Compact 35 with large lens?

analog what is that? · Dec 31, 2011

Sundowner said:
I've already been down this particular road, and instead of dropping couple of thousand into a Leica or something similar I decided to invest a hundred bucks in a pristine QL-17. It's not as compact as a Rollei 35 (another favorite of mine) but it's got a hellishly good 40mm f1.7 lens on it, and it's very quick to focus and shoot. With Tri-X rated at 1600 I can shoot down into some pretty dim light: I shot between 1/30th and 1/500th walking around a fairground at night...no problems whatsoever. Great little camera. Check it out.

I gather its the G III QL 17 you're taliking of? I have a Canonet 17 that aint exactly small......
A friend is looking into Minolta, and notes they cost an arm and a leg, why is that?

analog what is that? · Dec 31, 2011

Les Sarile said:
Pentax MX is the smallest full mechanical 35mm SLR with the largest full info viewfinder. With a Pentax M 40mm f2.8 pancake lens, it is small enough to fit a jacket pocket.

I use my M42 Takumar fisheye one it - with an M42-Pentax K adapter) and it is likely the smallest fisheye setup.

You have made me dig out a Pentax ME, it won't fire without a battery, thats what it is like, and I also dug out a Ricoh 5omm f:1.7 and cleaned it, now if I can find batteries for it...... Nice little setup and the Ricoh even if its no pancace, is a fairly small lens.....

elcabezagrande · Dec 31, 2011

I'm pretty sure that the Zenit S (C) is a bit smaller than the Pentax MX

2x Zenit-C + Mir-1 (#2) by siimvahur, on Flickr

CGW · Dec 31, 2011

LunoLuno said:
I always wonder why Fuji didn't sell their Natura cameras overseas.

http://www.cameraquest.com/fujinaturaS.htm

The market for new film p&s cameras around 2005 was nearly dead in N. America.

Les Sarile · Dec 31, 2011

elcabezagrande said:
I'm pretty sure that the Zenit S (C) is a bit smaller than the Pentax MX

This Zenit S (C) reference lists it's dimensions as 138 X 90 X 78 compared to the Pentax MX at 135.5 X 82.5 X 49.5. With those dimensions, the Zenit S (C) is even bigger then the OM-1 at 136 X 83 X 50. Really the MX's amazingly large viewfinder has to be seen.

analog what is that? · Dec 31, 2011

The Olympus OM-1 with a pancake strikes me as a nice outfit!

elcabezagrande · Dec 31, 2011

Les Sarile said:
This Zenit S (C) reference lists it's dimensions as 138 X 90 X 78 compared to the Pentax MX at 135.5 X 82.5 X 49.5. With those dimensions, the Zenit S (C) is even bigger then the OM-1 at 136 X 83 X 50. Really the MX's amazingly large viewfinder has to be seen.

I stand corrected. That MX really is a tiny little thing.

Sundowner · Dec 31, 2011

analog what is that? said:
I gather its the G III QL 17 you're taliking of? I have a Canonet 17 that aint exactly small......

Yes, it's a G III. 120mm x 75mm x 60mm, according to the information I have, and about 625g if I remember correctly. Not bad for a body and lens, especially when you consider that the Leica CL comes in at 125mm x 78mm x 32mm before you put a lens on it. The QL 17 isn't a lightweight, though...you know you're holding a metal camera when you pick one up. I like the solidity, though. Make no mistake...it's not a substitute for shooting with an interchangeable-lens system (and I'd love to have something like that) but it's a great way to make awesome photos on a budget.

If all you are looking for is the fast normal lens, then you're not going to go wrong for a sub-$100 price tag. The reason I bought one was because I found myself photographing out-and-about (street work) in the evenings and at night; I quickly realized that I needed the fastest lens/film combination that I could put together that would give me acceptable results. The film was easy: Tri-X, rated at 1600, like I mentioned before. The camera, however...not so simple. Fast lenses and small cameras usually spell "Leica" and "Leica" translates to "sell a few non-essential body parts for camera funds." I'd love to have a wide, fast lens to work with, but it was just too much cash to dump into something when I was still experimenting with the particular photographic style that required such equipment. So, I bought the QL 17 and worked with it, and began to get the images I was looking for by only spending a hundred bucks, or so.

Remember: it's all about the results. The camera and lens are only a means to an end.

analog what is that? · Dec 31, 2011

Les Sarile said:
This Zenit S (C) reference lists it's dimensions as 138 X 90 X 78 compared to the Pentax MX at 135.5 X 82.5 X 49.5. With those dimensions, the Zenit S (C) is even bigger then the OM-1 at 136 X 83 X 50. Really the MX's amazingly large viewfinder has to be seen.

The Zenit S was nothing but a Leica II (screw-lens) copy with an attached mirror box and pentaprism, and its dimensions speaks well for how tiny a Leica II / III was!

BainDarret · Dec 31, 2011

I have fond memories of the Fujica Compact Deluxe. It was my first real camera and I purchased it in 1969. With a 45 mm f/1.8 lens and unique thumb screw focussing it was a amazing travel companion during the 4 or 5 years I had it. Unfortunately the mechanical parts weren't as good as the optics and one day it would no longer crank film. They are pretty rare these days but if you can find a good one they do take silver oxide batteries. Google images has some images of the camera. This is my first post on APUG so I cannot post links yet.

BD

analog what is that? · Dec 31, 2011

Hi Bain, to help you along a question: I see from your handle you have moved up in the world, shooting 4x5" ?

BainDarret · Dec 31, 2011

Yeah, a 1947 Speed Graphic and 3 lenses, 101 Ektar, 135 Optar and 203 Kodak Anastigmat. The Anastigmat is razor sharp, just requires a compendium lens hood. I'm back in the darkroom after 8 years doing it digitally. It's (almost) like I never left.

Les Sarile · Dec 31, 2011

analog what is that? said:
The Zenit S was nothing but a Leica II (screw-lens) copy with an attached mirror box and pentaprism, and its dimensions speaks well for how tiny a Leica II / III was!

If I remember correctly, the Olympus OM-1 was designed very similarly to the early Leica. I only have a early Leica clone for reference.

LunoLuno · Dec 31, 2011

CGW said:
The market for new film p&s cameras around 2005 was nearly dead in N. America.

I think the situation was the same, or even worse, in Japan.....

sangetsu · Jan 1, 2012

Funny that no one has mentioned the Yashica CC or CCN. Both are basically the same camera, the CCN being the "new" version. Either one comes with a 35mm f/1.8 lens, which is quite fast, and reasonably wide. These are well made and easy to use cameras, small, but with aperture and focus controls which are big enough to use easily. The body is cast aluminum with brass top and bottom covers, the only plastic being the focusing tabs and battery cover. Besides being well made and well performing, they are probably the best looking of the Yashica rangefinders.

elcabezagrande · Jan 1, 2012

sangetsu said:
Funny that no one has mentioned the Yashica CC or CCN. ... they are probably the best looking of the Yashica rangefinders.

Maybe the CC is the best looking of Electro family, but the early all-mechanical Yashicas are beautiful.

Yashica YK by Greyscale3, on Flickr

Mustafa Umut Sarac · Jan 1, 2012

Buy a Leica and this will be the last camera you will ever buy. I have and when I am seeing a camera , I say I have Leica and all fun goes down.
Since 1924 , all models are built to be best , its like listening Bach , is there better composer , better camera ? No ! Its like marrying with Miss Universe.

John Austin · Jan 1, 2012

Regarding the Leica M2, when they are worn out they constantly go wrong a little bit - Mine is back at the repair shop again, it spends about four months with me per year - The last time I sent it away I added the postscript "Repair when you have nothing urgent and need to bang your head against the wall" - So I have a 35mm last before Asph' Summicron in my camera safe amongst other historically interesting oddities

For 35mm I now use my Vitessa

Bill Burk · Jan 2, 2012

analog what is that? said:
The Olympus OM-1 with a pancake strikes me as a nice outfit!

Took this setup to the New Years Eve party. Added T-20 flash on extender plus a slave Vivitar 283 at 1/8 power bouncing off the ceiling. It was a blast shooting two rolls of Panatomic-X at f/2.

analog what is that? · Jan 7, 2012

Mustafa Umut Sarac said:
Buy a Leica and this will be the last camera you will ever buy. I have and when I am seeing a camera , I say I have Leica and all fun goes down.
Since 1924 , all models are built to be best , its like listening Bach , is there better composer , better camera ? No ! Its like marrying with Miss Universe.

I have Leicas, screw and bayonet, nothing I put in my pocket, it would have to be kevlar or something....
But I'll admit, the CL is small enough, and a LTM is compact with a collapsible Elmar...

Les Sarile · Jan 7, 2012

elcabezagrande said:
I'm pretty sure that the Zenit S (C) is a bit smaller than the Pentax MX

2x Zenit-C + Mir-1 (#2) by siimvahur, on Flickr

If one MX is already smaller then a Zenit S (C) then two MX's would be smaller then two Zenit S (C) . . . ;-)

Les Sarile · Jan 7, 2012

Literally and figuratively a small camera with a large lens . . . ;-)

Compact 35 with large lens?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency