Biggest bang for the buck

[summitar]

This thread is inspired by a recent posting by Raid Amin, describing his first

use of a Konica Auto S2.

 

When I arrived in Vietnam in 1966, I inquired of the old timers as to the best

bargains. The consensus of the majority was (1) Sony tape recorder, (2) Seiko

wrist watch, and (3) Konica Auto S2 35 mm camera. They were people who just

wanted to record their experiences, and were not camera fanatics. The fanatics

recommended the Topcon Super D, which was a very nice camera indeed, but out of

my price range. So I bought a new Konica S2 at the exchange for $35. Not only

did it produce sharp photos, but it demonstrated excellent engineering, design,

and workmanship. Large viewfinder/rangefinder with bright yellow outline that

was corrected for parallax. Full flash sync up to 1/500 sec. Shutter preferred

automation or full manual control. Battery check. Accurate CdS exposure meter

within the lens barrel so that compensation for filters was automatic. Built in

lens shade. Display of exposure info in viewfinder plus on top of camera. Easy

to load film. Came with everready case and strap. Lever wind film advance.

Notice that most or all of these features are lacking from the Leica

screwmounts, and quite a few are absent in the Leica M3, which was the

contemporary of the S2.

 

For the above reasons, I nominate the Konica Auto S2 as having the biggest bang

for the buck (mine is still working without CLA) of any camera I know. I would

like to hear your nominees. And, please, garage sales, pawn shops, or

inheritances don't count. The buck refers to street value of a new camera.

[jrjacobs]

I would have to say without a doubt the Yashica Electro 35 cameras.

Incredibly good, fast lens, accurate aperture priority, parallax adjusting rangefinder, flash sync at all shutter speeds. Most of them are still going and can be had for not alot. They are also another "Vietnam era" camera.

[roger_smith4]

I like my shutter-priorty Canonet QL-17 GIII which has similar features to the above and is also easy to load.

[greg ma]

In the SLR department the Nikkormat FTn is legendary. I think it's value comes in on how long the camera lasts without major overhaul or CLA. It does what it is supposed to do producing great pictures with Nikkor glass even without the accessories of the F's. The copal shutter is still going strong with a crisp sound at all speeds and a nice snap to the film advance. Light meter even works !!! My Nikkormats are still working right along with the Nikon F's matching them exposure for exposure. (Although I am not a heavy shooter, I'm down to 3-4 rolls a month). Other's did not quite make it to the finish line.

 

In the rangefinder department I loved my original Konica Auto S. Big and heavy I bought it for a song and was amazed at how long it help up and the quality of the photos. The viewfinder made focusing easy with glasses. My blacks and whites were gorgeous. A little problem, a CLA, and somewhere along the line it disappeared.

 

Others may disagree, this is only personal expeerience based on what I have owned.

[ben conover]

Hi, I know this is slr based so far....so consider the Burke and James press camera? I bought the camera with a good lens and film holders shipped to my door for $200. I restored it, removed the rangefinder, the viewfinder, and replaced the leather. The lens is imaculate and all the shutter speeds work fine.

 

The film size is about 20 times the size of the Konica Auto S2.

 

Cheers.<div></div>

[don_mckeith]

I'm still using my first camera, which I bought new in "67 (I think)- but it was a leftover store display model from 65? 66?-

 

Yashica Electro 35 "professional"

 

I had it CLA'd this past January by Mark Hama, because I thought it was time. (I put in new light seals about 6 years ago) The CLA cost more than I paid for the camera.

[dan_fromm2]

PX prices shouldn't count, they weren't available to the general public. If we want to base this exercise on fair market prices of new goods, we're going to have to ignore prices paid for used equipment. Back to old advertisements and catalogs, folks. And no grey goods. Finally, we're going to have to adjust for inflation.

 

This sure looks like another stupid "my thing exceeds your thing" exercise. One silly brag begetting another.

[don_mckeith]

To be fair if you figure in inflation,yada,yada yada -- I paid about 1/10th the cost of the camera for the CLA. I figure an "06 Dollarette

is worth about a dime in "67 money.

[don_mckeith]

Dan-

 

"Bang for the Buck"= value for your hard earned dollar. It's an old concept,but not compleatly dead.

[vivek iyer]

<i>This sure looks like another stupid "my thing exceeds your thing" exercise. One silly brag begetting another.</i>

<p>

OK, I'll bite. Kerry's is the clear winner! :-)

[piotr_panne]

Gabby, Wiesbaden. About $48 adjusted.

[gene m]

The "old timers" steered me to a bar in Saigon for a bargain. I got the clap.

[summitar]

This wasn't meant to be an exercise of computing to the nearest nano-dpllar. We all know that the theory of diminishing returns kicks in somewhere along the line. The PX price of $35 for a Konica S2 may compute to an MSRP of around $50. But what do you get for the extra $200 to buy a Leica of Nikon F. Is it merely conspicuous consumption? We know that some low cost cameras can provide very excellent performance, such as the Knoica, Canon G-III, Yashica, and Voightlander Vito B. I was merely inquiring about other moderately priced cameras that perform better than one would expect based on the price. I don't know why Fromm doesn't keep his axxhole views to himself. Maybe he was fropped on his head as an infant.

