C/V Color-Skopar 50 on my IIIc and honestly think it is one of my loveliest lenses, but the Xenon is quite nice as well (and f2 instead of f2.5... but in truth, in low light I have trouble focusing accurately enough even at f2.8 with either camera).

 

I love both cameras, I'm just surprised by how much I really ended up like the Retina (purely whim purchase).

I haven't used the Retinas, but I can really relate to your struggles w/ FSU cameras. It took so much money and aggravation to finally get a useable one that I could have bought two Leica III's. On the other hand, I am running about 50% w/ the III's too. Maybe the message is if someone is going to buy 50 to 75 year old cameras they should either immediately send them out for CLA's or learn to do it themselves.

 

The smartest thing I have done yet (which probably isn't saying much) was to go ahead and buy a Bessa R3A. Got the in camera meter, 1/2000 shutter speeds, and it can take M mount lenses and my favorite FSU lenses w/ an inexpensive adapter. True, it isn't as stylish or fun to use, but the real fun comes when I get the pics back. The only thing I would do differently would be to get the R2A instead of the R3A because w/ glasses it's hard to see the 50 frame lines.

Ah, the IIa. It was my first real camera, and I stupidly sold it to buy a Rollie with a 3.5 lens. I have since replaced the Rollie with a Retina IIIc, but its not the same. The IIa was probably the best all around 'pocket' camera I ever owned. I have an M4 and M7 but I still like to shoot a roll with my old Leica IIIa [1935], so I qualify to compare the Retina with the old Leica They are both beautifully made but really different cameras. For just walking around, the Retina, but for planned work or just more versatility, then definitely the old Barnack as you call it. That shutter click on the IIIa is the sweetest sound in cameradom.Loading it though is really a pain.

 

Incidentally, had I kept the Rollie, it wold be worth a lot of money now.

 

Thanks for bringing back old memories.