pls. help me decide:Retina IIa vs V Vito II , and why ?

been given a choice between these 2 gorgeous pic takers by a

friend, for a modest price . any suggestions/tips will be much

appreciated .. TIA .. (both in B+ condition) pc

The Retina IIa is the more deluxe of the two. Hence, it will be a bit larger and heavier. On the other hand, it has pretty much the best of what a small 35mm folder has to offer. For example, it has a rangefinder while the Vito II doesn't. Other features include a Schneider Xenon, set in a nine-speed Synchro-Compur with a cocking rack. A folder that cocks the shutter as you advance the film? What's up with that?

Although I did not use neither my VitoII nor my RetinaIIa, from a technical point of view I would prefer the latter. The VitoII has a wider body while the RetinaIIa body has a heavier feel and probably is somewhat higher. However, the VitoII is an old pre-war design, the RetinaIIa was updated post-war and hence has quite a few more up-to-date features.

 

BTW also some VitoII (like mine) come with a Compur shutter.

The Kodak Retina IIa I have has a German Synchro-Compur shutter; a modern one with M and X flash synch positions. It will strobe synch at 1/500 sec; but requires a flash with a PC cord. It has a modern wind lever for the right thumb; like a modern camera. A retina should not be hossed and wound with careless brute force. The cocking rack is ok; not not robust; sometimes it strips out; if the grease gets gunked up. Both cameras you mention are fine; worry about the condition of the one you chose.

Paul -- any typhoons in HK yet?

 

The Retina IIa has the advantage of rangefinder focusing, when calibrated is very accurate. The Vito II is zone focus.

 

The Retina lens at f/2.0 is faster than the Skopar (or Color-Skopar) at f/3.5.

 

Both lenses are very good. The Vito often uses the Pronto® shutter, which has a more limited range of shutter speeds. Some Vitos have the Compur shutter, but they seem to be not quite as common.

 

The Vito II is considerable lighter, which can be an advantage. It doesn't way down a coat pocket like the Retina IIa does. The Vito II also is easier to hold if you have large hands. Because of the Retina design, there is very little space for your fingers of your right hand to curl around the body.

 

Each really has its merits, and either is a fine choice. If you're not too good at judging distances, then I'd go with the Retina IIa.

 

If you could afford it, I'd buy both. You won't regret it.

The real reason to choose the Retina IIa over the Vito II is that in the Retina, when the shutter needs service you can get the lens off to work on it. In the Vito, the lens ID ring is glued on, and it's difficult to get it of without scratching it to service the shutter.

 

The faster lens and coupled rangefinder are also helpful, but secondary considerations to repairability in a 50 year old camera.

 

rick :)=

Hello Paul,

 

I've a IIa and a Vitomatic II that has the 3.5 Color-Skopar so I have some experience with both optics. Frankly, within their limitations I like them both. Part of the choice equation is to what use do you plan to put the cameras? If both are for scenics (i.e., infinity focused, primarily) and lens speed isn't essential, then the Vito would make a nice choice as its lighter and more pocketable than the Retina. But -- and a big "but" here -- if you plan to shoot at any distance closer than, say, 10 feet, the coupled rangefinder in the Retina is essential.

 

My vote goes to the Retina. Its substantial, very usable, with a great lens and shutter. You won't regret the choice.

 

The attached picture was taken with my IIa that I took with me as I was traveling to Washingto, D.C. by train.

 

Hope this helps. Please let us know what choice you make!

 

Best regards,

Ed B.<div></div>

Ed -- nice shot. Did anyone hassle you? Things are much tougher on photographers these days.

WOW ! thanks guys, never thot i'd get so much support trying to get my classic arsenal together. thank you for the wonderful response i got from you guys.

 

Mike: yeah ! we get a bit of the low pressure stuff and a bit of rain here once in a while,and it makes things worse.

 

WOW !what a collection you got there MAN! and i think you're getting some more.I enjoy looking at your shots tho Mike, it encourages me to look at stuff in a different perspective,rather than just plainly tripping the shutter whenever i felt like it.

 

so, the way i look at this is: most of you guys tend to be on the side of the Retina IIa, which is like (in this situation)a US$25 something more than the Vito II,and is a bit more beat up cosmetically.

 

am not a collector BTW, i'm only a bassplayer with a passion for photography,and i have a feeling some of you know wha ah mean.hehehe . (dun even know how to explain to the wife) when this piece of gear arrives on our doorstep,where it came from.

 

will try and balance things,and see what happens. thanks again to all that gave their opinions and ideas.

 

thank you for that beautiful shot Ed B. and your knowledge shared. you can laugh at me, but i guess i'm leaning towards the cheaper lighter , slower,smaller , Voigtlander Vito II. but we'll see , and definitely tell you what happens. Gratchi Mile ! pc

Kind of an apples vs oranges comparison considering the differing design/use objectives. The upside is that you can still find either for under a hundred bucks on eBay.<br>    Both cameras are challenging to work on. The Retina has a <u>lot</u> of parts. The Vito II wasn't built to be repaired. In addition to the front cover problem Rick mentions, there is also a flimsy metal tab that has to be bent and you'll need a couple of special spanners to twist out the inner barrel components. Still, I love my little Vito. I think Mike's idea to get at least one of each is the only solution.