In your opinion, what are the best non-Leica rangefinders ever built?

albireo said:

May I ask the experts, what are the things to watch out for when on the market for a Konica IIIa?

I'm eyeing one in good nick on eBay but from the pictures I can see there's a lot of crud in the viewfinder. How easy it is to clean.

Also how's the 48mm in terms of sharpness at f/4 and above? I'd rarely shoot it wide open and would like a lighter package (Vs the 50mm, which appears to be bulkier). But I'll go for the 50mm if it's really much sharper than the 48mm

Ultimately I'd imagine I'll have to send it out for a CLA anyway, right? @Alex Varas do you CLA these?

Click to expand...

Well... I did one transport system of this model years ago, the camera is well built, very solid. I would say the transport system is the weak part, this sample I worked on had serious worn out gears, probably it got jammed once and it was forced/abused. I will do this camera if it's sent to me.
Myself I'm always looking for this model in EU marked but the few appearing are way too much.
Lens is outstanding at every aperture, my client was very happy with it.

albireo said:

May I ask the experts, what are the things to watch out for when on the market for a Konica IIIa?

I'm eyeing one in good nick on eBay but from the pictures I can see there's a lot of crud in the viewfinder. How easy it is to clean.

Also how's the 48mm in terms of sharpness at f/4 and above? I'd rarely shoot it wide open and would like a lighter package (Vs the 50mm, which appears to be bulkier). But I'll go for the 50mm if it's really much sharper than the 48mm

Ultimately I'd imagine I'll have to send it out for a CLA anyway, right? @Alex Varas do you CLA these?

Click to expand...

Easy to clean. Extremely sharp lens the 48mm. I can't speak to the 50mm personally, but I've heard that it is marginally sharper. Get one! Beautiful, reliable, fun to shoot, great results.

camera_allure said:

I have the 48mm f/2 version, but I would like to own both. I echo what others have touched on: limitations not only have the potential to be good, but they can be liberating ironically enough. Some days I will create artificial limitations in my shooting, for instance I'll pick up a half frame camera (or something else which I don't regularly use) just to get my mind working in a different direction creatively. It has been effective. I sympathize with you, though, 35mm can be wonderful to work with.

Click to expand...

I know exactly what you mean. I even enjoy (said it before) shooting my F60, because it does have serveral limitations, and only the basic features - which is good enough. Into the end, we're just expose a bit of film into the light, to capture photons.

SchwinnParamount said:

YEP!! What ChuckRoast said. I personally found what Yashica said to be slightly offensive.

Click to expand...

Well, it's true that hipsters & posers quite often use the M6 as their weapon of choice, just watch one of these countless YT videos. No hard feelings, and nothing bad meant either way, just the truth. (no social insecurities also, i am happy with my old gear)

Yashica said:

Well, it's true that hipsters & posers quite often use the M6 as their weapon of choice, just watch one of these countless YT videos. No hard feelings, and nothing bad meant either way, just the truth. (no social insecurities also, i am happy with my old gear)

Click to expand...

There are only three kinds of people: Makers, Fakers, and Takers. I never allow the Fakers and Takers to define how l live my life, my values, or my choices.

As I said, I own both an M2 (1961) and an M5 (1974). Both would qualify as "older" cameras though mine have both been through DAG's complete CLA/rehab and run flawlessly. I chose them for various reasons, but among them was that these cameras were hand built Leicas, which the M6 is not. In fact, anything after the M5 (M4-P, M4-2, MA, MP, M6 ...) are all partially machine built and have (in my opinion) cheaper grade components in them.

I bought them to use them (and I do) not as fashion accessories. Then again, it's hard to imagine either of them having much curb appeal at the Oscars, given that they look like what they are - vintage cameras. (Note that I do not expect to be invited to the Oscars, nor would I go if I were. Talk about Fakers ...)

For the record, I also own a beautiful IIIf with an uncoated 50mm f/3.5 Collapsible Elmar as well as a Fuji GW690II as other instances of rangefinders in regular rotation here at Casa de la Roast. All these RFs complement my similar stable of Nikon film SLR stuff - again, aged but working perfectly.

