Konica S3
-
A
- Thread starter cerber0s
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale Chemicals for sale
- Started by Peter Schrager
-
For Sale Enlarging Lenses - Bundle of Three
- Started by jdart3000
-
For Sale Interest check on many items
- Started by campy51
-
For Sale FS: Toyo View - Linhof Technika Flat Lens Board Adapter
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
Sold SOLD!
- Started by B.S.Kumar
Forum statistics
Fabulous lens. Don't be alarmed at the "by Mattell" feel of the lens mount assembly. It's actually stable where it matters. The GN system is extremely accurate with the only downside being it dumps the whole capacitor on every flash. I haven't actually had one for some years now and don't recall the battery requirements as I write this so that may be an issue?
Very overrated camera.
The whole spiel about the lens hinges on one dubious Modern Photography review from the 70's.
It's non manual, and that is a bigger problem than you'd assume.
It was a good deal when it could be had in good condition for $50 or lower. But not at all as at the prices "investors" photographers, greedy shops and inheritors want now.
Just the same as with many other overhyped cameras.
Size is made too much of. None of the good rangefinders (where the rangefinder actually makes sense) fit in a pocket comfortably and securely. And not much better in a bag than something slightly bigger.
Get an Auto S2 (if you can find one that works) or HiMatic 7s. They are far better and well specced cameras on all accounts. Including I'd say the lens.
People have a fantasy about putting a camera in their pocket, taking a stroll, maybe even forgetting about it, bringing it to a club or pub, and then happening upon something and snapping a street masterpiece.
It just never ever happens like that.
The whole spiel about the lens hinges on one dubious Modern Photography review from the 70's.
It's non manual, and that is a bigger problem than you'd assume.
It was a good deal when it could be had in good condition for $50 or lower. But not at all as at the prices "investors" photographers, greedy shops and inheritors want now.
Just the same as with many other overhyped cameras.
Size is made too much of. None of the good rangefinders (where the rangefinder actually makes sense) fit in a pocket comfortably and securely. And not much better in a bag than something slightly bigger.
Get an Auto S2 (if you can find one that works) or HiMatic 7s. They are far better and well specced cameras on all accounts. Including I'd say the lens.
People have a fantasy about putting a camera in their pocket, taking a stroll, maybe even forgetting about it, bringing it to a club or pub, and then happening upon something and snapping a street masterpiece.
It just never ever happens like that.
I found the oppposite, a very underrated camera right now.
I got rid of all my compact 35 mm cameras some months ago though eBay auction because I didn't use them (I rarely shot 35 mm now). I sold an Olympus 35 RC for 100€, a Nikon 35Ti for 600€, and a Konica Auto S3 for 110€. The best of all three for me is the Konica and the only one I would buy again.
Much better lens than the Olympus and much more convenient for me to use than the Nikon "brick".
I got rid of all my compact 35 mm cameras some months ago though eBay auction because I didn't use them (I rarely shot 35 mm now). I sold an Olympus 35 RC for 100€, a Nikon 35Ti for 600€, and a Konica Auto S3 for 110€. The best of all three for me is the Konica and the only one I would buy again.
Much better lens than the Olympus and much more convenient for me to use than the Nikon "brick".
I have a S3 and S2, the S3 lens is tack sharp, build quality is good. the all auto feature is not a problem, on the rare occasion I can fool the meter by adjusting the ASA. Of the 2 usually pick the S2. On the other hand the Canon QL 1.7 has a very good lens, may not be as sharp as the Konica S3, but when shooting ISO 400 film either lens will out resolve any ISO 400 film. Using the Canon in manual mode disables the meter, but with B&W I fall back on Sunny 16 or or meter in auto mode then set the manual setting I want.
Only bummer with the S3 is that it needs a battery adapter or conversion as it uses the old mercury cells.
Has the lens ever been independently verified as something special? I mean it’s a leaf shutter on a rangefinder, and it’s relatively wide.
That’s already a lot of help with regards to resolution.
It has the same basic specs as the Auto S2 lens, only a little wider.
It doesn’t appear that the formula changed much.
The S2 Hexanon, while sharp and contrasty, and certainly a very good lens, was no better overall than Minolta or Nikons offerings of the time.
for $50 or less, the S3 is worth trying though.
But look around. The price for a good nick S3 is much higher on average.
I’d still take a good large rangefinder window and full manual over a compact RF.
Remember full manual with active meter, like the 7s,means you get to have aperture or shutter priority, or any ratio of the two, with a minimum of manual intervention. That is a powerful feature.
That’s already a lot of help with regards to resolution.
It has the same basic specs as the Auto S2 lens, only a little wider.
It doesn’t appear that the formula changed much.
The S2 Hexanon, while sharp and contrasty, and certainly a very good lens, was no better overall than Minolta or Nikons offerings of the time.
for $50 or less, the S3 is worth trying though.
But look around. The price for a good nick S3 is much higher on average.
I’d still take a good large rangefinder window and full manual over a compact RF.
Remember full manual with active meter, like the 7s,means you get to have aperture or shutter priority, or any ratio of the two, with a minimum of manual intervention. That is a powerful feature.
Last edited:
Both Modern and Popular Photography tested the S3 and rated it;s lens as one of the sharpest they had ever tested, in the 70s most lens tests were done with microfish film, it daily use if lens will resolve 200lMM it is as sharp as it needs for bee for Tmax or Delta 100. I use my S2 and 3 with hearing aid batteries.
Would you happen to have the date of the issue of the reviews in both magazines?
A friend and I did some side by side tests with various RF's of the day (many years ago). The S3 and the Minolta Hi-Matic E were about the same and the Leica CL (40mm) was right behind with a Canon QL following. I had a couple of Olympus SP's (not compact) and they were a bit disappointing I recall. A Petri of some sort, long forgotten and a few others of friends (I can't recall the variety) and a Ricoh (the one with the bottom wind lever). They were all actually very capable and with single examples, a bit of RF adjustment error could have played more of a role than the glass, I'm sure. That was a very competitive market back then and likely accounted for a large portion of the makers' production units.
There’s been speculation that it’s actually exactly the same lens, build and perhaps designed by a third party, to milk the already ailing RF market for the last revenue, before the predicted autofocus compacts destroyed that niche.
The two millimeters are within slack and interpretation limits.
I'll see if I can pull them up.
Agree with this, these '70s fixed rangefinders are just too big and bulky to forget about in your pocket. I only truly pocketable camera I ever had success with was the Olympus Mju II. I took that camera to pubs and clubs all the time in the 1990s to photograph my friends doing silly things. I've never shot a masterpiece but those photos of my friends in the '90s are still great and we often look over them and laugh at the memories. The last generation before the ubiquitous camera phone. A friend dropped his into a toilet and it was fine and apologies as I've told this story before, but he also passed his BA Photography degree shooting only with the Mju II whilst his colleagues dropped four figure sums on pro Nikon outfits. At the final degree exhibition his shots stood alongside Hasselblad portraits, they were special because the camera truly could be forgotten about in a pocket.
Off topic, sorry!
Auto S3 - nice camera. I think it handles very similarly to the Minolta Hi-Matic 7s II. I like all those fast aperture '70s rangefinders. I currently have a Olympus 35RC, slower lens but smaller body which suits me well.
Going further OT: If you can tolerate the direct flash look then sure. I just can't. At all.
The Mju II is a hair better in this regard, since is has slow sync that keeps the shutter open some time after the flash fired to get some extra ambient background, but it's a big compromise in a club/bar environment, especially handheld.
The obvious thing to do is to bring a pocketable optical slave. Further to avoid the direct flash totally, you can tape some layers of Congo Blue or IR gel over the flash to only have the necessary IR for the slaves photo cell.
Going back on topic, the S3 is supposed to have a great flash system. Trouble is, it dumps the entire load for every flash, slowing you down, blinding more than necessary and using the battery pack faster than it needs to. AFAIR you are also locked to a specific speed to use it, making slow sync harder.
The Hi-Matic 7s with a period correct V283 in the flash bracket does everything to you need to do at every speed.
Last edited:
The Konica Auto S2 was available with a 1.6 lens. That one is an Interesting option, but it is a big and bulky camera.
Thing is, it doesn't really matter if it's that size or the S3 size. They are both too large to put in a pocket or small bag (they come with their own "bag" usually).
Unless you have an unusually small frail frame, carrying either is going to be much the same.
The finder, which is really the main reason to shoot range finders IMO, is much nicer on the S2 and similar vintage rangefinders.
The smaller rangefinders of the 70s was kind of rangefinder manufacturers excusing themselves and needlessly trying to justify their existence, thereby compromising the very thing that gave name to the type.
Last edited:
I was thinking of posting a similar thread. I've gone through a couple of compact rangefinders so far - one (Olympus 35RC) that was disappointing and one (plain C35) that was broken. That S3 looks mighty tempting! Flickr has a surprisingly low number of hi-res scans from them, though, so while the lens does seem at least "good" I haven't really gotten any evidence of it being special. I'm thinking of getting a TC-X and Hexanon 40/1.8 instead, as it doesn't seem that much bigger!
Actually, so far in my venture into film, the best lens I've used on a fixed-lens camera, by some distance, has been on my Minox 35 EL. I'm repeatedly surprised by how sharp it is, everywhere but the extreme corners. If only I could get past the zone-focus thing!
Actually, so far in my venture into film, the best lens I've used on a fixed-lens camera, by some distance, has been on my Minox 35 EL. I'm repeatedly surprised by how sharp it is, everywhere but the extreme corners. If only I could get past the zone-focus thing!
Last edited:
RG zone focus. Get a laser RF. Not the cheapest one because that is going to have difficulty working outside in daylight.
It will
A. Allow you to do exact measurements in the close range, where exactitude matters.
B. If you play around with it, it will teach you to become far better at judging distances at a glance.
I can judge distances within 5 m with slack of about 10 to 20 cm. Plenty good for most photography and far quicker than any other manually focus method.
It will
A. Allow you to do exact measurements in the close range, where exactitude matters.
B. If you play around with it, it will teach you to become far better at judging distances at a glance.
I can judge distances within 5 m with slack of about 10 to 20 cm. Plenty good for most photography and far quicker than any other manually focus method.
That's pretty impressive! A laser rangefinder probably falls outside of my worthwhile expenses at the moment, but in the future it's probably not a bad idea. I've had some luck using this, which was suggested to me by someone on another forum: https://tomchuk.com/rf/
Not necessarily great for shorter distances, but works surprisingly well!
Yeah, I know about it and have tried it.
Precision depends on the distance to your eyes and how still you can stay when switching.
To get really precise at close distances you should wear it in a precisely a measured string around your neck, to get it closer to your eyes.
But then you run into focusing trouble.
It is the exact principle as rangefinders. So in theory the precision should be the same. But in real life changing focus back and forth and having to keep you arm still when judging back and forth between the eyes, introduces so much drift that you almost might at well make an educated guess.
Precision matters only within the five meter range at apertures at or above 2.8 on 135.
After that, the DoF is so thick even a bad guess is good enough.
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |