Minimal 35s

Bill Burk · Mar 30, 2018

I've been carrying a Spotmatic F and I have a few choice words about that...

But I don't fully trust the meter. When power is off the needle is null, so I don't know when I bring to my eye whether it's null because I got lucky and exposure is right, or if the power is off.

So I have to fiddle until I see satisfactorily that the needle is moving (and my "Depth of Field" lever is up for my non SMCT lens - and the lens is in Automatic too (because if that slides to Manual, the finder is dimmer than it has to be).

So after a few checks, I can use the meter. Most of the time I have a Weston Master II or III in my pocket anyway, but a few times I have left the meter home.

macfred · Mar 30, 2018

My 'minimal' 35mm is a Konica III rangefinder from 1956 with Hexanon 1:2 f=48mm - Konirapid-MFX shutter.
Sturdy mechanics - bright finder - remarkable lens - nice price.
There is a version with exposure meter and half-frame capability (Konica IIIM - 1959) too.

--
My 120 minimal is a FUJI GW670iii rangefinder.

Theo Sulphate · Mar 30, 2018

Leica III
Zeiss Nettar 515/16 for medium format

gorbas · Mar 30, 2018

Horizon 202 and Minolta Autometer 4F

Ces1um · Mar 30, 2018

E. von Hoegh said:
Still has a meter.

I think there's room here for a deep metaphysical discussion. If the meter functions, then it's a meter. If the meter is nothing more than a collection of non-functional metals and glass, is it still a meter? Discuss amongst yourselves...

blockend · Mar 30, 2018

It's strange people thought rangefinder cameras without a meter were normal, but SLRs without a light meter were an oddity.

Ces1um · Mar 30, 2018

E. von Hoegh said:
If it has a meter, it isn't minimal. Q.E.D.. Interchangeable lenses are ok, as indicated in my first post

But didn't you say in your original post you carry around an external meter? Wouldn't a smaller built-in meter be more "minimal" than carrying around an external meter? One thing to carry rather than two? If I can't have a meter at all then I might as well go with something like a kodak instamatic 50 with a 126 to 35mm adapter? That's getting pretty basic.

Colin Corneau · Mar 30, 2018

Spotmatics gotta figure high. Although I could be a smart ass and say "pinhole".

E. von Hoegh · Mar 30, 2018

Ces1um said:
But didn't you say in your original post you carry around an external meter? Wouldn't a smaller built-in meter be more "minimal" than carrying around an external meter? One thing to carry rather than two? If I can't have a meter at all then I might as well go with something like a kodak instamatic 50 with a 126 to 35mm adapter? That's getting pretty basic.

You can have a meter. You can not have a camera with a built in meter. You can have a Contax II, but not a Contax III.

E. von Hoegh · Mar 30, 2018

Ces1um said:
I think there's room here for a deep metaphysical discussion. If the meter functions, then it's a meter. If the meter is nothing more than a collection of non-functional metals and glass, is it still a meter? Discuss amongst yourselves...

No metaphysics needed, a broken built in meter is still a meter.

Paul Howell · Mar 30, 2018

E. von Hoegh said:
You can have a meter. You can not have a camera with a built in meter. You can have a Contax II, but not a Contax III.

So you can have a Canon F1 with standard non metered head but not a Ftb? With or without a metered head a F1 or Nikon F1 is more advanced than a metered Ftb or Nikormat. A fixed lens Kowa Se or H with a working meter is more basic than a Contrax II, Leica M4, or Nikon F or F2.

Ces1um · Mar 30, 2018

Colin Corneau said:
Spotmatics gotta figure high. Although I could be a smart ass and say "pinhole".

I thought about that as well, but then you'd need a tripod really.

ciniframe · Mar 30, 2018

On old folders you can't get film for I use photo paper, cut to size, loaded in the darkroom. It's ok for a test, as long as the camera has a 'B' setting, tripod mount and can take a standard cable release is handy also. I have an old Kodak folder that takes 130 film but I really intend to adapt it to 120. Another project I'll get around to.......I really will.

Theo Sulphate · Mar 30, 2018

blockend said:
It's strange people thought rangefinder cameras without a meter were normal, but SLRs without a light meter were an oddity.

The reason, perhaps, is historical. In the Age of Rangefinders, the height of their popularity with amateurs, built in meters were the exception. When amateurs began the Great SLR Migration, the built-in meter as a manufacturer-introduced selling point was almost an expected feature.

Ces1um said:
I thought about that as well, but then you'd need a tripod really.

Although I have a very small "micro" tripod for my pinhole camera, more often than not I simply rest it on a surface or on the ground.

To my post above, I will add Minox III and Pentax 110 for subminiature formats.

btaylor · Mar 30, 2018

Contax IIa, Leica M2. I don't need no (built-in) stinking meters. I sold my FSU rf gear awhile ago. simple/minimal, moderately reliable, bargain but high quality optics!

MattKing · Mar 30, 2018

E. von Hoegh said:
Who else has a favorite basic and competent 35, either rf or slr?

E. von Hoegh said:
Half frame is good, so is 120, I put this in 35mm without thinking it through.

Not fair if you change the rules!
The Retinette 1b you see in my Avatar.
The Retina S1 that I had in my youth - unless the magicube feature and built in "sunny 16" exposure system disqualifies it
If 120 cameras are allowed, my Baby Bessa would be a good choice, although using the frame counter function is so demanding that I need to carry the instructions with me.

Besk · Mar 30, 2018

I use a Leica IIIf. Also want to try out the Robot with the 30mm/3.5 lens I just purchased here. A Nikon F2/plain prism is too large and heavy.

Bill Burk · Mar 30, 2018

I know I was bending the rule by suggesting a Spotmatic F... But I figured it’s in the spirit of simplicity when you take a camera that features a meter.... but you don’t use it. For the Contax III example. What if you got it cheap because the meter doesn’t work?

mshchem · Mar 30, 2018

Back in the day, pre 9/11, I left the fancy Nikon stuff at home and carried a Spotmatic. I would use the meter in dim light . I loved that camera. Now I have a really nice SP500, Super Takumar 50 1.4. Since I treasure that little gem, I leave it at home and carry a Canon G16 "film less " camera, but only when I fly. My favorite minimalist cameras are 6x9 Fuji rangefinders.
Mike

John Koehrer · Mar 30, 2018

All Canon F1's had a meter, it's in the body.

Going to 1/2 frame SLR's the original PEN-F and FV were meterless. So were a number of Olympus viewfinder cameras.

grahamp · Mar 30, 2018

Voitlander Vito B. No meter, no rangefinder (unless I use one on the accessory shoe). 50mm Color-Skopar. Quiet, too.

Gerry M · Mar 30, 2018

35mm: Zorki 3M, Canon IVSB2, Nikon S2
120: Zenobia/Neo Hespar

bimmey · Mar 30, 2018

Fed 2 and Jupiter 8 is with me most of the time.

darinwc · Mar 31, 2018

I also appreciate the early Pentax cameras. I have a Pentax SV with a f1.8 that I am dying to take out.
But my latest simple camera is the Rollei 35. The meter on mine does not work. Just finished the first roll but have yet to develop it. No rangefinder. Manual controls. No meter (broken). Not sure how accurate it would be anyway.
Simple joy to use.

David Lingham · Mar 31, 2018

Nikon FM with no battery because of a non working meter, completly manual, Weston euromaster. Does that qualify.

Minimal 35s

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency