First Rangefinder

[JADoss23]

Been shooting film for awhile now and after hanging out with a friend last night who had a Contax G1 I decided that I wanted to look for a rangefinder. My main camera is a Nikon F3 and have a few point and shoots but thought would be nice to have something in between. Looking for something more budget friendly but also reliable and and great quality. Right now the Bessa R and Contax G1 are leading the race but was curious if there are other cameras I should look at? Any advice on choosing between the Bessa or contax? thanks !

 

[MattKing]

Do you feel that you need interchangeable lenses? If not, there are many more choices available.

 

[JADoss23]

Do you feel that you need interchangeable lenses? If not, there are many more choices available.

Would probably prefer Interchangeable but open to both.

 

[Pentode]

If you’re willing to use a fixed lens there are scores of Japanese RFs from the 50s through the 70s that are very reliable, have great optics and are CHEAP.

Just some of the popular models are the Minolta Hi-Matics, Konica S series, Canonettes and Yashica GSN. That’s just scratching the surface.

I tend to prefer the older, un-metered models that don’t require obsolete batteries, but some of the later ones had interesting auto exposure options. They were all built very well and they all have very good glass.

My main shooter for a number of years was a late-50s Petri Color-Corrected Super 1.9. It cost me $10 at a flea market and it’s a very good camera.

Even if you decide to go with a full, multi-lens outfit like the cameras you mentioned it’s still worthwhile to have one (or more) of these Japanese, fixed-lens workhorses in your arsenal. They’re fun to shoot and they won’t let you down.

Only my opinion, of course....

 

[MattKing]

It might take some getting used to, but many of the Retinas are very satisfying to use.
Even the simple, scale focusing Retinette 1b in my avatar.
This is from my Retina IIIc:

 

[Sirius Glass]

OK so fixed lens or interchangeable lenses. I would recommend something with interchangeable lenses so that you will use that one camera everywhere and not go off to replace it soon.

Next is cost range.

Which features do you want and which you can do without? Built in light meter? Hot shoe? Self timer? Eyeglass issues?

Finally and this is to me when I sold cameras is the most important. Not what others recommend so much as what fits in your hands and you are comfortable handling. That includes how well you can see and frame with the viewfinder. Can you handle the split image focusing of the camera that you are holding. Is the split image bright enough. How does it feel to you to advance the film, fire the shutter, make the settings? Are you comfortable with the loading? Rewinding? Typically if you have smaller hands a smaller camera will be easier to handle; likewise larger hands are usually better suited to larger cameras.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

What Pentode said. I have a Canonet QL19, very nice lens with a big bright viewfinder and shutter priority trapped-needle auto. It will work manually, a 675 air cell with all but one airhole blocked will last a long time.

 

[JADoss23]

OK so fixed lens or interchangeable lenses. I would recommend something with interchangeable lenses so that you will use that one camera everywhere and not go off to replace it soon.

Next is cost range.

Which features do you want and which you can do without? Built in light meter? Hot shoe? Self timer? Eyeglass issues?

Finally and this is to me when I sold cameras is the most important. Not what others recommend so much as what fits in your hands and you are comfortable handling. That includes how well you can see and frame with the viewfinder. Can you handle the split image focusing of the camera that you are holding. Is the split image bright enough. How does it feel to you to advance the film, fire the shutter, make the settings? Are you comfortable with the loading? Rewinding? Typically if you have smaller hands a smaller camera will be easier to handle; likewise larger hands are usually better suited to larger cameras.

I'm leaning towards interchangeable lens model just because I'd like a system to keep for as long as it works. Built in light meter isn't a necessary nor any eyeglass issues. I would like a hot shoe to use a flash or not opposed to built in flash. The more budget friendly the better. Trying to keep it under 300-400

 

[John Koehrer]

interchangeable lens................Canon or Leica ltm bodies should be in your budget.
No meters very compact especially with a collapsible lens.
Leica's a bit more awkward to loadm it's done from the bottom, Canon's more common pop open back.

 

[jwd722]

I agree with JK, I have a Canon 7 with a 35 f 2.8, a 50 f1.8 and a 135 f3.5( would prefer the Canon 85 or a Leica 90 instead).
The 7 has a built-in meter but I prefer to use a handheld meter.
Fun to use and has a cool factor all it's own. Prices vary but there are many reasonably priced ones.
https://www.cameraquest.com/canon7sz.htm

 

[RattyMouse]

Been shooting film for awhile now and after hanging out with a friend last night who had a Contax G1 I decided that I wanted to look for a rangefinder. My main camera is a Nikon F3 and have a few point and shoots but thought would be nice to have something in between. Looking for something more budget friendly but also reliable and and great quality. Right now the Bessa R and Contax G1 are leading the race but was curious if there are other cameras I should look at? Any advice on choosing between the Bessa or contax? thanks !

To me, rangefinders lose half their appeal with autofocus. That's one reason I never went with a Contax G despite their strong appeal.

Do you prefer manual or autofocus?

 

[Pentode]

If - and only if - you buy from a reputable source another option for you might be a Kiev 4a with Jupiter 8, 9 and 12 lenses.

Kievs are the poor man’s Contax and if you get one that works well (I did) you could build a solid kit with very nice optics.

FSU cameras are quirky, however, and it’s strongly advisable you only get one from a source with a good reputation, ie: Oleg, Fedka or Alex-Photo.

I like my Kiev a lot and the lenses are quite sharp. Opinions on FSU cameras vary pretty widely here so someone else might chime in and tell you it’s the worst decision you could possibly make!

 

[guangong]

OK so fixed lens or interchangeable lenses. I would recommend something with interchangeable lenses so that you will use that one camera everywhere and not go off to replace it soon.

Next is cost range.

Which features do you want and which you can do without? Built in light meter? Hot shoe? Self timer? Eyeglass issues?

Finally and this is to me when I sold cameras is the most important. Not what others recommend so much as what fits in your hands and you are comfortable handling. That includes how well you can see and frame with the viewfinder. Can you handle the split image focusing of the camera that you are holding. Is the split image bright enough. How does it feel to you to advance the film, fire the shutter, make the settings? Are you comfortable with the loading? Rewinding? Typically if you have smaller hands a smaller camera will be easier to handle; likewise larger hands are usually better suited to larger cameras.

Sirius has posted the best advice for this thread: How the camera feels in your hands, but also how comfortable to frame and focus. I would also include how you intend to carry your camera...around neck, pocket, case or bag. All decisions regarding choice of camera are basically individual in nature. These is no “best” in that sense. Then there are other considerations. Many favor the Contax G cameras and if you have failing eyesight this auto everything camera may be just what you want. I fiddled with one in a store when first came out but don’t like to be battery dependent, despite great lenses. For me, a Nikon F with plain prism is easy to carry in a large pocket, but Leicaflex fits my hands better. Ah, choices!

 

[Paul Howell]

Other option is Kodak Retina IIIS, somewhat fussy to use, but good lens, range from 28 to 135 that couples to the rangefinder, will take a 200, takes the same lens as the reflex, just need to make sure it has the rangefinder cam. I think it has bright lines for 35, 50, 80 and 135, need a finder for 28 and 200. Leaf shutter flash syncs at all speeds. Build quality is good, not up to Leica standards but good for an occasional shooter.

 

[blockend]

I like my Kiev a lot and the lenses are quite sharp. Opinions on FSU cameras vary pretty widely here so someone else might chime in and tell you it’s the worst decision you could possibly make!

I agree, lovely cameras though getting one fixed might be a pain.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

If - and only if - you buy from a reputable source another option for you might be a Kiev 4a with Jupiter 8, 9 and 12 lenses.

Kievs are the poor man’s Contax and if you get one that works well (I did) you could build a solid kit with very nice optics.

FSU cameras are quirky, however, and it’s strongly advisable you only get one from a source with a good reputation, ie: Oleg, Fedka or Alex-Photo.

I like my Kiev a lot and the lenses are quite sharp. Opinions on FSU cameras vary pretty widely here so someone else might chime in and tell you it’s the worst decision you could possibly make!

I have two Kievs, a '59 4a and a '69 4. The 4a has been used enough that the film advance/shutter speed knob is brassed, the ribbons are fraying and need to be replaced although the camera still works. The 4 has an accurate meter, accurate shutter, and is a delight to use. Both have working flash synch at 1/25 sec.. The rangefinders are as accurate as any I've ever seen, although the viewfinder is a bit dismal and not for eyeglass wearers. A good Kiev is like having a Contax, actually a bit better because you can still buy replacement ribbon material. A not-good Kiev will be a miserable experience. Oops, gotta run will finish later.
Later:- The lenses, J-12 35/2.8 can be very good but watch for marks on the rear glass, also a seemingly small amount of haze has a large (bad) effect. J-8 50/2 is a typical Sonnar type, glowy wide open but very sharp and contrasty at middle apertures. The J-9 85/2 is similar, another Sonnar, mine is made at Lytkarino in 1970, all the rest are Kiev Arsenal. A sleeper lens is the Helios 103 53/1.8 a good double gauss type, sharp, contrasty, cheap - like $40 cheap. Kiev mount stuff seems more reliable than screwmount, and earlier is better. I'm very happy with my outfit, great performance and reliability for very little money.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

G is the last camera I would call as rangefinder. It is auto camera.
With overpriced lenses and way too much of electronics.

R is true rangefinder. Has TTL metering, which is handy and using very easy to get batteries. And you will safe a lot on lenses. It works with FSU 50mm lenses. They are 9-50$, will do great for BW. And R will accept less expensive than M-mount LTM lenses. Color Skopar 35 LTM is possible to find for 250 USD and it is small, modern lens. Or old Canon LTM 35 lenses for same price.

FSU is very big gamble these days. Where is maybe one USA based seller, who stands for what he sells. The rest are mostly scammers on eBay from FSU countries. In 2017 I purchased, FED-3 and FED-5B. Both were listed as serviced and tested. But they were not. I have money returned for FED-3, but I can't fix it, yet. FED-5B was just fresh enough to still works without CLA.

Where are Canon P all metal RF cameras. Build long time ago, but still works. Not expensive are available.

If you are Nikon guy, then were are Nikon RF cameras. Some old, but still working fine and where are some made as replica of old ones, but working as good as old ones.
Old ones are not very expensive, but they are at their own league. I don't know who is servicing G, but Nikon RF cameras are still serviced within USA and sold after service.

You could also get serviced LTM Leica for very reasonable price and it will works with mentioned above FSU LTM lenses. Best match would be Industar-22, Industar-50 they are collapsible and will not block viewfinder.
If any other lens used, it needs external viewfinder. They are expensive, or DIY, or buy FSU universal one (not expensive).

 

[Cholentpot]

Argus C3.

Affordable? Check.

Rugged? Check.

Interchangeable lens? Check.

 

[ransel]

interchangeable lens................Canon or Leica ltm bodies should be in your budget.

I agree - and the Canon P is pretty economical and the rangefinder is very easy to adjust...if it ever gets out of adjustment. LTM...I use a Voigtlander 35mm f/2.5 on mine pretty much exclusively.

 

[blockend]

A sleeper lens is the Helios 103 53/1.8 a good double gauss type, sharp, contrasty, cheap - like $40 cheap.

On your recommendation I bought a Helios 103, and having put a few films through I'm impressed. Very usable 50mm all-rounder. Mine cost a mere £14 in good nick.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

On your recommendation I bought a Helios 103, and having put a few films through I'm impressed. Very usable 50mm all-rounder. Mine cost a mere £14 in good nick.

Good, I'm glad that worked out well.
The H-103 is possibly the only piece of FSU gear that I've heard nothing bad about.
Mine came on a '69 Kiev 4, which also has an accurate meter. One thing I did while I had the lens apart for de-hazing was paint the aperture blades flat black, as well as touching up the inside of the barrel and element edges, that and the haze removal made a noticeable improvement in contrast. Although I've made no quantitative tests it's about as good as any 50 I have when looking at a print. It does a nice job with E6 film too.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I've had Kiev-4AM, Kiev-4А and Kiev-II. Fixed all light leaks in 4AM. Didn't liked H-103 at all. Trashed 4A after I realized what I can't work on ribbons. Too tiny. II was well looked after and went to Kiev for CLA. But once I hold Contax-IIa in my hands, I have zero regrets in selling of Kievs. Maybe one day I'll get IIa and J-3. It seems what Jupiter line is better in Contax mount. Even J-12. It flares awfully in LTM, Contax mount it doesn't seems to do it much and this bad.

 

[btaylor]

I don't often agree with Ko.Fe., but the Contax IIa is a joy to hold compared to my Kievs. If the Zeiss lenses are too expensive, the Jupiter FSU lenses can be a terrific and fit perfectly. A downside however are the service costs: there are few who are qualified to work on them and they're expensive.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

I don't often agree with Ko.Fe., but the Contax IIa is a joy to hold compared to my Kievs. If the Zeiss lenses are too expensive, the Jupiter FSU lenses can be a terrific and fit perfectly. A downside however are the service costs: there are few who are qualified to work on them and they're expensive.

The Jupiter 12 will not fit the postwar Contax IIa and IIIa. The shutter in the postwar Contax is good, as long as it's clean and properly lubricated, it's also the most complicated 35mm shutter I've ever seen; the prewar Contax/Kiev shutter is the second most complicated.

 

[btaylor]

Good point, the Jupiter 12 (35mm) will not fit. I recall now that that was one reason I bought the Kiev-- the later Zeiss 35mm lens alone that fits the Contax IIa/IIIa easily cost 4 to 5 times as much as a nice Kiev with Jupiter 12!