What camera(s) are you using this weekend?

Discussion in 'Classic Manual Cameras' started by Mike Gammill, May 26, 2017.

  1. Have fun.
    Looking forward to the resulting posts....
  2. I have a length of FP4 in this Canon and hope to finish it before the forecast Spring storm arrives tomorrow night. I'd sent the lens away for cleaning, and this is the first film I've run through the camera; if it's OK I'll have to decide whether to hang onto the camera or move it on. As I very rarely use rangefinder cameras I fear it could become a shelf queen, and that would be a shame.

    Canon Model 7

    Canon framed copy.jpg
  3. This is what I took out last weekend. The camera at left is my first camera, given to my by my dad in High School when I was taking yearbook pictures. It's a Konica I rangefinder, just postwar. The one on the right is a Leica IIIf. My Summitar is in the shop so I used a Russian Jupiter 8 which didn't cover itself with glory but did OK. It works better with the Leica M8, whose APS-H sensor eliminates the outside edges of the Jupiter which make it look better. Still can't use that squinty viewfinder in the Leica. I probably need someone to rebuild it so that the rangefinder is easier to see. The Konica I has a very nice, big, combined split image rangefinder but a fixed lens with a leaf shutter. It telescopes out so you can put it in your pocket.

    I am pretty proud of myself for loading the IIIf without a hitch though. :p

    Ranssu1 likes this.
  4. CA1CCCF9-C8C3-4873-B21A-8C141A128A1A.jpeg
    Thanks. It knocks out nice images too.
  5. Weekend gear at the ready- Minolta XE with Sigma 24mm f 2.8 loaded with cold stored Panatomic-X. Also taking out the Olympus 35RC with Rolleipan 25. For more versatility under lower light I've got a roll of HP5+ in my Rollei 35.
  6. AB6DF410-2A12-41E8-9B47-54364754B2DC.jpeg
    What do you think of the Sigma 24?
    James Bryant likes this.
  7. Nice, and a beautiful photograph.
  8. Russ-Suzanne said:
    I am happy with it. Sharp even wide open. I don't have the hood so sometimes I do get some flare. I like the close focus of 1:4. Got mine from KEH a few years back. The Tamron Adaptall 24mm f 2.5 is also a nice little wide angle. Both are better than my Vivitar 24mm f 2.8 (which isn't bad).
    Compact trio with Minolta XE- Sigma 24mm f 2.8 and 90mm f 2.8 macro. 45mm f 2 MD Rokkor-X attached to camera
  9. stuart_pratt said
    Thanks, Stuart. The Neoca SV is certainly a pretty camera.
  10. I still have my Minolta XE-5. Not sure if that's the equivalent of the XE or if the XE-7 was. Nice camera though. I traded in my SR-T-101 for the XE-5 back in the early 80s. Still have a few lenses, a couple of celtics a Rokker or two. I loved the electromagnetic shutter. I think the XE is prettier than mine since it has that black plastic pentaprism cover. It's sitting in a box now.
  11. B9E22ABE-B4CD-4172-A519-04136624BCCE.jpeg I keep wanting to give my Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 a thorough test run, but never get around to it. What do others users think of it?
  12. 037EB3CE-91C7-4908-A6B2-81540E57F7F4.jpeg Sundays combo.
    iansurita likes this.
  13. The XE-5 is a slightly simplified version of the XE-7 and of course less expensive when new. When my family had a camera shop we stocked both. The XE-5 gives up the multiple exposure switch and the safe load signal.
    I have the Tamron 17mm f 3.5 and find it a very capable lens. I don't use it that much since it's rare that I need such a wide angle.
  14. Yes that's right and I was on a budget when I bought the XE-5. For Minolta, the 3's tended to be consumer "happy snappers" where the 5's were more serious amateurs and the 7s were more serious amateurs. The 9s tended to be aimed a bit more at professionals. Sometimes there was a 6 (such as my 600si) which had some special feature (like in the case of the 600si, the control layouts). I still have the dealer binders somewhere that have all the products described in high levels of detail. I had all kinds of Minolta cameras including a couple of XKs, but they were TOO heavy. I thought the XEs were a lot more elegant (and the XDs too). I note that Sony has continued this naming scheme somewhat (my Nex-7 for instance).

    I kept my somewhat low end XE-5 outfit mostly from sentimentality and because there wasn't someone in the family to donate it to. Now with the ability to adapt lenses on mirrorless cameras, all those old lenses (including Minolta's) have suddenly risen in value. I have several Celtic lenses (which were also Minolta's "cheaper" lens line). But they worked!
  15. My XE-5 looks well-used on the exterior, but it is still very capable. I did own an XK for a while but sold it to buy other gear. I wish Minolta had taken the XK shutter and put it in the XE body back then. They could have called it the XE-9. But I continue to enjoy using my XE, XE-5, and XE-7.
    My first Minolta wide angle, btw, was a Celtic 28mm f 2.8 MD that my parents gave me for Christmas in 1978. Still works great.
    My XE-5 with 50mm f 1.7 MC Rokkor-X
  16. ACCFCA80-01AD-483B-8440-5FA8C9D17667.jpeg
    I am undecided on my Tamron SP 17mm lens (first edition). Do you find yours pretty sharp?

  17. Seems sharp to me. It's been a while since I used it. I'll try to find some photos taken with it and post a few in the weekly thread.
    Russ-Suzanne likes this.
  18. Found one shot on my computer that was made with the Tamron Adaptall 17mm
    self portrait, Pentax Spotmatic with Tamron 17mm, Fuji Superia 200
    James Bryant likes this.
  19. Vincent Peri

    Vincent Peri Metairie, LA

    I'm having a second operation on my knee Thursday, but if I can walk without crutches by Saturday and my doctor okays it, I may do a little walking around the neighborhood with a couple of F3HP's so I can finish the rolls of color film in them and then I can load them with B&W film to try out the shutters at all speeds to see if everything works properly.
    Russ-Suzanne likes this.
  20. Look sharp to you?

Share This Page