Is a canonet a decent introduction to rangefinders?

[BetterSense]

I have this thing where I think I need to experience the rangefinder way of working, and I particularly want a Bessa R3 because of the 1:1 viewfinder. However the entry price for a Bessa or used Leica is a thousand dollars or more and that's a lot to me. I was thinking I could get a Canonet for much less money and try that for a while, and if I really liked it, spring for the Bessa or Leica. Suppose I got a Canonet QL19 or QL17, do you think this would serve as a good taste of rangefinders or would it just spoil me on the type of camera, and I really need to experience the higher quality cameras like Leica etc. to know what they are all about?

 

[BobD]

Suppose I got a Canonet QL19 or QL17, do you think this would serve as a good taste of rangefinders...

Sure.

... or would it just spoil me on the type of camera, and I really need to experience the higher quality cameras like Leica etc. to know what they are all about?

I see no reason it would spoil anything. Everyone has their preferences and
some people even prefer other cameras to Leicas, etc.

 

[karthik]

A Canonet would definitely give you a feel for working with a rangefinder. I presume you are used to a SLR (or something else?). I recently started with a Minolta 7s and like the following features very much:

• 
  Lightweight, small (fits easily into the outer flap of a backpack)

• 
  Full manual control, no batteries

• 
  Not too hard to focus

• 
  Quiet

If any of these are of concern to you, a Canonet would be suitable.

 

[Brian Legge]

I have a Canonet QL 17 GIII. Love it. It was the first rangefinder I picked up and is still my go-to rangefinder. I've since experimented with a bunch of other fixed lens ones and it is my favorite so far as manual ones go.

My automatic favorite is an Olympus 35 DC, though my opinion may be biased as it is the first camera I successfully repaired. I love the lens on it though.

 

[Brian Legge]

Note that there is a significant size difference between the original Canonet 17 and the Canonet 17 GIII. If compactness matters to you, be sure you know which one you are picking up.

 

[BetterSense]

I prefer full manual operation. I use an SLR camera now, but I've been wanting a rangefinder for snapping pictures of the kids; I find it hard to focus the SLR fast sometimes.

 

[Leighgion]

The Canon QL17 is a great little rangefinder, has full manual option and quite affordable.

 

[denmark.yuzon]

My first rangefinder is a Konica Auto S2... Not so compact if you compare it to a Canonet QL17 GIII.. its monstrous in size.. But, man, the hexanon lens is amazing.. I was so hooked to it I bought another one.. So i have two.. one for color, one for black and white.. talk about a back up camera.. LOL..

But yeah, a canonet is a good start to get into RF photography.. dont forget the Olympus 35 SP.. that is one sick RF too..

 

[pollux]

as you're in texas, why not get the texas leica (fuji). it's got no meter though.

 

[d.sge]

I have this thing where I think I need to experience the rangefinder way of working, and I particularly want a Bessa R3 because of the 1:1 viewfinder. However the entry price for a Bessa or used Leica is a thousand dollars or more and that's a lot to me. I was thinking I could get a Canonet for much less money and try that for a while, and if I really liked it, spring for the Bessa or Leica.

That's essentially the route I went. Though I have no experience with Canonets and their viewfinders, the Yashica Lynx's VF I started with only served to wet my appetite further for a brighter, contrast-ier one. It proved to be very small taste. So I settled on an R3M and the Yashica has since been relegated to torrential downpours and blizzards. In other words, I rarely use it. In hindsight I'd rather have had the $50 I spent go to the VC kit I eventually selected.

That said, I'm looking to sell my R3M. While the 1:1: VF is fun, and is what drew me to the camera initially, I'd rather forgo the 1:1 and have plenty of space around the 40mm framelines inside the VF to anticipate and compose my shot. I find the 75mm framelines ideal for that particular camera. The 90mm ones are pretty good, too.

I prefer full manual operation. I use an SLR camera now, but I've been wanting a rangefinder for snapping pictures of the kids; I find it hard to focus the SLR fast sometimes.

In general, getting from the MFD to infinity and back is going to be faster for all manual focus rf lenses as compared to slr lenses thanks to a shorter focus throw. I've also found focusing to be much easier with an rf in low light as well, but only if the rf patch is nice and bright.

 

[Anscojohn]

[Suppose I got a Canonet....... QL17, do you think this would serve as a good taste of rangefinders .....[/QUOTE]

*************
Yes.

 

[domaz]

You can find Canonet cheap if you are patient and look around your neighborhood (i.e. estate sales, garage sales). Not much too lose and they are great cameras. I found one the other day and thought I would just sell it to the Rangefinder lovers, but I must admit it's hard to let go off..

 

[f/stopblues]

I bought a Canonet QL17 (not GIII) as my tiptoe into rangefinders. I loved that way of working, but soon got tired of the viewfinder, which is a great one as far as fixed-lens RF's go, but miles behind a Bessa series camera or a Leica. I settled on a Bessa R2A and now have an R3A. I still have and use the Canonet five years later and added a second one, though I never use it.

I hope you enjoy rangefinders! If they fit your way of seeing and shooting, they can be a great experience!

 

[lns]

I prefer full manual operation. I use an SLR camera now, but I've been wanting a rangefinder for snapping pictures of the kids; I find it hard to focus the SLR fast sometimes.

I am not sure that a rangefinder really has any advantage over an SLR for snapping pictures of kids. I think it would be better to buy an autofocus camera. The speed advantage of the rangefinder, in my experience, is being able to preset focus and use hyper focal technique, and also having the whole viewfinder appear in focus as you look though it. But those aren't really advantages with most pictures of kids. I say this as a mother of three and also an occasional kids portrait photographer.

Nothing against the Canonet. It's a fun camera. I used one years ago. And I love rangefinders. But SLRs are great for pictures of kids. They tend to have better flash options, too.

-Laura

 

[BetterSense]

I think it would be better to buy an autofocus camera.

I can't find an autofocus camera that is small enough for me. The pentaxen are close, but they are hardly battery-independent.

 

[Pumal]

Another one fun to use is a Canonet 28. It's an underrated camera. It turned out better than they expected. You can use it in aperture priority as long as you remember that speed will be a constant 1/60

 

[canonman]

The canonet G-III QL 1,7 which I bought here from Sandy King has been my first rangefinder. I had been shooting with a TLR and a SLR before. I now also got a Leica and a Konica Hexar RF which are great cameras, but I still use the canonet because of its size - its my camera which always sits in my daypack somewhere. The canonet is not only a great choice to get addicted to the RF world, but also a great companion when you want to get an additional Leica. The canonet makes sharp pictures - if you need the automatic functions be sure that the meter works. I had different canonets and all of them needed a CLA of the shutter at some point, but some 80 USD or so to get it done is well spent money. Go for it, you shouldn't regret it!

 

[John Koehrer]

When you find one of these at the garage sale it probably won't trip or advance.
THE BATTERY is most likely dead or missing.
Turn the aperture ring OFF the A setting. At that point everything is manual.

 

[Robert Budding]

I can't find an autofocus camera that is small enough for me. The pentaxen are close, but they are hardly battery-independent.

Good luck finding a battery-independent AF camera! Not sure why it's so important to you - my experience with batteries has been good; they're cheap and reliable. Yes, they do wear out, but it's easy to carry a few spares.

 

[BetterSense]

I got a QL17 GIII. It's pretty cool, except I think the shutter is running a bit slow. The couple things I noticed are that it is smaller and lighter than my OM2, the shutter is running a bit slow and it doesn't focus very close. Also, the shutter and aperture adjustments are too fiddly to operate without looking. There is no DOF scale, and finally, I haven't figured out how to turn it off. I've been leaving it on manual mode hoping that the meter is disengaged that way.

 

[fdisk]

love it

I really like mine, best $30 I ever spent. and its bang on for velvia 50 slides. lens is nice and sharp, the yahica mg-1 is great too maybe even cheaper. but if I got another rangefinder it would be a mamiya 6

 

[fdisk]

its the Canonet QL 17 GIII

 

[canonman]

I got a QL17 GIII. It's pretty cool, except I think the shutter is running a bit slow. The couple things I noticed are that it is smaller and lighter than my OM2, the shutter is running a bit slow and it doesn't focus very close. Also, the shutter and aperture adjustments are too fiddly to operate without looking. There is no DOF scale, and finally, I haven't figured out how to turn it off. I've been leaving it on manual mode hoping that the meter is disengaged that way.

You turn it off with the lens cap!

 

[panchro-press]

A working FED II or III may be worth looking into.

-30-

 

[Steve Mack]

Buy a used Leica. With a lens. Try it. If you don't like the camera, you can probably sell it for just about what you paid for it. That way, you won't find yourself buying about 4-5 other brands before you decide that what you really wanted was a Leica rangefinder, after all.

Don't ask me how I know this.

With best regards.

Stephen