Affordable walk-around rangefinder?

r-brian · Jun 28, 2007

If you are looking for something with a nice big viewfinder (that leaves the FED's and screw mount Leica'f out) and a really sharp lens, look at a Minolta HiMatic 7s or 9. You can pick one of these up for $30. The lens is fantastic, with auto and manual exposure and a great big viewfinder. For something a little smaller, look at the HiMatic 7sII or Canonet. I've also heard good things about the Olympus's.

jasonjoo · Jun 28, 2007

Yikes, just over night and there's so much to read!

It seems like there are a lot of cameras to choose from, but since Roger highlighted the ones that have good image quality and a nice viewfinder, I am leaning towards the Konica SIII. My budget may seem low and I can expand that, but at the moment, I am trying to have both of best worlds (meaning digital and analog). Call it blasephemy, but since I have been unofficially dubbed our church and family photographer, it seems like digital is indispensible. However, for the past month or so, I've been purely shooting in analog and I must say, I enjoy it a LOT.

Again, I appreciate all of your responses. Thanks so much for helping me out!

narsuitus · Jun 28, 2007

My personal favorites are the:
Canon QL17 Giii 35mm film rangefinder with 40mm lens
Minolta Hi-Matic 9 35mm film rangefinder with 45mm lens

mcgrattan · Jun 28, 2007

Actually, by sheer chance, I picked up a Zorki 4 at our local market today for £10. Its viewfinder is considerably larger and brighter than any other FSU rangefinder I've tried.

re: FSU lenses. I've enlarged shots from an Industar 61 L/D to 8x10 and the prints were great. Easily a match for, for example, the SMC-A Takumar 50 f1.7 I have. I haven't enlarged to a greater size, though, so I don't know how well the lens would stand up to more enlargement. The Jupiter-8 I have is quite nice, but definitely not as sharp as the Industar. A little soft (although I like the look). The 85mm Jupiter 9 is, as Roger says, quite nice but definitely a 'portrait' lens.

mabman · Jun 28, 2007

Interesting thread, thanks everyone

I've just bought an Olympus 35RC from eBay based on some good things I've read, and am awaiting delivery - I like the XA, but found it too fragile and it broke down in my pocket (however, I seem to be alone in this) as did the modern Stylus Epic - but I also hear good things about the 35RC (although metal, somewhat bigger and heavier), which I'm hoping will be just as good image-quality wise and just about as portable, while being more robust

I'm also looking at a Konica Auto S2, which doesn't have quite as many features as the S3, but is not as popular and therefore cheaper. It seems somewhat heavier, but that's OK for me. So, please don't outbid me

So, yeah, I've got a bit of GAS at the moment, but at the prices for FSU rangefinders and 1970's/early 1980's-era fixed-lens rangefinders, who can resist

Roger Hicks · Jun 28, 2007

mabman said:
...at the prices for FSU rangefinders and 1970's/early 1980's-era fixed-lens rangefinders, who can resist

That's it, really. The SIII isn't worth enough to sell. At best I'd expect $50, twenty-five quid -- and at that price, I might as well keep it in case I feel like using it again. And I suspect that's setting it high.

Cheers,

Roger

copake_ham · Jun 28, 2007

Strangely, I have to agree with Roger.

If the OP wants a good, cheap ($150-$200), workable RF to learn and enjoy the format, he will be much better off with any of the Japanese cameras mentioned.

The FSU RF's are not reliable. They may be fun for some here to play with (usually folk who have other, reliable gear) but I wouldn't recommend them to a "newbie" to the RF format.

See, the worms are now all over the place!

DBP · Jun 28, 2007

If you want a good, brightline, viewfinder, that eliminates all the FSU models, except arguably the Leningrad, which is not cheap. The usual suspects would be the '70s Japanese leaf shuttered models, which include Canonets, Yashica Electros, Minolta Hi-Matics, and various Olympus models, along with others by Konica, Petri, and others. The Cameraquest site is the best compendium I have seen as far as the range of models covered. The Yashicas tend to be a bit cheaper that the Minoltas, Olympi (?), and Canonets. Likewise, the Canonets other than the QL17 tend to be relative bargains. Many of the lenses are superb when in good condition, but there is always a possibly of fungus and oil condensation.

elekm · Jun 28, 2007

So the answer is that there are a boatload of choices -- each with their advantages and drawbacks.

I'll also add to the mix one of the more curious rangefinders: the Carl Zeiss Jena Werra. Some were zone focus, some had rangefinders. Some had meters, some had meters and rangefinders.

The cameras are very well made and show a superior build and use of higher quality materials than most Iron Curtain cameras.

Buying new will set you back anywhere from $500 to $4,000, depending on what you buy.

I'd probably move from the XA to something a bit larger -- maybe one of the Japanese cameras. And if you like that, then continue to move into different segments.

It's OK to own more than one camera. In fact, I encourage it.

Roger Hicks · Jun 29, 2007

elekm said:
I'll also add to the mix one of the more curious rangefinders: the Carl Zeiss Jena Werra. Some were zone focus, some had rangefinders. Some had meters, some had meters and rangefinders.

The cameras are very well made and show a superior build and use of higher quality materials than most Iron Curtain cameras.

...and it's such fun watching people try to figure out where the wind-on is!

I completely agree about owning more than one camera. My only point was that you can spend so much money on 15 varieties of junk that you never get one that's any good (and would cost the same as half a dozen pieces of junk).

Cheers,

Roger

jasonjoo · Jun 29, 2007

While my camera collection is growing, I find that each camera finds equal amount of use. Strangely enough, my Canon 5D (digital SLR) has seen very little, actually NO use ever since I've been getting into analog cameras.

Each camera has a purpose, so each camera is used at different times and for different purposes. As of late, I have been carrying around my polaroid model 440 and Olympus XA with me almost everywhere. I really enjoy the RF format, so now I will venture into this world as well.

I appreciate all of the suggestions and it will take me a few more days to digest all of it Thanks for being so patient and helpful!

Jason

Roger Hicks · Jun 29, 2007

Dear Jason,

How many cameras do you need?

Well...

http://www.rogerandfrances.com/howmany.html

Cheers,

Roger

PHOTOTONE · Jun 29, 2007

I question the concept that any of the fixed-lens 35mm rfdr cameras mentioned in these posts produce any "better" images than an Olympus XA can produce. While being larger in size than an XA may be an advantage, and some having more manual controls, the XA benefits from having a more recently designed lens, and is really an excellent small rfdr camera. I have most of the cameras mentioned in the posts, including a couple of XA's.

dmr · Jun 29, 2007

narsuitus said:
Canon QL17 Giii 35mm film rangefinder with 40mm lens

I was browsing this thread and wondering why nobody had suggested this yet. This was one which was suggested to me by the RFF folks as a "second choice", and I have grown attached to it. (I sheepishly admit to getting a second one - in black - I never thought of a camera as a fashion accessory, but ...)

One thing I do like is the semi-wide fixed lens. It's small enough to carry around easily and they are available quite readily. The bad part is that many of those out there are suffering from seal rot (a seal kit is about us$10) and flaky shutters, which may be trivial to fix or very involved.

My personal fave is kind of an odd one, but this was the model I first used for any semi-serious photography and eventually acquired another one. The Mamiya Super Deluxe, early-mid 1960s vintage.

It's not the smallest or the most popular, but it just seems to be a natural for me. I have the 48mm 1.7 version, but there's also a f1.5 version that shows up on e-gag every so often.

keithwms · Jun 29, 2007

Jason, I would recommend that you modify your slightly unrealistic budget constraints and save up for either a konica hexar AF or the konica hexar RF, or better yet, get a contax g2. You can also get a g1 with a g2 modification. These quite often go for well under $500 and are superb.

Other than that, take along hard look at the hassie xpan or the Japanese version; and of course consider the bessas. But I think a contax g1 or g2 is probably the best deal possible right now, the lenses are practically free and many will agree that they are literally the best in the biz.

If a manual RF is preferred then a minolta CLE would be another very good way to go but they are almost impossible to find these days and the prices have gone too high, in my opinion.

Also check rangefinderforum, there is a lot of knowledge there.

Roger Hicks · Jun 30, 2007

keithwms said:
...a contax g2. You can also get a g1 with a g2 modification. These quite often go for well under $500 and are superb...

Dear Keith,

Gorgeous lenses, it's true -- if and when they focus. I had a small G2 outfit on loan for a year, and I can see why they ceased production. I'd go for a Voigtlander every time.

Cheers,

Roger

Donald Boyd · Jun 30, 2007

I still believe the Olympus 35 RC is the one to get unless you don't like slow 35mm lenses. My second choice would be the cheapest used camera you can find.

elekm · Jun 30, 2007

Jason, does the physical size of the camera matter to you? Some cameras are a bit small. Some of the 1960s rangefinders made by Konica, Fuji and Mamiya are on the large side.