For me, at least, different cameras cause me to see differently and imagine scenes differently. I have been careful to buy a fairly good sized stable of cameras at good pricing because I don't look for perfect cosmetics or latest model, but best function. I consider this body of equipment - all of it - to be the various brushes of my craft, and nothing more. While people do occasionally notice a Hasselblad or a view camera, mostly, they ignore me, which is how I like it...

After a couple of weeks with my Konica IIIa, I am beginning to to think I've found the best RF. Keep in mind, I have a Leica M6, Canon P, Voightlander RS (is that the model?... the Cosina creation), Fuji Compact Deluxe... and many more.
I love the ergonomics of that left hand film advance, the viewfinder, but most especially, the incredible fixed 50mm lens that comes with the creature. I developed a roll of Tri-X the other day and was ASTOUNDED at the quality of the images. Contrast, tone, sharpness, everything I've always wanted in a negative.

SchwinnParamount said:

After a couple of weeks with my Konica IIIa, I am beginning to to think I've found the best RF. Keep in mind, I have a Leica M6, Canon P, Voightlander RS (is that the model?... the Cosina creation), Fuji Compact Deluxe... and many more.
I love the ergonomics of that left hand film advance, the viewfinder, but most especially, the incredible fixed 50mm lens that comes with the creature. I developed a roll of Tri-X the other day and was ASTOUNDED at the quality of the images. Contrast, tone, sharpness, everything I've always wanted in a negative.

Click to expand...

I also have a Konica IIIa with the 50mm f1.8 lens. In addition to the overall feeling of solidity, that viewfinder is amazing! I wonder why Leica with their wonderful M series rangefinder cameras didn't incorporate a viewfinder frame which corrects for the change in lens coverage as the lens focuses closer!

Dante Stella offers some informed commentary on the Konica IIIa: https://dantestella.com/technical/koni3.html
I have the ever ready case which is in rough condition, but it has fulfilled its function, the camera itself is in virtually pristine condition.

Mike Butkus has a pdf of the operating manual at https://www.cameramanuals.org/konica/konica_iiia_iiim.pdf If you download the manual, send Mike a little money so he can continue his excellent work.

As Dante Stella says, if you see one for sale, buy it!

My favorite rangefinders are the ones you can fit in your pocket because you always have them when you need them.

And unlike many people here, my Kiev-4 has never given me problems, I must be one of the lucky ones. Even the self timer works great. Had it for over a decade now. $50 with lens.

I loved the image quality and excellent viewfinder of the Fujica GW690 but the shutter froze and nobody seems to be able to repair them. They got more expensive, wouldn't buy a second one.

chuckroast said:

I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with an M6, M-A, or M-P other than their nosebleed prices. Leica has very reasonably decided to morph into a lifestyle brand, much like Apple or BMW, but that doesn't change the fact that they make very fine products.

Personally, I chose the M2 and the M5. The first is a "pure" M body (and I too us a 35mm lens a lot) and the M5 was something I always wanted since it first came out in 1971. If someone gave me an M6, though, I wouldn't turn it down

BTW, just because poseurs are known for the hipster instinct to buy M6s, shouldn't influence the rest of us one way or the other. I don't let Hollyweird, pop musicians, or politicians to define my life ...

Click to expand...

Leica must be doing something right. Or does anyone think their success is really just down to clever marketing? Which would mean that all Leica users are stupid??

The difference between a Leica M and a Canon P is similar to the one between a Nikon F2 and FE or FM.

The Canon LTM rangfinders are very nice, and you have a great choice of lenses. The only little downside for me is the sound of the shutter, which is not really silent.

I am very happy with my Canon 7s. It has a low light sensitive CDS light meter and a cold shoe, which is missing with the Canon 7.


Canon 7s with Canon 1.8/50 mm and Komura 3.5/105 mm.


Canon 7s with Jupiter-9 2/85 mm

Does a Crown Graphic qualify? Mine has a rangefinder, a fantastically good Scheider Xenar 135mm lens, and the negative will casually annihilate anything ever made in 35mm.

I lived in Atlanta from 2002-05, during the waning days of 4x5 Polaroid. The Wolf Camera flagship store was in the ATL, and whenever the 4x5 Polaroid would expire, they'd bring it back there and clear out a 20-exposure box for $11.99 per box. I'd walk out with four or five boxes every time. I used to hang out down by Five Points and do street portraits for 3 or 4 bucks per photo--I'd use the rangefinder to focus, and the wire viewfinder to frame, and I was basically using it as the world's biggest point & shoot almost. Fun times, didn't know they'd end so soon, sigh.

rulnacco said:

Does a Crown Graphic qualify? Mine has a rangefinder, a fantastically good Scheider Xenar 135mm lens, and the negative will casually annihilate anything ever made in 35mm.

