inexpensive 35mm RF system

[Lee Rust]

The Retina is an interesting and finely built machine, but the Canonet is much more comfortable to hold and operate, plus the QL17 viewfinder is way better and there's the auto exposure option with a reliable meter. However, either of them are fairly fiddly when it comes to adjusting shutter speed and aperture. This is where the Leica-style cameras and lenses are really in a class by themselves.

 

[blockend]

Any other cameras I should be looking at?

The issue with old interchangeable lens rangefinder cameras, is very few match the viewfinder to lenses other than 50mm. Which isn't a problem if you like that focal length. If you want variety, which your post suggests you do, you're looking at supplementary viewfinders. This complicates the process, and the question is whether you'd be better using a plain viewfinder camera or an autofocus one, of which there is no shortage.

My favourite cheapo is the Kiev, a pre-war Contax built until the 1980s by the soviets (Ukraine). They're well built, especially before the late 70s, lenses are plentiful and reasonably priced, and they're a more sophisticated camera than the Russian Leica knock-offs. You'll still need alternative viewfinders if you stray from 50mm, but that's true of any rangefinder in your price bracket.

 

[R.Gould]

many of these old rangefinders have frame lins for the lenses they support, for instance the Werra's and the Ambisillette both have the frame lines, and the Ambi supply the correct viewfinde to go with their 130 mm lens, as far as additional viewfinders go that is really not a problem, I have two that I use for cameras like the Leica iiif and my vitessa t, one is a Russian turret finder and the other is a turnit 3 from Voigtlander, which gives 35 50 100 and 135, and neither cost that much, maybe £30 each, and, at least over here seem to be rradily available

 

[Theo Sulphate]

...
Any other cameras I should be looking at?

Not to buy, since it's an expensive medium format camera and you're looking at 35mm, but just for the experience of The Best Viewfinder and Rangefinder in the World: a Mamiya 6 or Mamiya 7.

I thought my Leica M3's and M6's had the brightest, clearest viewfinders with an excellent rangefinder patch ...until I looked at the Mamiyas. Just astounding.

 

[guangong]

If compact size doesn’t matter and extreme closeups and extremely long lenses are not an issue, the only other advantages that rf cameras have over slr is speed of operation for very spontaneous photography. One disadvantage compared with slr is the ability to forget about lens cap and miss an opportunity altogether.

 

[abruzzi]

Not to buy, since it's an expensive medium format camera and you're looking at 35mm, but just for the experience of The Best Viewfinder and Rangefinder in the World: a Mamiya 6 or Mamiya 7.

I thought my Leica M3's and M6's had the brightest, clearest viewfinders with an excellent rangefinder patch ...until I looked at the Mamiyas. Just astounding.

Nah, I'm going to pair my Canonet with a GW690!

 

[michr]

Cheap interchangeable lens rangefinders are something I've spent some time looking for.

The Argus C3 has already been mentioned. There's also several other models made by Argus (C33 and C44) which feature interchangeable lenses.
Other cameras are the Ambi Silette and the Anscomark. Both are interesting-looking and feature some nice lenses, and are generally inexpensive.

I also second the recommendations for Retina cameras, the IIIc (small c version) is very nice, often less than $50 and the 35mm and 80mm lens elements are also cheap. Using focal lengths besides 50mm is a bit of a pain on these cameras, you have to use the rangefinder first, then select the distance on the lens second.

Most of these will have accessory shoes to take turret viewfinders.

 

[removedacct1]

I still believe the Retina IIIc/C are great rangefinders, well worth considering. Here's a photo of my recent rescue cat, Frank, made with the Retina IIIc loaded with Astrum A-2SH film: https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1836/43173627325_826c97f1ad_h.jpg

 

[Marcelo Paniagua]

I still believe the Retina IIIc/C are great rangefinders, well worth considering. Here's a photo of my recent rescue cat, Frank, made with the Retina IIIc loaded with Astrum A-2SH film: https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1836/43173627325_826c97f1ad_h.jpg

Whoa!! that is an insanely sharp picture. And cat look awesome Just love cats myself.

Best regards

Marcelo

 

[removedacct1]

Whoa!! that is an insanely sharp picture. And cat look awesome Just love cats myself.

Best regards

Marcelo

Thank you Marcelo!
Yes, the Schneider Retina-Xenon is a very good lens and can deliver exceptional sharpness and respectable bokeh as well. Glad you like my Frank.

 

[abruzzi]

Yeah, that is an excellent shot!

I wanted to start in a newer era, because it would be more familiar to me, and easier to see how I get on with a rangefinder, however I love that the Retinas fold down, which I would think would make them easy to carry around. I’m planning on using the Canonet as just a trial.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

I really think that for someone who never used a RF the best and cheapest way is to get a quality fixed lens RF like Yashica Lynx (including the crazy monster Lynx 14, although much pricier) or Fujica V2. Especially Yashicas for some reason have few takers even today and top shape one can be had for well under $50. Just need to make sure everything spins and works so no follow up investment needed to give it a go in the field. RFs are just different breed of cameras and not to everyone's liking in the way they operate. It also has some notable advantages over any other type: most have quiet shutters, on street they just keep asking for zone focusing / hip shooting etc.

 

[Pentode]

I agree that a fixed-lens RF is a great entree into the world of RFs (it was for me), but I think you could be very happy with an FSU camera. The trick is to buy from a reputable dealer who checks them out first. This would still fall within your budget.

 

[Ces1um]

@abruzzi So like you I had purchased all manner of cameras and then got the bug to try a rangefinder. I bought a voigtlander bessa r3m along with 3 lenses. Spent quite a bit on them too. It rendered photos beautifully, but It turns out I hate rangefinders. Not knocking people who like them, they just aren't for me. I've also had issues with the calibration of my camera so that likely has affected my opinion slightly. I think it's smart if you can start off with something cheap- or even borrowed. After a week you may not like what rangefinders have to offer. Don't do what I did and spend a lot right away assuming you'll love all things rangefinders. Hopefully you'll love it though.

 

[abruzzi]

Yeah, it turns out I'm more of a SLR person so I agree with you there. I didn't much like the Canon QL17 GIII, partly because the light meter only works in shutter priority mode. But I also got a Kodak Retina IIIC, and its about as nice a rangefinder as I'm going to get. It's been enough to know that I don't want to spend a fortune on a Leica. I like my Kodak for what it is, but most of my time is spend with SLRs.

 

[John51]

A mf rangefinder might suit you. If you don't take to rangefinders, it's mf, you can live with it for mf shots.

 

[dmr]

I didn't much like the Canon QL17 GIII, partly because the light meter only works in shutter priority mode.

I actually have two of these and love them. Very sharp lens, wide end of normal (40mm) and light and easy to carry.

I was surprised that this camera did not have any true match-needle type of exposure like the Mamiya SD, which I also have, but I've gotten in the habit of keeping it in auto mode but manually adjusting if I don't agree with what the meter suggests. Also, on the black one, I've been using the "wrong" battery and find that it's still well within the margin of error for negative film.