Which 35mm Rangefinder to Choose?

[adam_sinke]

<p>Hi, so there are so many old rangefinders that finding one that meets a photographers preference can be a little difficult. Also, because many of these cameras are old there isn't a lot of information available online. I am hoping someone could suggest a good 35mm rangefinder that would be best for my preferences.<br>

<br /> I am not a rich man, so as nice as it would be to own a Leica or a Nikon SP or a Voigtlander, I really don't have the money for one of these higher end cameras. I also don't require a camera with interchangeable lenses.<br>

<br /> I'm looking for a fixed lens (preferably wide, say 28mm), with at least a 1.8 aperture, built-in flash, aperture and shutter priority (with a shutter speed of at least 1/2000) and autofocus.<br>

<br />I know I might be getting greedy with all the requirements but if someone can suggest the best and most affordable rangefinder that fits those requirements, I will be very grateful?<br>

<br /> Thanks for your time.</p>

[SCL]

<p>Not sure you can find one with exactly the features you mention and have a fixed 28mm/f1.8 lens inexpensively. However there are a number of relatively inexpensive cameras which could pretty well fill most of the needs. My favorite among the choices is the Olympus Stylus - which has a 35-70mm lens, fits comfortably into a pocket, and produces remarkably sharp photos; these can generally be found in charity shops for under $10. Another favorite of mine (although I no longer have it), but a bit larger than the Stylus, is the Canon Sure Shot Megazoom 105, which has a zoom range of 35-105mm, again a bargain in charity shops, usually under $15. Attached is an example of what the Canon is capable of:</p><div></div>

[bobatkins]

<p>You might look at the Canon Canonet QL17 III. It doesn't meet all your criteria, but it's an excellent camera and can be obtained relatively cheap. You could also look at the Yashica Electro 35 CC.</p>

<p>You say you want autofocus, but that's (almost) an oxymoron for a rangefinder. </p>

<p>You may be using the term "rangefinder" to mean a camera that's actually NOT a rangefinder. Such abuse of the term is unfortunately very common. In that case, you're on your own!</p>

[GerrySiegel]

I almost had a nice one for sale, until it started misbehaving, adam. I refer to the Konica Hexar AF Silver which had a Leica quality lens that was compared with the Summicron 35 mm or therabouts, moderate WA anyway and programs and no slouch. F 2.0 and autofocus very quick and accurate. Via infrared I recall...Multiple modes, some kind of tricky to remember be warned if you search one out.... Sturdy camera until I dropped it and behaves erratically though it powers up so it remains on the shelf. No it has no flash but comes with a small one one that gives TTL. Most RFs unless you mean P and S like the Mini Leica P and S plastic jobs have no flash and you don't want one, trust me... If you can find this Hexar camera and have the patience to learn its mild eccentriciites, you will enjoy it as a souped up version of the old Canonet RF style models. Auto film wind and rewind. Auto shift of finder to close up. Not much I can say went wrong and I got some good shots with it. It is considered a classic of the type and there was a good review right here in PN in the archives which sold me. Not perfect. So what is then or now. I kind of gave up film, but the Hexar is a purty camera in Silver model with date and time. Paid about 5 bills new.

 

More ideas will be in the modern camera forum I expect.

[Karim Ghantous]

<p>The Canon P is one the best buys in that category. The mount is L39 (Leica screw) and you can get a decent example for about US$100. You should be able to find a good 28mm lens for not much money, but expect to pay a few hundred.</p>

<p>The good thing about the Canon P is that you can re-align the RF by yourself. The vertical and horizontal alignments are different mechanisms, and the horizontal one is the easier of the two.</p>

[Ian Rance]

<p>Rangefinders are great - the silent leaf shutter is a wonder of technology. I use and like the Kodak Retina range - mine has a 47mm Ektar f/2 lens - but that is not wide.</p>

<p>I really wanted a Nikon one with 28mm lens (you know, the one with the dials on top) but prices were too high - especially as no repairs are possible any more - so I went for a Fuji X100R which has a 35mm f/2 equivalent lens and has the film presets. Not film I know, but good quality.</p>

[walter_degroot]

<p>the ultimite rangefinder is the<br>

CANON 7 there are less expensive versions as well.</p>

<p>rick oleson bought one as the canon 7 is very excpensive.<br>

the openingh back and single window vf.rf is a big plus. no it is not a Leica but is a high quality machine.<br>

there are a raft of Japanese rf cameras.<br>

some varied greatly in build quality. I do not think it makes sense o repair many as they were built at a price. but a few examples of ogg brand cameras may be decent if not oputstsanding.<br>

many of the big names-- it seems nikon and pentax did not make many if any rf cameras-<br>

the ones that come to mind are yashica olympus canon and konica and minolta.<br>

some only got serius abut rf cameras when smaller, often semi automatomated careas were popular.</p>

<p>yashica mamiya and olympus made many models. there are devotees of cameras such as the olymus 35rc that require some<br>

understanding to use it more seriously than p&s mode..<br>

I own both a canonet28 and a konica c35<br>

( no flash and a real rangefinder.<br>

I own a early yashica lynx ( no batteries)<br>

I used my brothers mamiya ruby, bery typical<br>

if small rf cameras. I wish I has asked for it.<br>

he is dead and I am not bold enough to ask his family.</p>

<p>I think you will enjoy owning and using these cameras. I also own many plastic semi auto cameras. and they, so far, seem to work well. I also own some 16mm cameras ( still)<br>

but I see better use for the 35mm smaller cameras.</p>

[GerrySiegel]

dupe.

