Canonet QL19 vs QL17 GIII vs Yashica Electro 35

[irvine.short]

<p>Hi All,</p>

<p>After my Yashica Electro 35 was stolen I surveyed the local auction site for a while and no Electro 35's came past for a while so I bought a QL19 which should be with me shortly.</p>

<p>Of course the next day a QL17 GIII came up.</p>

<p>Would there be any real difference in lens quality between the two, and how do both stack up against the Yashica Electro 35? That lens really is legendary.</p>

<p>I did find the lack of manual control on the Yashica a bit of a downfall now and again but I did like the way it worked fine with a new alkaline battery.</p>

<p>Cheers,</p>

<p>--Irvine</p>

 

[gnashings]

<p>My experiences - with my examples - the GSN has a slight edge in glass over the QL17, is heavier, but feels better built... Yet, I find the semi-auto infuriating and prefer the QL17. Battery is an issue...The only 19 I own is a really cool old Bell&Howell version with a meter cell around the lens and a bottom wind - super cool, but in my experience, far less contrasty and over all noticeably less sharp than ql17. Again, those are just my examples - and th 19 is so different and obviously older that I don't think its a fair comparison. Buy em all, they're dirt cheap, and all fun in their own way. </p>

<p>Wait - I do have a Canon 19, I just never ran any film through it... add that to the to do list</p>

 

[maciek_stankiewicz]

<p>Hi Irvine,<br /> What Peter said. I own both cameras and from my experience and performed tests, Yashica Electro Lenses are little better performers especially when it comes to corner sharpness, much better performers @ 1.7. <br /> Yashinon lenses are less contrasty, what I like :) Also more flare prone so for the best results use 55mm lens hood.<br /> Canonet GIII is my everyday camera because with it's shutter priority, it's an ultimate tool for street/low-light photography.<br /> Best Regards,<br /> Maciek Stankiewicz<br /> P.S. In my humble gallery You can find some examples from both cameras:<br /> <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/harlemshuffle/">http://www.flickr.com/photos/harlemshuffle/</a></p>

[chuck_foreman1]

<p>This comes up often (19 vs 17) and Pete's older example not withstanding, the old rules applies that your mileage may vary!<br>

but the nominal speed difference is academic and the 19 is a bargain compared to the "famous" 17 GIII that it's the smart thing for your pocketbook. One of these days I'm going to be impressed with my 1,7 GIII but I'm still waiting! My brother ..years ago (back in the day) had the MG and I remember thinking it was very good for the money. I've been deterred from actually buying any Electro series for the "electro" dependence, so in this regard the Q series is a real manual advantage.</p>

<p> </p>

[steve_bellayr]

<p>Lens quality on the Yashica is better while the ergonomics on the Canonet QL17 is better. I personally would avoid the 19. Go to rangefinderforum. com Currently they have listed a Yashica GSN.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>I have a variants of the Electro 35 (<a href="00WQDe">link</a>) series and a couple of Canonets (a 1.7 and a 2.8). They all are nice shooters, but somehow the Canonets are a little more elegant to use, at least for me.</p>

<p>Optically, they all are astonishingly good considering their position in camera hierarchies and their original costs.</p>

[gnashings]

<p>Chuck - I still love that old Bell&Howell 19 though! Its a brick of a camera, and used within its limitations even my example can give pleasing results. Its just not for those who want an rf because its small and inconspicuous - the only stealth feature it has is common to all leaf shutter rf's, its nearly silent. I am curious to see how the newer, Canon branded example performs - I see no reason why it should really deserve to be "avoided"... but then again what do I know - I can't avoid anything old with a lens that wants my money (hopefully excluding aging hookers wearing monocles... I hope I can avoid those... ok, tangent.. sorry!)</p>

[irvine.short]

<p>Well, the proof is in the pudding. I am sure another Electro 35 will come along.</p>

<p>Here is one I took: <a href="

<p> </p>

[irvine.short]

<p>Maciek: Thanks for the link to your Flickr site. I think I will indeed keep en eye out for another Yashica.</p>

 

[flavio_egoavil]

<p>Answering this old thread because appears at the top of the Google search results, and because the question is very common.</p>

<p>First, please note that i'm a hardcore <strong>Canon</strong> fan and i think that they are the most innovative manufacturer in terms of optics, since the 70s.</p>

<p>Now, back to the comparison. I'd pick the Electro 35 GS / GSN anytime. I currently own a 35 GSN and a 35GL and i couldn't be happier. Also note that i own about 13 film cameras, 35mm and medium format, so i have tried different equipment.</p>

<p>This is what the Electro 35 brings over the QL17 / QL19</p>

<p>- A better Lens. You can see the Electro 35 GSN lens is much bigger physically. Any optical engineer will agree with me in that being able to have more freedom in making a lens physically bigger also brings more freedom to optimize it further. In other words, for equal focal length and f/stops, not constraining its external dimensions helps to not constain the performance. Given equal technology, glass types, and competence level (yashica at the end of the 60s vs Canon at the end of the 60s), and given two similar back focus distances, and equal apertures (f1.7), a phisically bigger lens has the potential for better performance compared to the more compact lens.<br>

In short words, many people claim the Yashinon-DX 45/1.7 is an amazing lens, some of them claim "better than the one on the Canonet QL17", and i think there can be some technical base to this claim.<br>

Also note that Yashica owned a lens factory -- Tomioka, which later was considered good enough for Zeiss to have them manufacture Zeiss lenses there...</p>

<p>- Viewfinder. The viewfinder on the GSN is clear and big, but more importantly, the rangefinder patch is really clear which allows for easy focus in low light. If it's not clear, have the camera cleaned by a technician (or you can do it yourself). The viewfinder on the Electro 35 GL is even bigger but that's another story.</p>

<p>- Exposure meter. The one in the Yashica can shoot in practically ANY low light situation, down to 30 sec shutter speed! But more importantly, it is <em>very</em> accurate and reliable. No doubt because it has a nice, big lens over the meter cell...</p>

<p>- Battery. The GSN is not sensitive to voltage, so it doesn't require expensive zinc-air battery replacements. It can use a common 4LR44 with a spring or (my choice) a combination of a lithium CR2 + two PX625A alkaline batteries without too much fuss. Again, drops in voltage over time will not affect exposure accuracy.</p>

<p>- Feel. It is subjective, but the ELECTRO 35 feels better in my hands. I do agree that internally perhaps the Canon is better designed.</p>

<p>- Aperture priority - it is more useful than shutter speed priority (Canon) and i say this even as a proud former Canon AE-1 user (shutter priority SLR)</p>

<p>- Rugged -- the Electro 35 is more rugged, except for the lens filter thread, but then this is the weak part of many cameras.</p>

<p>- Recessed front element -- an overlooked design feature</p>

<p>- The Canon has a mechanical shutter, but note that Yashica has a manual back-up... Something that isn't mentioned too often: The Electro 35 will operate without a battery, it will stay at 1/500s so you can shoot with ASA 100-400 film in daylight by using the Sunny 16 rule if your battery dies.</p>

<p>- Allows you to concentrate on the image -- the AE system is so accurate you don't even need to think about exposure.</p>

<p>I can't comment on film loading since if you can't load easily an Electro 35, then you should perhaps go for a digital point and shoot...<br>

All in all, the only weakness of the Electro 35 is that big SIZE... Now i have the 35 GSN, the 35 GL and perhaps i'll get myself a 35CC.<br>

High praise for the Yashica!!</p>

[flavio_egoavil]

<p>Forgot to add some things:<br>

- Due to the peculiar AE system of the Electro 35 cameras, the exposure is being measured WHILE the shutter is open. This means that the AE system will give a correct exposure even if the light levels change DURING the exposure!! <br>

- Filter size on the Yashica is the much more common 55mm over the rare 48mm on the Canon QL17.<br>

- ISO setting change (for exposure compensation) i find easier on the Yashica, with its big dial and due to it's location - on top, always visible.<br>

- Rangefinder seems to be very precise. If not, re-calibrate it (the service manual is out there on the web).</p>

<p>If you have some tools and patience, you can fix a Electro 35 G/GS/GSN yourself! Non-working Electro 35 of these series are easy to dissasemble, their repair have been widely documented on the 'web, and<strong> 99% of the time these actions will cure ill-working Yashicas</strong>:<br>

- Replacement of the 'pad of death', this requires taking the lens board out, which takes time but isn't so difficult. The pad can be replaced with a circa 2mm thickness rubber piece made out of pencil eraser.<br>

- Cleaning of the shutter trigger sliding switch (main switch). Cleanable... with pencil eraser, and/or with contact cleaner.<br>

- Adjustment of the main switch's ending (locking) position. You only need to take out the bottom plate to adjust it. Once adjusted correctly, the shutter button clicks smoothly and assuredly, and there are no exposure errors.<br>

- Cleaning of the switches for the B/AUTO/FLASH speed selector and the aperture selector.<br>

- Cleaning of the lens over the CdS exposure cell<br>

- Cleaning of all battery contacts.<br>

These steps will bring a Yashica Electro 35 G/GS/GSN back to correct operation in most cases. </p>