I lived in Atlanta from 2002-05, during the waning days of 4x5 Polaroid. The Wolf Camera flagship store was in the ATL, and whenever the 4x5 Polaroid would expire, they'd bring it back there and clear out a 20-exposure box for $11.99 per box. I'd walk out with four or five boxes every time. I used to hang out down by Five Points and do street portraits for 3 or 4 bucks per photo--I'd use the rangefinder to focus, and the wire viewfinder to frame, and I was basically using it as the world's biggest point & shoot almost. Fun times, didn't know they'd end so soon, sigh.

Click to expand...

I still have a Crown Graphic with a 4 lens setup. They are fantastic cameras. Of course, these days you have to shoot rollfilm or sheet film with it.

For more portability, the 2x3 'Baby' Speed or Century Graphic are both really nice, light rangefinders with huge negs.

manfrominternet said:

Since I unfortunately can't afford a Leica (or a Contax G2 for that matter), I wanted to ask you guys which non-Leica rangefinder I should be looking at.

Click to expand...

Some years ago I asked myself a similar question (I would have loved to try a Zeiss Ikon ZM - but it's too expensive for me and will always be) and my solution was the aforementioned Contax IIa / IIIa.
I use to take them both with me (for coloured and black-and-white slides) as soon as I'm travelling and don't want to carry around heavy stuff. Those two bodies with four Zeiss lenses 35, 50, 85 and 135 weigh just about 2 kilograms.

It's a real pleasure to take pictures with this gear. Almost anything is possible.

davela said:

Despite what some posters above have said, it's shutter on a properly working example is whisper quiet in my experience - not quite a Leica M3 in the that regard, but close to it.

Click to expand...

My postwar shutters sound exactly like this. They are even more quiet than a friend's Leica M2 shutter. We have compared both.

But: there is a huge difference between postwar Contax IIa / IIIa and prewar II / III shutters.
The postwar shutter is pretty quiet, especially at slower times like 1/25, 1/10.

The prewar shutter of my Contax II is really loud, even like the shutter of my Contax RTS II SLR if you fix its mirror. At slow speeds like 1/10, 1/5 and 1/2, it gets even louder .

One time last year I took some portrait pictures of a good friend in a café. It was a disaster because I had brought an SLR with a winder. That was really noisy. Sure, its 85mm f/1.4 Zeiss lens was beautiful. But I wish I had brought one of my quiet Contax postwar RFs with its 85mm Sonnar instead - my friend and me, we both would have been much more comfortable .

GRHazelton said:

Sad to say the Leica M3 - and Zeiss' inability to develop it further - left the Contax RFs behind.

Click to expand...

Especially with regard to the rangefinder itself - the 1951 Contax IIa rangefinder looks like the Contax II rangefinder from 1936. I think this is the weak spot of the classic Contax RF cameras. Especially when you have to wear glasses.

Fortunately, there are additional Zeiss Ikon "Universal" finders (prewar and postwar) for wide-angle, standard and telephoto lenses which are definitely useful.

As for the Zeiss lenses - I've just developed some black-and-white slide films from last year and sometimes I cannot say anymore if I took a picture with my (coated!) Contax RF lenses or with Zeiss-C/Y-lenses. So even my 70 or 75 year-old Contax RF Sonnars and Biogons, Zeiss-Opton and Carl Zeiss Jena, do an excellent job.

There are also uncoated Contax RF lenses available, mostly prewar ones from Carl Zeiss Jena: They do have a certain kind of charm, softness, sometimes almost a little bit of certain poetry .

I would not like to use them only - but I've just developed a slide taken with my uncoated 50mm f/2 Sonnar which I enjoy a lot.
It just depends on the light situation. I would like to experiment soon with these uncoated lenses using a Fujichrome Velvia 50 which is well-known for producing intense colours.

Michael

As already stated, the Reid and Sigrist with a 2" Taylor Hobson lens is a better version than any Leica. I understand that nobody on APUG has one.