Found a Beauty Today

Quite literally...

Beauty "Lightomatic II" rangefinder in pristine condition except the focus is all but frozen solid.

Strangely enough the shutter is very responsive. Go figure.

Bet that lens cap isn't factory standard, but I kinda like it anyway.

Nice. Judging by the paint job on the lens cap, it looks like it's owner got fed up of taking photos of the inside of the cap...

There's no missing that it's still on now ;-)

My first or second camera, c1958, was a Beauty Canter. It was fine.

Not enough has been said about the Japanese rangefinders of the post-War 1950s. They are, almost without exception, highly precise instruments. There were many brands but each one opted to disavow the negative perception that Japanese products were shoddily built (there WAS a time when they were!!!). These cameras are fully capable (of course, with some limitations such as lens interchangeability) of results similar to the SLRs of the 60s, 70s, and 80s. - David Lyga

I had a Beauty Canter

mdarnton said:

My first or second camera, c1958, was a Beauty Canter. It was fine.

Click to expand...

My second camera was a Beauty Canter, which superceded my Retina I (which I still have). It was a very capable camera, the lens was excellent. My Father and I tested it and his AsahiFlex IIb using the Air Force test targets; the Canter f1.9 acquitted itself very well. Sadly the shutter "blew" and repair costs were too much for teen-aged me. I turned to a KomaFlex S, which I still have. It has a sticky diaphragm, and repair costs for a 127 SLR leaf shutter camera are too much considering how little film is now available. Alas....

That's funny--My cameras were hand-me-downs from my brother. First the Canter, then a small press camera, then a Retina 1! He bought a Komaflex-S, too, but I never got that one. As I remember, it was a tidy little package.

Here's me with the Retina, then the shot right after this one on My Flickr page is shot with the Canter. When I scanned it, I was surprised at how sharp and flare-free it was, given the backlight situation.

Michael, 1962 by Michael Darnton, on Flickr