[GerrySiegel]

When you said autofocus I mentally eliminated some of the thirty to 40 year old camera models which if tuned up and seals replaced can indeed do a decent job, especially if you can see the split images and get them in focus...I am not talking Leica naturally. If that is your choice look to one of the used houses that specialize in fixing up oldies.

 

Of course it is your budget and if you can spring loose and want to spend a few hundred or close to $400 perhaps, and get one of the best lenses short of Leitz quality , seriously,then I say check out a more modern rangefinder. If you can find one that and owner will release.. Not the only such model but one that has a following and which gives results, even with slide film, as I found out. Not for all tastes and not for the shopper at the old three ball pawn shops for sure. Not an eBay item unless you are daring... But a definite RF style picture taker that uses film well and is up to date for the millentium.. :-) Good luck. you will need it if you want to fulfill your full specs and not spend more than a few bucks...<div></div>

[walter_degroot]

<p>agfa made some intesting 35mm rf cameras.<br>

one kind that may disapoint you are the solid well made smaller german vf not rf cameras. I am sure they are well made but heavy and with limited shutter speeds.</p>

<p>this is a real problem with modern films.<br>

you may have to clank the shutter speed up and the aperture down just to use 400 film.<br>

the days of asa 10,32 and 200 speed film are gone.<br>

I have an argus a f. and will use iso 100 film developed in dilute rodinal as iso 50 gilm.</p>

<p>remeber when asa 100 was high sped?</p>

<p>I find too mush harder to understand automation and so called advanced featuresw annoying.</p>

 

[james_elwing]

<p>Your 1/2000 sec eliminates all leaf shutters and most focal plane shutters. With autofocus, I think you will have to go through the film camera mag ads from the '80's and '90's.<br>

When you find one, no matter how good it is, it should cost almost nothing; garage sale inventory.</p>

[GerrySiegel]

Who told you you need 1/2000 shutter speed. None of the classics delivered that speed. And you said 'at least 1/1000." Mechanical shutters, cloth or metal, and irises had to open and close and do it repeatedly. Fast speeds were rarely very accurate from my recollection.... Set your goals lower and be happier.....Or your aims closer to the electronics of today which can achiever such speeds via electronic means and modern material science. My advice for what it is worth. Even the formidable Leicas, I don't recall them having such a marvelous shutter capability maybe top out at 1/1000.... and needed fine tuning a la the M series. A fast lens and super fast shutter means no outdoor shot in sunlight, as you know..... Of course flashguns can give you quickie speeds. Soooo...what do you shoot anyhow that sets these specs,just curious==?

[michael_linn]

<p>Look for something like a Petri Automate (circa 1956) and try to get it for fifteen or twenty dollars.</p>

<p>Of course it will not be working properly but you can probably get it back to 1956 condition for $100 or so from an experienced tech.</p>

<p>The top speed will be 1/300 or 1/500 depending upon the shutter installed. In any case the lens will be a 45mm F1.9, seven element, and likely a better lens than you are a photographer.</p>

<p>You are not going to get a working Leica, Canon, or Nikon rangefinder with any lens as good as that for five times the price. And from ten feet away it will look just like a Leica M3. </p>

[adam_sinke]

<p>Thank you all for your help. I now realize my ignorance and lack of knowledge. I suppose that's why I came here so thanks for the help.</p>

<p>The least important of my "requirements" would be the autofocus and the built in flash. I think the Canon P looks like my best bet. I currently shoot on a Nikon F4 so I am very unfamiliar with the rangefinder cameras.</p>

<p>My parents had a Minolta Hi-Matic when I was young and I remember that was a fun little camera.</p>

<p>I didn't realize there was a third type of camera. I know SLR's and rangefinders but if not one of those two what would that camera be referred to as?</p>

[dhbebb]

<p>If your parameters are fixed 28mm lens and flash, a Ricoh could fill the bill:<br>

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Ricoh-GR1s-GR-Lens-28mm-F-2-8-gr-1s-/331649333124?hash=item4d37d73784</p>

 

[charles_stobbs3]

My suggestions also don't meet all of your criteria but my personal experience with Canonets is to skip the

QL's and go for a Canonet 28. And if you don't really need autofocus (you don't) a Konica C35EF3 is a

gem.

[Gus Lazzari]

<blockquote>

<p>"Your 1/2000 sec eliminates all leaf shutters" <strong><em>James E.</em></strong></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Not quite, a <strong>Minolta V2</strong> "Rocket" achieves that beautifully.<br>

Pictured below is this amazing tank like<em> </em>camera.<br>

<br />It achieved it's ultra high speed accomplishment by <strong>starting the shutter out</strong> at an effective f/8 opening (Red 'aperture' Zone <strong>2,000th</strong> & Blue 'aperture' Zone 1,000th).<br />Read one of the Pnet threads about it: <a href="/classic-cameras-forum/00Tt3f" rel="nofollow">Minolta V2</a> <<< click>>> <a href="http://static.photo.net/attachments/bboard/00T/00Tthk-153123584.jpg" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">V2 Features</a><br>

<br>

Just got back from a "B&W film" Washington D.C. field trip with one (Can't wait to process the negatives). <br>

Crazy, but I'm up to five of these; sorry for hoarding them, but I just can't get enough of these unique cameras of Photographic history...</p><div></div>

[Uhooru]

<p>. . . there isn't a lot of information available online.<br>

<br>

Have you looked at www.cameraquest.com? The opinions there are just one guy's take, but he does run down many of the classic rangefinder cameras and also sells a lot of VC equipment.</p>

[jamie_robertson2]

<p>Your list of demands is almost impossible to meet, especially if you are on a budget. Also, if you want a 28mm lens then a rangefinder focussing system isn't really needed as most things will be in focus most of the time anyway. </p>

<p>My two choices for you are:</p>

 

<ol>

<li>Olympus MjuII (Stylus Epic) if you want autofocus. It has a razor sharp 35mm f/2.8 lens, a built in flash, spot metering, auto film advance and is weather-proof. It's also one of the smallest 35mm cameras ever made. They are also dirt cheap.</li>

<li>Canon QL17 GIII. Manual focus rangefinder with a sharp wide aperture 40mm lens. </li>

</ol>

[carbon_dragon]

<p>One possibility on the higher end is the Leica CL with lenses made for it (one of which is 28mm). Good little camera, quite excellent lenses, not well regarded by collectors so the price isn't astronomical. Downside is the obsolete battery. Either you have to use hearing aide batteries (which go flat quickly) or you have to do a conversion kit for other types of batteries. All that said though it's a great camera and has an excellent picture quality.</p>

[craig_shearman1]

<p>I agree with Jamie's recommendation of either the Canonet GIII GL17 or the Olympus Stylus Epic, depending on which style you prefer. I have both and love both of them.<br /><br />The Canonet is a traditional manual focus rangefinder with very sharp lens, with such a strong reputation that it is widely known as the poor man's Leica. Look it up on the cameraquest web site and you will see why. It has a built in light meter, which my Leica M3 does not, and a better viewfinder than the M3.<br /><br />The Olympus is a sophisticated point and shoot, and known by some as the professional's point and shoot.<br /><br />I take out my Nikon DSLRs for paying jobs but I've shot more family pictures with these than them, plus many serious pictures as well.</p>

[craig_shearman1]

<p>I would second Jamie's recommendations of either the Olympus Stylus Epic or Canonet GIII QL17, depending on which type of camera you prefer. I have both, love both and have taken many successful photos with both.<br /><br />The Olympus is a sophisticated point and shoot camera, known by some as "the professional's point and shoot." You can simply pick it up and point, but it also has spot metering and such as described above and a very, very sharp lens. Focuses down to about a foot. Metering is excellent. Fits in a shirt pocket.<br /><br />The Canonet is a traditonal manual focus rangefinder but with built in lightmeter. See <a href="http://www.cameraquest.com">www.cameraquest.com</a> to learn why it is often called "the poor man's Leica." I actually prefer its viewfinder to my Leica M3.</p>

[craig_shearman1]

Not sure how this came up twice. Last nights

post wasn't showing when I posted just now.

Sorry for duplication.

[Brian1664876441]

The Canonet Ql17l is the model that immediately preceded the GIII. Very similar in appearance, the rewind knob is glat,

and the battery check uses the Needle rather than having a light. The build quality is a bit better, including the lens. I've

had about a dozen GIII's and a couple of QL17l's. Less variation in the image quality with the older model. They usually sell

for less.

[glen_h]

<p>Another choice in rangefinders is the FED and Zorki. The quality isn't as high as Leica or Canon, but they are fine little cameras. The rangefinder calibration is way off on many. Either it was already that way, or due to my firing the shutter with no lens on when I first got it. (As far as I know the shutter works find.)</p>

<p>Yes, other than SLRs and rangefinders there are cameras that are neither. Some call any non-SLR a rangefinder, but it has to actually have a rangefinder. Without one, you guess the distance, and turn the lens so the right number (or picture) lines up with a mark. There are also TLRs, two lenses, one for viewing one for taking. </p>