I need a Rangefinder

[jtzordon]

The Olympus XA2 produces nice results and is tiny, but it only does zone focus. It works great for general shooting, but you might find if limiting depending on your applications.

 

[stevco]

The Olympus XA2 produces nice results and is tiny, but it only does zone focus. It works great for general shooting, but you might find if limiting depending on your applications.

Olympus XA2 it's nice for it's nice features: small, light, good lens.. But as you say the focus and automatic system might not be as crative as manual camera with manual focus etc..

 

[AdrianW]

Hi Stevco: Amongst the cameras that you mentioned, I have a Konica c35 and a Minolta Hi-Matic 7s (but not the 7s II).

The Konica is a very easy to use camera that someone gave to me for free. But it is fully automatic (selects both aperture and shutter speed) and I prefer to decide these settings rather than having the camera decide for me. That's why I like the Minolta 7s... I can shoot either on auto or manual with this camera.

I was fortunate in finding my Minolta in perfect working order and have been amazed at the detail in photos taken with the 45 f/1.8 lens - even when shot wide open. Another benefit with this camera is that the viewfinder framelines move as you focus to correct for the parallax error commonly found with other rangefinder cameras.

I'm not sure how the 7s compares with the 7sII for size and weight - it is certainly larger than the Konica c35. If you can find a Minolta Hi-Matic 7s in good working order at a decent price and don't mind the size I think you will be very happy with the build quality.

BTW, I do have to also mention the Olympus XA. This was my tiny "go everywhere" camera for many years and has rewarded me with many great photos... great lens with aperture priority rather than fully automatic.

 

[stevco]

Hi Stevco: Amongst the cameras that you mentioned, I have a Konica c35 and a Minolta Hi-Matic 7s (but not the 7s II).

The Konica is a very easy to use camera that someone gave to me for free. But it is fully automatic (selects both aperture and shutter speed) and I prefer to decide these settings rather than having the camera decide for me. That's why I like the Minolta 7s... I can shoot either on auto or manual with this camera.

I was fortunate in finding my Minolta in perfect working order and have been amazed at the detail in photos taken with the 45 f/1.8 lens - even when shot wide open. Another benefit with this camera is that the viewfinder framelines move as you focus to correct for the parallax error commonly found with other rangefinder cameras.

I'm not sure how the 7s compares with the 7sII for size and weight - it is certainly larger than the Konica c35. If you can find a Minolta Hi-Matic 7s in good working order at a decent price and don't mind the size I think you will be very happy with the build quality.

BTW, I do have to also mention the Olympus XA. This was my tiny "go everywhere" camera for many years and has rewarded me with many great photos... great lens with aperture priority rather than fully automatic.

AdrianW,

Thanx for your post.

Konica 35 is nice, but as you say, has lack of manual mode.

As far I learn from the people here, I furthermore tend to Minolta 7sII and Canon QL-17 GIII for it's small and light size, AE and Manual mode, good optics.

I've found some Minolta 7s over ebay, one in very good shape and recently was serviced (as the seller told me), and affordable price + shipping price.

But 7s it's quite bigger and heavier and maybe closer to my Minolta srt 101 with 58mm lens has dimesions 140 x 100 x 100 mm (as i measured approx.), while as i read Minolta 7s has dimensions: 140×82×73 cm and 770g weight, while Minolta 7sII has 115x60x77 mm which is quite smaller (i couldn't found weight measurements).

 

[maderik]

AdrianW,
But 7s it's quite bigger and heavier and maybe closer to my Minolta srt

Here is an SRT-101 and Hi-Matic 9 (similar to the 7s) side by side:

Here is a photo with some of the Olympus rangefinders and an OM-1 for reference:

The 35 DC in the middle is about the same size as the 7sII and G-III QL17.

 

[stevco]

Maderik,
You have a fantastic set here, you must have fun
OM 1 it's a bit smaller than my SRT 101 and about a half lighter!

Minolta 7s has even a bit higher body then srt 101.
Olympus RF are quite small and light, i like that about them.

Thank you very much for showing me this, I appreciate it!

 

[stevco]

APUG's,

I've found 2 cameras but i don't know the condition yet, only the price.

I've found a seller near my country who sells Kodak retina IIIC with Heligon lens 50mm f/2 (standrdly these are made with Xenon lens, i've never heard of Heligon, are they good/worse/better?), that's a vintage beauty, folding camera (that's very compact), have someone here had that camera, tried, photographed, any critics, conclusion etc..? Also maybe, how it's comparable to the Minolta 7sII, Canon ql-17 gIII?
The price it's around 80 euro (as i would have cheaper shipping compared to Usa/europe which is around 35 dollars to 35 euros) what do you think?

