need LTM advice

[Davesw]

I am looking for a range finder of the LTM variety however a Leica or Bessa is probably out of my price range. FED ,Zorki definitely in my range , but I have owned Russian\Ukrainian cameras before and they have been a bit sketchy.not bad but I am looking for a works every time without a lot of nursing. How do people in this group feel about Canon rangfinders? I have been looking at 7s and Ps you still need about $300.00 to play but I could swing that body only. Also looking lenses, recommendations for 35MM/50MM and maybe 105MM.

 

[elekm]

I would look for a used Cosina Voigtlander Bessa-R (LTM) or Bessa-R2 (M mount). It should be in your price range, and your chances should be better of getting a camera that doesn't require extensive work.

Plus, both cameras have meters and much better viewfinders.

 

[mablo]

Bessa-R is a very good camera although it lacks that classic rangefinder feeling being all plastic. I would definitely consider all metal Canon rangefinders. I have a Canon P and an older Barnack-type Canon IV-Sb. I'd say that the P is more or less equivalent of Leica M2, both being fully manual and having 35-50-100 viewframes. The IV-Sb is a bit enhanced copy of Leica IIIc. I use it primarily with my 21mm lens with an external viewfinder.

For 35mm LTM lens my recommendation is to get the Voigtlander 35mm/2.5 Color Skopar. It's a small gem and costs less than $200 used. Be warned that the 35mm/2.8 Jupiter-12 is not compatible with many rangefinder cameras because of the protruding bottom lens (Bessas and some Canon models, maybe others too).

For 50mm LTM lens I'd get the Voigtlander 50mm/1.5 used ($200-300), much older Canon/Serenar 50mm/1.8 ($150) or the very good Jupiter-8 50mm/2 "new old stock" from -92 (less than $100). The Industar 61 L/D 50mm/2.8 is also a good option for around $50.

For 100mm LTM range there's no better deal IMHO than Canon's small and light 100mm/3.5 ($70-150).

My 2-cents worth,

 

[Fotoguy20d]

For 100mm LTM range there's no better deal IMHO than Canon's small and light 100mm/3.5 ($70-150).

Canon's lenses are quite nice - I have the 135mm f3.5. Just make sure the lens will mount properly on the body. Mine mounts fine on my IIIc but will not mount on my Zorki I. I've read that if you force it onto the Zorki it'll never come off again - something to do with the shape of the cam.

Dan

 

[Gerry M]

If you can do w/o a metered body, I think a Canon P (in good condition) would be the best way to go. I bought a new R2A and, as far as I'm concerned, the P is a much better built body than the CV's. A "P"/J8 is a good combo, and should fit into your price range. I use a P with a Canon 35/2.8 & a Canon 50/1.8. I also use these lenses on an M4. For me, the P is easier to use than my M4. As said in an above post, the 50/1.8 can usually be had for ~$150 and the 35/2.8 ~$200. When your budget allows, these would give you a very nice RF kit. If you aren't already, you might consider watching the classified's on RFF. A couple of P's have sold there recently. Best of luck on your search.
Gerry

 

[vedmak]

you could get a leica iiic for under a $200 , just shop around. You can have Canon, Zorki or the other imitations, but why bother? In my world it is better to get a quality equipment then save a $20, lenses are a bit different, if you are willing to pay for CLA some of the Russian lenses are much better and scratched up Elmars and Summitars, for example Industar 61LD is pretty sharp, and dirt cheap, even Jupiter 3 (silver version in good condition) has some appeal, although it is a soft lens. Canon lenses in LTM are great too. Nikon lenses in LTM are rare and expensive.

 

[Karl K]

Which LTM body?

Any older Leica, Canon, Zorki, Fed, etc. will probably require a CLA for smooth consistent operation, and that CLA will cost dearly. If the older camera has already been CLA'd, then the price will reflect that. There is no free lunch.

My advice is to buy a lightly used Bessa (an R or R2 is probably in your price range) and you will have a reliable, but not a classic, body. Yes, they are plastic, but they work well in the hands of the average user.

The lens is much more important than the body. Spend your money on good glass and replace the body when it dies.

 

[Joe Grodis]

I wouldn't dismiss the Russian cameras just yet. I own somewhere around 30 rangefinders and Zorkis aren't as bad as hearsay would have it. Getting a Zorki 4 for example with a Jupiter-8 50/f1.8 lens in nearly unused condition for less than $200 is commonplace at Fedka. From my RF hunting experience it seems there are still many many Zorki's & FED's stashed away in near mint condition and dirt cheap. PLUS, they will accept Leica lenses!! SO, really... for the price, why not?

 

[luvcameras]

Check my pages for Canon RF and Leica RF camera price and information. Watch ebay and you can easily get a good one for under $ 200....I'd recommend a Canon 7.

www.antiquecameras.net

Dan

 

[sangetsu]

The only complaint I have about FSR cameras are that many have rotted out shutter curtains, so examine whatever camera you plan to buy carefully. Other than that, they work well and are capable of taking great pictures. I have a Zorki 1 with an Industar 50/3.5 lens which cost me all of $40. I also have a Leica III with a Summitar 50/2 which cost quite a bit more. In the end, I can't see any difference in the quality in the images between these two cameras, except that the $17 Industar lens is a little sharper and less flare prone than the Summitar.

 

[Davesw]

thanks for all the input. The lens information was most helpful. I may rethink my position on Russian gear based on Joe's post. My experiences with a few Kiev 88's probably should not condemn zorkies and feds just based on country of origins

 

[elekm]

The Fed and Zorki should be mechanically less complex than the Kiev 88, which should also mean fewer things to go wrong. I've read a lot of unflattering comments about the Kiev 88's reliability.

I had a Fed 2, which I recently sold, and it was a reasonably well made camera. I have another Fed 2 that seems to be in decent shape, although it needs a considerable amount of work.

 

[2F/2F]

What is your budget? I got each of my Leicas (IIIa w/ Summar and IIIc with Summitar) for just over $200 each. They did not need CLAs. They worked fine, and were in excellent condition. They are not collectible or expensive cameras at all.

 

[Chaplain Jeff]

Consider the Minolta LTM's. I have a Minolta 35 Model II and love it. The Rokkor glass is incredible, but it of course takes all the German and Russian usual suspects as well.

They can usually be purchased for around $100 and then another $100 - $199 CLA / Repair will have them purring like new. THey have cloth shutters and nearly always need new ones and the timing adjusted. But it's definately worth it.

Just google Minolta Model 35 and there are a couple of really great sites that show them off and explain the differences, advantages, disadvantages, etc.

Good luck and let us know what you decide.

 

[Xmas]

Canon P or leica M2 were contemporaries, they have similar build standard, the P does not have the M mount but loads film faster. The shutter tends to be more reliable but is noisey by comparison.

The Canon P and the Canon lenses used to be cheap but are inflating, the avilability of the CV LTM lenses seems to have salted the seam, with gold.

A P or M2 may need maintenance, lenses internally cleaned etc.

Noel