[summitar]

Gene M,

 

I guess your old timers didn't warn you against buying Saigon Tea for the local ladies. "Be nice, GI. I treat you number one, you treat me number 10".

[summitar]

For clarification, I have shopped at military exchanges for nearly 50 years. They are expected to turn a profit, so the main advanage for the customer is avoidance of sales taxes. Some overseas exchanges also provide avoidance of other taxes, on occasion. Avoidance of federal and state taxes on tobacco and alcohol could provide tremendous bargains, much more so than on photographic gear. Plus, this is the Classic Camera forum so I assume most cameras, if purchased new, would be from the 50s and 60s. There are probably very few of us who purchased a new camera in the 40s, and a new camera purchased in the 70s would bot be a subject for this forum. I seem to recall that inflation rates were fairly low in the 50s and 60s. Thirdly, I own and enjoy several each of the Konica S2s, Canon G-IIIs, and the Yashica Electros. All are fine camras, but I get no special machismo points for preferring one over the other. For largely subjective reasons, I am more comfortable with the Konica. The Canon has a neat flash mechanization, but I find that using a lens shade or a UV filter on it can change the exposure settings. The Yashica has a great lens, but the exposure the camera chooses are more obscure to me than the Konica settings. I posed the original question to get opinions on other lost cost overachieving cameras. I don't consider this to be a stupid question. But Mr. Fromm, a lima delta dispstick if there ever was one, seems to derive perverse pleasure from trashing other opinions. I suggest that he pursue professonal guidance.

[bob oldendorf]

To go back to the question:

 

Here's another vote for the Canonet GIII 17. I paid $69 (new) for mine in 1985

(though offhand I'm forgetting if that included the flash, or if the Canolite was

an extra-cost option). It's still working (without CLA) today.

 

I used it as a back-up to my new FE-2, and it was my choice for hiking, etc.

 

An extremely powerful, versatile camera, with better than 'good-enough'

optics, all in a not-very-expensive package.

[g-man1]

olympus stylus epic // mju ii

[Brian]

<P>My Yashica Minister III, which I bought used in 1971 and is still going. It's not as cleverly engineered as the Konica and I suspect the lens is not quite as good, but it is simple to use, has coupled rangefinder and frameline parallax correction, EV exposure sytem, a seemingly indestructible Selenium meter (and I think it's a good deal smaller and lighter than the Konica).</P><P>I paid about 2/3 the new price and in retrospect a new one would have still been a very good buy.</P><P>And I see nothing wrong in reminiscing about these good experiences. My camera deals have not always been so pleasant so it's nice to recall the good ones.</P>

[mharris]

YashicaMat. Batteries? We don't need no stinkin' batteries. Sharp lens, dependable and the chicks dig it.

[daniel_iggers]

Kodak Pony IV with the Anastar lens!<div></div>

[peter_naylor1]

Guys, with a title like that I'd have to say that Gene M's post is the only one on target. All your other ones are definately "OT", surely? ~~PN~~

[dave_powell1]

I'd have to say that the biggest bang I've received for a retail (non-used) camera purchase was the 35mm Ansco Super Memar that I snagged back in the '60s at Cord Camera in Columbus, Ohio. (It was the American-market version of the Agfa Super Silette.)

 

While the camera's body plating was none too thick, and now shows some wear and rub-through, its 6-element Solagon f/2 lens can still produce knockout images if I don't point it into the light. No metering or autofocus either. Sunny-16 and Hyperfocal Focusing turn it into a point-and-shoot.

 

Another nice feature is that the speed and aperture rings interlock when set, and allow me to select many equivalent alternative exposures with a simple turn of the combined ring. It's still a high-quality street shooter. Believe it cost me about $40 back then...down from $60. In today's dollars...well...my head hurts too much right now to figure it out!

[david_held1]

I have to vote for the Electro 35. Picked mine up at the PX at Camp Zama Japan in early '70 while there on R&R from that very unpleasant place Uncle Sam sent me in '69. Carried that sucker to the field and back. It still works and takes great pictures.

[david_m]

If you mean price/performance ratio, its got to be the Argus C3. You can find them for $5-10 or under and they can produce very sharp photos. And don't forget it has INTERCHANGEABLE lenses. I also agree with the previous poster about the Kodak Pony, although I prefer the Pony II.

[dave_powell1]

Dave M's right-on about the Argus C-3! I didn't mention it in this thread becuse a friend GAVE me his father's C-3 kit. But since Dave brought it up, I'll add my experience with the first test roll I put through mine. When I had it printed at the local pro shop, the manager asked what camera I'd used...he'd never seen such clear, sharp, detailed images before, even from his Hassey customers (or so he said).

 

The store manager actually had a shelf of old broken cameras near the counter, so I pulled down his own C-3 and handed it to him. He just stared at it...couldn't believe it. And we then proceeded to determine that his unit was functional. Its shutter-cocking lever just turned in the opposite of the usual direction.

 

But his high appraisal of the images was correct. In the prints, I could see the outlines of individual leaves in the trees 2 miles away at the horizon! If you go to the Argus collector sites, you will also notice that the C-3 often produces richly saturated colors with entirely their own "look." --Dave P