And also, there is a Canon ql-17 gIII for 50 euro..?

any conclusions?

 

[maderik]

APUG's,
Kodak retina IIIC with Heligon lens 50mm f/2

Big "C" or little "c"? The difference is the viewfinder: the big C has a decent size finder while the little c finder is smallish, dimish, and squinty.

> i've never heard of Heligon, are they good/worse/better?),

Less common in the US, some say it's better and some say no diff.

> folding camera (that's very compact), [...] Also maybe, how it's comparable to the Minolta 7sII, Canon ql-17 gIII?

Compact but heavy. It will fit in a pants pocket, but you'll need a good belt or suspenders to avoid wardrobe malfunction. The lens is highly regarded, and the all metal mechanics feel wonderful. But the winding lever is on the bottom (I don't mind, some never adapt to it), the viewfinder is small/dim (at least for little c) and the selenium metering is uncoupled (if it even still works) and not that sensitive for available light work. It has an old fashioned knob (instead of crank) for rewinding, so no quick film changes. Another oddity is that the film counter must be manually reset, counts down, and has an interlock to prevent shooting past 1 (many think a Retina is dead when it's just locked). Common problems are wear in the cocking/winding and interlock mechanisms and dead light meters. Folding makes it more compact when folded, but adds time to be ready to shoot (also have to reset lens to infinity, remove filters or hood to fold.) It's a very different feel from the Japanese RFs of the 60's and 70's. But I really like my folding Retina's (IIc and IIIc).

One thing to remember with all of these 40+ year old cameras is that they need to be periodically cleaned and serviced. The viewfinders are not sealed and 40 years of dust can make them rather dim and very hard to see the rangefinder patch. The rangefinders should also be tested and adjusted for accuracy. Old lube and disuse can make the shutter and other mechanics sticky.

 

[stevco]

Big "C" or little "c"? The difference is the viewfinder: the big C has a decent size finder while the little c finder is smallish, dimish, and squinty.

> i've never heard of Heligon, are they good/worse/better?),

Less common in the US, some say it's better and some say no diff.

> folding camera (that's very compact), [...] Also maybe, how it's comparable to the Minolta 7sII, Canon ql-17 gIII?

Compact but heavy. It will fit in a pants pocket, but you'll need a good belt or suspenders to avoid wardrobe malfunction. The lens is highly regarded, and the all metal mechanics feel wonderful. But the winding lever is on the bottom (I don't mind, some never adapt to it), the viewfinder is small/dim (at least for little c) and the selenium metering is uncoupled (if it even still works) and not that sensitive for available light work. It has an old fashioned knob (instead of crank) for rewinding, so no quick film changes. Another oddity is that the film counter must be manually reset, counts down, and has an interlock to prevent shooting past 1 (many think a Retina is dead when it's just locked). Common problems are wear in the cocking/winding and interlock mechanisms and dead light meters. Folding makes it more compact when folded, but adds time to be ready to shoot (also have to reset lens to infinity, remove filters or hood to fold.) It's a very different feel from the Japanese RFs of the 60's and 70's. But I really like my folding Retina's (IIc and IIIc).

One thing to remember with all of these 40+ year old cameras is that they need to be periodically cleaned and serviced. The viewfinders are not sealed and 40 years of dust can make them rather dim and very hard to see the rangefinder patch. The rangefinders should also be tested and adjusted for accuracy. Old lube and disuse can make the shutter and other mechanics sticky.

This review about Kodak retina IIIc (with small "c") it's helpful a lot. I was also concerned about that camera, it's old and it's quite odd as you say, and the functionality and accuracy it's on its edge.

About Canon ql-17 gIII, the seller told me that it works visually (seems fine on pics), but it's not tested fisicaly with film and i'm not sure if the shutter, apperture and lens, lightmeter, film cassete and spool, and other electronic/mechanic parts works OK.

I think the price it's OK if works, but with that old camera i don't believe that works without cleaning and servicing as you say. Also the problem is that in my town there is no any photo repair man or CLA, but also that would be late if I already pay the camera without CLA before, and i don't believe that he would make that effort to do that insted of me.

 

[fotch]

I have read by comments by others that the Kodak Retina's are good camera however, very hard to repair or refurbish, and expensive to do so. Might want to Google that to see what pops up first.

 

[pantelis adiavastos]

i dont think the xa2 is bad. 35mm lens with zone focusing is not that bad. think od the vast depth of field you got and you'll get it... even atF2.8 u can't go wrong on 35mm lens. personally i dont like plastic first, and then i dont like to have auto to blame. i better use manual and blame my self... and i also prefer a 60's handheld lightmeter to assort my cameras...

anyway usability is a huge factor. it's the reason most of us quit digital, because ether you go to a full auto stupid compact pocket camera, or, a semi-auto refrigerator size dslr.

 

[stevco]

i dont think the xa2 is bad. 35mm lens with zone focusing is not that bad. think od the vast depth of field you got and you'll get it... even atF2.8 u can't go wrong on 35mm lens. personally i dont like plastic first, and then i dont like to have auto to blame. i better use manual and blame my self... and i also prefer a 60's handheld lightmeter to assort my cameras...

anyway usability is a huge factor. it's the reason most of us quit digital, because ether you go to a full auto stupid compact pocket camera, or, a semi-auto refrigerator size dslr.

Oly xa2 it's too much Plastic to me, it's compact and nice but just not what i want to find. But having manual mode and manual focus it's fantastic. And for that i'm seeing further to Minolta 7sII and Canon ql17 gIII (there is a chance to get this one).

Also, you are right about the digital pocket cameras and furniture sized cameras

 

[stevco]

I have read by comments by others that the Kodak Retina's are good camera however, very hard to repair or refurbish, and expensive to do so. Might want to Google that to see what pops up first.

I wouldn't be a camera collector, so it's good to have a newer camera and also with cheaper repairs too.

 

[Jeff L]

I have a Konica C35 and like it very much. The lens is quite good and the camera is small, light, automatic, easy,very quiet and takes 46mm filters. I put a small lens hood on as well. They are quite inexpensive so if it doesn't work out - it's no great loss.

 

[jeckyll]

I use a QLIII and don't use a battery adapter. For negative film the results are fine, I don't shoot slide so I can't comment.

Just FYI

 

[stevco]

Guys,

What would be the TRUE price for Minolta 7sII?

The seller tells me that camera it's in great condition, that the shutter and lightmeter works (according to this, also the battery is working), he has photographed only several films, it comes with leather case and UV filter. The price it's 120 euro. I'am waiting for pictures of the camera.
What do you think for around 40 year old camera, with all the problems that might have.
For example, i bought my almost MINT Minolta srt 101 with very clear 58mm 1.4 and 35mm 2.8 for 110 euro! see here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/stevco/4296912825/sizes/o/

Minolta 7sII has fixed lens, and might be a rare camera for it's high price today.

On the other hand:

Another seller (from antique shop) have Canon ql-17 GIII for 50 euro, not tested, only visually looks good - he says, and he avoid to test it. I saw the camera on small pictures, and i'm waiting for bigger pictures. And i don't believe this guy at all, he just has very nasty attitude like - buy it as is or leave it. And it's quite a risk.

Both cameras are right to my country so I might have free shipping, anyway I woudn't pay 35 dollars shipping (like buying from ebay etc.).

 

[BobD]

The GIII is a great camera but they are almost always found today with very
bad light seal foam around the edge of the film compartment. It's not
difficult to replace but it does take time and a little expense.

Of course, the same goes for many cameras of this vintage.

 

[elekm]

I doubt that any camera can be described as "mint" after 30 or 40 years, and that term should be stopped being used by everyone immediately, especially if one is making this judgment based on a photo.

I also agree that nearly all Japanese cameras since the 1960s will need to have new foam seals. And nearly all cameras -- regardless of country of origin -- should be serviced and recalibrated and readjusted. Manual cameras are mechanical devices and therefore will benefit from routine service.

 

[stevco]

To Everyone who helped me to find the right RF I need:

Thank you very much for yours very helpful tips, suggestions, reviews and opinions. I really appreciate that!

I bought a beautiful, black, in very careful stored condition - Minolta 7sII with original black leather case and UV filter.
I think it will suits very well right to my Minolta SRT 101 and Minolta Maxxum 600si.
Currently the camera is at my Sister, and i will receive it around the middle of April. I will post then pictures from the camera and also photographs with it

Thank you again fellas, I owe you!

 

[fotch]

Hey Stevco, congratulations, good choice.

 

[photoncatcher]

Fro general "carrying around", I love my little Oly 35rc. Good metering,light weight, and a killer sharp lens.