As always keep in mind the likelihood that it will need to be serviced, unless you buy from one that already has been serviced.

keithwms · Jun 30, 2007

I agree with Roger that a bessa would be the best bang for the buck for manual focus. It used to be that you could find an affordable CLE on ebay but geez, after a year of trying, I finally gave up. Now the prices exceed those of the bessas.

I don't know how severe the g2 focusing issues are, I didn't see them in my limited experience, and I was in fact looking for trouble because I'd read about it. Some say they have issues, while others say it's no big deal at all once you get the hang of it, apparently the trouble only crops up over a relatively small intermediate distance range. In either case there is manual override, fidgety though it may be. Let me suggest consulting Scott Davis (FlyingCamera) on this point, he is an avid g2 user and can give an unvarnished opinion. It was he who showed me just how absurdly inexpensive the g2 lenses have become. I mean, sweet cheeses, they are practically free, you can get going for around $500 and can build a whole system for between $1-2k.

On the topic of focusing a rangefinder, I think it really behooves one to think hyperfocally and to start by learning to identify your near and far points. For a manual RF, since the patch is in the middle, you quickly discover that unless you want to be limited to centered subjects or unless you are willing to stop down excessively, you have to learn some things about DOF! Same goes for some AF RFs, one has to be a bit more vigilant than you would be with an AF SLR because you are of course not previewing your focus in the VF. But it's really a very minor hurdle when you consider what capabilities an RF provides, and when I started rangefinding it benefited me greatly to think a bit more about DOF. And yes I know that this little intro mini-lecture will be utterly trivial to the many RF experts here

Eric Rose · Jun 30, 2007

I have 3 RF's, a Zorki IV, Olympus XA and a Bessa R. The Bessa is the most flexible in that I can share lenses with the Zorki and buy cheap LTM's on eBay. The meter in the Bessa is dead on and the focusing is bright and easy. It's light as well. I've traveled a lot with it and been very happy with the pics it has taken.

The Zorki is a tank. Would make a great weapon if needed LOL. The focusing is pretty good but there are no brightlines for different lenses. The one thing I do like about it is that I can focus the eyepiece for my eyes. It's fairly quiet, quieter than the Bessa.

The XA is palm sized, quite as a church mouse, and tack sharp. Great little meter as well. The rangefinder is a bit of a bugger if you wear glasses and of course it's a fixed lens.

As far as price is concerned I picked my XA up for about $30, the Zorki for $35 with 50mm lens and the Bessa R for a few hundred bucks with VC 35mm Skopar pancake lens.

If I were to only have one RF it would be the Bessa. Build quality is high, optics are first rate, and it's cheap enough that if it gets trashed it's not the end of the world. Just go out and get another one.

Changeling1 · Jun 30, 2007

You need an Argus!

The brick has stood the test of time. No rangefinder collection would be complete without several. Average price $10-$15 on the epay site.

coigach · Jul 1, 2007

Have read the thread and wanted to put in a word for the Contax G2.

I use one with the 28, 45 and 90mm lenses for street stuff and think they're wonderful cameras. The lenses are amazing and I've never ever had an hassle with focussing. The cameras are a little quirky, but when you get used to them, I've always found them to be 100% reliable.

Here's a link to G2 focussing technique: http://www.botzilla.com/blog/archives/000378.html

Best wishes,
Gavin

elekm · Jul 1, 2007

The Contax G1/G2 might be and probably is a fantastic camera, but it's considerably more than his budget of $100-$200, especially when a single lens can cost $400 or more.

Iskra 2 · Jul 1, 2007

One Lucky Guy

Roger Hicks said:
When it comes to lenses, yes, the Konica and the best Retina lenses will stand comparison with whatever you've been using, but most FSU lenses won't. And again, I've owned 'em.
Roger (www.rogerandfrances.com, where you'll find some ideas for saving money)

I guess I got lucky with my random chances. A good Jupiter 8 with K64 under it is unsurpassed IMHO. But then I've never used or compared any of the other choices.
Regards.

keithwms · Jul 1, 2007

elekm said:
The Contax G1/G2 might be and probably is a fantastic camera, but it's considerably more than his budget of $100-$200, especially when a single lens can cost $400 or more.

Hence my admonition to reconsider the budget.

Look, a g2-modified g1 can be had at KEH, EX condition, for $235! And many great lenses can be had for a similar price- well under $300. I mean, sweet cheeses, KEH has a 45mm f/2 planar for $179, EX condition. That is quite possibly the best 35mm normal lens ever, period... definitely worth saving for, if the budget really is $200.

That concludes this unpaid advertisement for KEH....

Affordable walk-around rangefinder?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency