Need a new camera, I'd like recommendations

elmartinj · Feb 11, 2019

So, sad story first, someone stole my beloved himatic 7s. I do have some slr's but I really love to mess around with not so expensive, fixed rangefinder cameras. To find my replacement, I've found the following cameras (evil bay isn't an option due to high shipping costs for my country):

-fed 2 with industar 26m
-kiev 5 (don't know which lens)
-minolta 7sii
-konica III

They are all differently priced, but I could pay for either one (just one though) and they're all in working conditions. I know there are brutal differences between, say, the industar and the rokkor glass. And still, I feel it makes sense to ask, which one would you choose and why.

P.s. I've had three ql17 giii already but their fungus resilience has been awful. They've all come with it and I've always thought it best to part ways before letting it get on my other gear.

Thanks!

Deleted member 88956 · Feb 11, 2019

Fujica V2, Yashica Lynx 5000, both way ahead of all you mentioned and more often than not cheaper too. Of course in excellent fully working condition.

Pentode · Feb 11, 2019

If you don’t care about interchangeable lenses the Konica is a really fine camera.

If you think interchangeable lenses might be useful to you, a working FED 2 can be a very good camera (IF it’s in good working order) and you shouldn’t be so quick to knock FSU lenses; some of them are outstanding.

Ko.Fe. · Feb 11, 2019

Good luck to find working Fed-2. And Kiev-5 is not working camera.
Get made in Japan copy of Leica LTM, send it with lens to http://www.yyecamera.com
You will have kit which will last for decade or two.

Arbitrarium · Feb 12, 2019

Coming from a Hi-Matic 7s, I'd suggest a Konica Auto S(2) or a Yashica Electro. Similarly sized, similar lenses and equally automatic (well, aperture priority for the Yashica). There's also the Hi-Matic E or the Olympus 35 RD and DC.

bimmey · Feb 12, 2019

I've got 2 Fed 2's and a Zorki 3M and some Jupiter lenses. They came from Oleg at OK Vintage camera. He is an excellent FSU repairman and a pleasant person to deal with. All are still working well. An inexpensive way to get into interchangeable lens rangefinders with very good optics.

macfred · Feb 12, 2019

Pentode said:
If you don’t care about interchangeable lenses the Konica is a really fine camera...

Agreed!
--
I have a Konica III (1956) - Hexanon 1:2 f=48mm - Konirapid-MFX shutter. It's a beautiful, reliable camera with a great lens.
Also worth a look (because of the improved finder): Konica IIIa (1958) - Hexanon 1:2 f=48mm - Seikosha MXL shutter.
It has three finder windows - finder has 1.0x magnification - fairly large and bright.

GRHazelton · Feb 12, 2019

The Konica IIIa has an excellent viewfinder, one to one. It is parallax corrected, and corrects for the contraction of coverage as the lens is focused, something the vaunted M series Leicas don't do. Plus its solid and heavy enough to be an excellent weapon. No meter if that's a concern for you. See this: http://www.dujingtou.com/article_1122.shtml There are many other laudatory articles on the IIIa. My IIIa is virtually mint, probably because of the ever ready case, which is pretty grotty.
Read the articles. You know you want the Konica IIIa.

Deleted member 88956 · Feb 12, 2019

Konica III is not cheap by any means. These suggestions can be taken much father up the money chain and continue to show ever so better a camera. Poster implied giving it a try on a cheap. Fujica V2 has a fantastic 1.8 lens, great thumb wheel focusing, great sounding shutter and costs next to nothing. It's somewhat bigger/heavier but pure pleasure to shoot with. Almost same goes for the Yashica Lynx 5000, but I would not say it feels as refined as the Fujica V2. When you can have either one for well under $50, I'd say it's a killer proposition to "giving it a try".

removed account4 · Feb 12, 2019

Look for an Agfa Optima. Its a great camera. It has zone focusing but it has actual distances, super sweet lens, I've been using one for a few years, can't complain !

GRHazelton · Feb 12, 2019

How about a Voigtlander Vitessa L? Check what Camera Quest has to say: https://www.cameraquest.com/voitvitl.htm If you want to attract attention, this lovely machine is just the ticket. Plus it handles nicely, and f2 Ultron is truly excellent. While the viewfinder is not the equal of the Konica IIIa - name a camera which equals that - it is entirely adequate and parallax corrected.

Deleted member 88956 · Feb 13, 2019

jnantz said:
Look for an Agfa Optima. Its a great camera. It has zone focusing but it has actual distances, super sweet lens, I've been using one for a few years, can't complain !

From Agfa stable I'd suggest Super Silette L. Tessar type lens (Solinar), feels like no empty space inside it, great rangefinder and fast focus. Also small take anywhere, but it is made of metal so the heft is there and for a good reason. These can be had for cheap too (have 2, each costing me around $25). Just keep in mind that Agfa had a Super Silette which is a fine camera but IMHO not even close to same county compared to "L". Optima is far far behind by comparison, but still a nice one with no thrills nor features, sort of like cooking but no salt and pepper allowed.

Found this for some info on the SS L

mshchem · Feb 13, 2019

Witold said:
Konica III is not cheap by any means. These suggestions can be taken much father up the money chain and continue to show ever so better a camera. Poster implied giving it a try on a cheap. Fujica V2 has a fantastic 1.8 lens, great thumb wheel focusing, great sounding shutter and costs next to nothing. It's somewhat bigger/heavier but pure pleasure to shoot with. Almost same goes for the Yashica Lynx 5000, but I would not say it feels as refined as the Fujica V2. When you can have either one for well under $50, I'd say it's a killer proposition to "giving it a try".

I agree on the Fujica. Very substantial camera. Looks great. I picked up mine for 5 bucks, sent it in for a CLA worked perfectly . I sold it to a young fellow, who fell in love. I wasn't using it. Beautiful camera.

thornhill · Feb 14, 2019

If metering is important one must remember that many of the cameras from this era are reliant on mercury cells, or a reasonable facsimile, for best performance.
That includes my own particular favourite, the Olympus 35 SP.

markjwyatt · Feb 14, 2019

Rather than the Kiev 5, the Kiev 4a may be a better option. You can find Kiev 4a cameras built as late as 1980; though be sure to check them out as quality control is rumored to have fallen off starting in the 1970s (maybe mid to late 70s). I do have a 1978 Kiev 4a which is currently in need of a CLA, but is working. The Kiev 5 was not considered a very good camera and is rumored to have very significant manufacturing issues (others may disagree). I would not go with a Kiev 4, because even if a meter works, I would not depend on it continuing working, but that is an option if you really want metering.

Deleted member 88956 · Feb 14, 2019

markjwyatt said:
Rather than the Kiev 5, the Kiev 4a may be a better option. You can find Kiev 4a cameras built as late as 1980; though be sure to check them out as quality control is rumored to have fallen off starting in the 1970s (maybe mid to late 70s). I do have a 1978 Kiev 4a which is currently in need of a CLA, but is working. The Kiev 5 was not considered a very good camera and is rumored to have very significant manufacturing issues (others may disagree). I would not go with a Kiev 4, because even if a meter works, I would not depend on it continuing working, but that is an option if you really want metering.

Everything after Kiev 4/4a was a dumpster type manufacturing. Reportedly parts were so scarce they could not reliably put a working camera together (probably somewhat hyperbolic statement). The 4 vs. 4a has sole difference in the meter or not, but that affects the looks and as both are direct brothers-never-to-be with Contax RFs or old, they both present desired looks. Non working meter still leaves that authoritative look on the camera. Bottom line is that you want to get either one (or better both) that has all chrome features, not a single black knob or part thereof. Leatherette being sole black in the whole of camera. Then you have a chance of either getting one that works, or making it work. Everything after that is a much bigger gamble.

macfred · Feb 14, 2019

Another fixed lens solution could be the tiny Olympus XA rangefinder camera.I got mine in great conditiion for about 60,- EURO

Settig the aperture with a lever on the front of the camera one can see the shutter speed in the viewfinder.
The viewfinder is bright (0.6X magnification); rangefinder patch is sowewhat small but clearly visible.
The Zuiko 35mm f/2.8 (six-element, five groups) takes sharp photographs.http://www.diaxa.com/xa.htm
The camera has a +1.5-stop backlight compensation control (or you have to use the ISO setting).
If someone does not have hands in toilet seat size he can operate the camera well.
http://www.diaxa.com/xa.htm
http://www.diaxa.com/xa.htm

markjwyatt · Feb 14, 2019

Witold said:
Everything after Kiev 4/4a was a dumpster type manufacturing. Reportedly parts were so scarce they could not reliably put a working camera together (probably somewhat hyperbolic statement). The 4 vs. 4a has sole difference in the meter or not, but that affects the looks and as both are direct brothers-never-to-be with Contax RFs or old, they both present desired looks. Non working meter still leaves that authoritative look on the camera. Bottom line is that you want to get either one (or better both) that has all chrome features, not a single black knob or part thereof. Leatherette being sole black in the whole of camera. Then you have a chance of either getting one that works, or making it work. Everything after that is a much bigger gamble.

Mine is a black Kiev 4a (likely painted), but I did get lucky in that it is basically mechanically sound (as I said it does need a CLA). Yes, the looks sold me on it. It was my introduction to Contaxes (followed within a few months by a Contax IIa).

Kiev 4A Type2 (Black) by Mark Wyatt, on Flickr

elmartinj · Feb 14, 2019

Thanks to all of you guys for your responses!

I hapenned to fall for the konica's build quality and condition. Got it for 80 usd, which I think is sort of a fair price (recently serviced).

I'll see if I can post any results in the next few days

GRHazelton · Feb 14, 2019

thornhill said:
If metering is important one must remember that many of the cameras from this era are reliant on mercury cells, or a reasonable facsimile, for best performance.
That includes my own particular favourite, the Olympus 35 SP.

I gather that a bridge meter circuit is tolerant of the higher voltage of a silver oxide cell, 1.5v compared to the 1.35v of the mercury cell. I think that a camera using a fixed "target" in the VF, such as the circle in my Spotmatic F almost certainly uses a bridge circuit.. As I understand it when the meter needle coincides with the circle the voltage on both halves of the circuit is equal, whether or not the potential is 1.5 v or 1.35 v. This would include my battered but beloved Praktica LTL. I've got silver oxide cells in the Spotmatic, and its readings agree closely with with those from my Pentax LX.

GRHazelton · Feb 14, 2019

elmartinj said:
Thanks to all of you guys for your responses!

I hapenned to fall for the konica's build quality and condition. Got it for 80 usd, which I think is sort of a fair price (recently serviced).

I'll see if I can post any results in the next few days

Excellent choice! And a very good deal, BTW. You will enjoy it, and you will be the center of attention among those who know.

thornhill · Feb 14, 2019

GRHazelton said:
I gather that a bridge meter circuit is tolerant of the higher voltage of a silver oxide cell, 1.5v compared to the 1.35v of the mercury cell. I think that a camera using a fixed "target" in the VF, such as the circle in my Spotmatic F almost certainly uses a bridge circuit.. As I understand it when the meter needle coincides with the circle the voltage on both halves of the circuit is equal, whether or not the potential is 1.5 v or 1.35 v. This would include my battered but beloved Praktica LTL. I've got silver oxide cells in the Spotmatic, and its readings agree closely with with those from my Pentax LX.

What I heard was that all the Spotmatics worked well with alkaline or other cells. As the voltage dropped it just took longer to get a reading but the reading was accurate. However I've never owned one so it's only hearsay on my part. I'm curious if the 1/21 Spot Meters had bridge circuitry in them. (and I'm still hoarding my last couple of 625 mercury for my Olympus!)

Deleted member 88956 · Feb 15, 2019

GRHazelton said:
I gather that a bridge meter circuit is tolerant of the higher voltage of a silver oxide cell, 1.5v compared to the 1.35v of the mercury cell. I think that a camera using a fixed "target" in the VF, such as the circle in my Spotmatic F almost certainly uses a bridge circuit.. As I understand it when the meter needle coincides with the circle the voltage on both halves of the circuit is equal, whether or not the potential is 1.5 v or 1.35 v. This would include my battered but beloved Praktica LTL. I've got silver oxide cells in the Spotmatic, and its readings agree closely with with those from my Pentax LX.

Prakticas will work fine with silver oxide as they employ bridge circuit (I suppose alkaline would be Ok too), Yashicas and Minoltas of old that had mercury cells assigned will not, but could "compensate" either mentally or by ISO setting/exposure compensation features. Silver oxide needed though, alkalines are not good for this as their voltages drops all the time and you never know what it is for reference.

Need a new camera, I'd like recommendations

Deleted member 88956

Attachments

Deleted member 88956

Deleted member 88956

Deleted member 88956

Deleted member 88956

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency