• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Dilemma

The Minolta/Leica CL and CLE are also great and cheap cameras to get in to the M-mount system. The CL plus the 40 F2 is the size of most point and shoots (or smaller).
 
If you need something cheap then a Canon 7 is the way to go. I think it is one of the best RFs ever made. If you are looking at Bessa prices, you should take a look at the Hexar RF instead. Way better camera. Leicas are great (I have an M3) but I use the Hexar RF over the M3 95% of the time. For the best bang for your buck if you want the best lenses go with Zeiss.
 
The LTM Leicas, especially the IIIa and IIIc can be found for around $200 or less if you are patient and can jump on it fast. The FEDs and Zorkis are nice, but you have to be careful to find one in good working condition. They are like a lot of other FSU goods, some were made well and others were made just to get by. A good repairman, or you being talented at CLA, can turn a mediocre or problem camera (Leica or FSU) into a good shooter. Are the FEDs in the Leica range? Well, my FEDs shoot very smooth with a little TLA, but not quite as smoothly as a Leica. But I love all my rangefinders and wouldn't get rid of the FEDs over my Leicas and vice versa.
 

I'm with you on this, I don't believe in spending loads on light tight boxes.

I too use a Zorki 4 and Fed 2. Both perform really well, maybe heavy, but function, no shutter problems or light leaks and the lenses are pretty good too.

My other favourite which I picked up for next to nothing is a Chinon 35EE.
 
Insanity....

thanks for all the input. It's pretty overwhelming. There are so many cool cameras out there. In the past I have always bought junk cameras with small technical issues and tore them apart and repaired them and had fun shooting with them. I love the rangefinders, mostly because of the quiet shutters, and they are allot easier to carry around. It takes awhile to figure out what you like. Of all the little fixed lens rangefinders I shot with, most of them were cheap. Like the Petri 7s. neat little camera. The lens is nice, but it's a cheap camera, so cheap I got 2 for $12. Yes I know, photography is about the shot.. but It's also fun to play with different cameras. I guess if it was totally about the actual photo, then I would just be smart and purchase a Zeiss 35mm 1.4 and mount it on my Nikon F100, which is probably what I will do. It's all about the lens... and about the shot.



By shooting with the Hasselblad, I absolutely fell in love with the lenses. The lenses just have that crispness "pop" that is amazing to me, but the Hasselblad is not exactly a pocket camera. That goes for the Mamiya RB67. Great camera. Great lenses, and the camera doubles as a swing-able weapon in case of a mugging, as it weighs like 5+ pounds.

I would still like to try the Zorki 4S, and play with one, but I don't want to spend all my days and nights fixing the shutter and the rangefinder glass and all of that S***.

Leica. I have never had one. Sure, I would love to play with one... It's the camera every person shoots for, Leica, Leica, Leica. All the Manufacturers emulated them...

I guess the whole thing with the Leica thing.... I think allot of people put them on a pedestal to worship. But are they really THAT GOOD ? I want a fast lens, and clear popping lens like my hasselblad, and somewhat pocketable.. In the back of my mind I'm thinking the whole Leica thing is like the hot cheerleader you had to have in college, and then after the fact you were like...yeah been there done that, she is like all the other wacko women (cameras) out there.

Maybe I should just get back to shooting, and stop salivating over another camera....lol. Thank God, that cameras are cheaper than women.

Greg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
IMO, the Leica M film bodies feel like, and are built like, nothing else.

For lenses, I think Zeiss, the company that makes Hasselblad lenses, give Leica a good run for the money.
 
When I had a 500CM years ago I had the chrome 80/2.8 on it. It outperformed most of the Leica lenses I own (and owned.)
 
For now, I am just going to shoot with my cheap Petri 7s. I bought a junk Konica Auto S2 a while back and have to replace the shutter cranking arm as it snapped. It has a nice crisp lens, but it's not built like a brick outhouse. reliability is key. strength is key. I need to dump all my junk and get one camera and one lens and just be done with the camera collecting and my self induced repair workshop.


Greg
 

The fixed lens rangefinders of the 60s to the 80s were consumer built quality, for reliability and strength either a Leica or Canon, or Minolta CL, I think the strongest rangefinder I have owned or used is the Leica III G. I have used a Bessa or newer Konica Hextar M so I don't if the build quality is as good as as a Leica.
 
My 35mm RF's are a Yashica Lynx 5000e and a Argus C-3 and for 120 a Mamiya 6. My search for the prefect camera began in 1968, and it took till not many years ago to realize that I should have spent more time taking photos and less time searching for that magic camera Others may know more.

David
 

If you like to have your time on repairs instead of taking shots, Z-4S is great camera for it. And if you are so into fast lens, get J-3 as well. It might give you another ride for fun with realigning it for particular camera
I received Z4 as the rear cap for J-3, good luck to make it works for even exposures. Sold it ASAP and re-shimmed J-3 for family FED-2, the only FSU RF I have no problems with.

Sure some gearheads put Leica somewhere, but to me Leica M RF is about convenience and confidence of taking shot.

Get one of those on the left instead:



Cheap, simple, fast, sharp and works.
 

Attachments

  • photo%u00252B1.JPG
    125.6 KB · Views: 174
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register