For relatively low cost and very high quality, a Leica IIIf with either a collapsible 50mm f/3.5 Elmar (very small when collapsed) or collapsible 50mm f/2 Summicron (not quite a small but still very low profile). I know that's a little longer than you want but these cameras are just marvelous travelers and street shooters. I had YYE rebuild both the body and the Summicron.
At higher cost and somewhat larger size, but considerably easier to use and with a more comfortable viewfinder/focus arrangement - a Leica M2 with a 35mm Summicron-M. This is a classic combination. Even used, it's relatively expensive, but oh dear heavens what a shooter that combo is. I speak as someone who shoots a lot of 120 and 4x5. But that M2/35mm is increasingly becoming my goto.
Just realize that these cameras and lenses are old and may need overhauling. So watch for a decent deal and then pay YYE or DAG to do the overhaul and you'll have a shooter for a every long time.
Source: Own both of the above. When I am in the mood, both do marvelous things on film. I am usually a Nikon 35mm shooter (and remain so), but one day with the M2/35mm combo turned me into a rabid Leica fanboi
Here is an example (scan of silver print):
https://www.tundraware.com/Photography/Gallery/Silver/media/large/20240125-1-12-Treeceding.jpg
This photo was taken with a Canon Canonet QL17. HP5. Cheers!
I used a Canonet QL17 until it stopped working. It's a very capable camera but I only used it in manual mode. I never trusted the meter.
I don't think people actually read, they just say get the camera they have. Internet I guess.
I am not aware of any 35mm viewfinders that are 100%.
As nice a camera as they may be, I've always found the Canonets remarkably bulky; similar to the Konica S2 etc. A small SLR is barely smaller, modern ones may weigh as little or even less, and in my experience are just as easy to hold still. I used to have a QL25 for a while, but I got rid of it because of the issues mentioned; its bulk and lack of any other appeal condemned it to a closet in my ownership anyway.
I believe your QL25 was of that first generation.
... and for good reason.
Budget tier
---------
Fixed lens options - Canonet, Fujica V2, etc
Pros: low price, well matched viewfinder/rangefinder/lens. Opportunity of a working meter. Some will feature high quality lenses
Cons: variable viewfinder magnification. Unclear amounts of operational noise. Are these going to be less quiet than a Leica or a Canon?
Fujica V2 is about half the noise of any Leica, it's basically a whisper level experience. Thumb focus, if you never used one, is ingenious, fast and easy.
Magnification isn't the only thing that makes a finder nice...
That being especially true when considering rangefinder cameras. I'd say there are many other things being much more important than magnification. Like the shape of the frame lines, how accurate they are (at what distance), rangefinder patch contrast, how much peripheral view do you want (ok, that is dependant on magnification)...
From your outsiders list there is only one camera there that is silent and near perfect and that's the Konica Hexar. I owned one for about two years after they first came out. It was black model and I really enjoyed using it except for one little flaw. My example had a slight misaligned rangefinder (+). I could not figure out why I would have a few out-of-focus shots on a roll. One day I tested the rangefinder (+) mark to where it was actually focusing and it was slightly off center. I sent it to Konica USA twice to correct the problem and it came back each time with the same misalignment. I sold it with the intention of buying another, but never did. If mine didn't have this flaw I would still have it. Yes, it's certainly a classic worth having and can be totally silent. OH, and the 35mm f2 lens is as good as any Leica lens I have used. I don't think it was as good as my 45mm f2 Zeiss Planar for the G1, but darn close.Thanks everyone for the suggestions so far.
One theme that's emerging I think, is that the my initial combined requirement of a 35mm or 40mm as a do-it-all AND a huge viewfinder (ideally .8-1X) will restrict my choices a fair bit.
So then I'd say I'll relax the focal lens requirement to include 50mm lenses, too.
What I see emerging so far is
top tier
--------
Leica M2 + Summaron
Earlier Leica with collapsible lens
Pros (as I see them): mechanical and optical quality, can be resold without loss if unsuitable
Cons (as i see them): price, will likely need a thorough CLA. Bling factor: might attract unwanted attention.
Mid tier
---------
Canon P + 50mm f/1.4
Pros (as I seem them): good viewfinder, good IQ
Cons (as I seem them): the samples I'm eyeing on ebay japan look pretty worn. I see some rust in many units, some lens haze. humidity damage in some cases. A few have pretty big dings on the body. I wonder about the durability of these cameras. CLA will be needed probably.
Budget tier
---------
Fixed lens options - Canonet, Fujica V2, Konica IIIa, etc
Pros: low price, well matched viewfinder/rangefinder/lens. Opportunity of a working meter. Some will feature high quality lenses
Cons: variable viewfinder magnification. Unclear amounts of operational noise. Are these going to be less quiet than a Leica or a Canon?
Outsiders
------------
Minolta CLE?
Olympus XA?
Konica Hexar RF
Bessa R?
...
Regarding the requirement for a large projected viewfinder image: I really don't enjoy composing through a keyhole. For those of you owning a DSLR, you will know what I mean: if you have ever owned a crop-sensor low-tier Nikon DSLR (eg Nikon D3xxx, D5xxx) you will know it's like looking through a tunnel. I realised that's not what I wanted when I purchased my OM2-N. It's a pretty big factor for me. Being able to focus well (eg clear, usable rangefinder patch) would also be extremely important.
That being especially true when considering rangefinder cameras. I'd say there are many other things being much more important than magnification. Like the shape of the frame lines, how accurate they are (at what distance), rangefinder patch contrast, how much peripheral view do you want (ok, that is dependant on magnification)...
From your outsiders list there is only one camera there that is silent and near perfect and that's the Konica Hexar. I owned one for about two years after they first came out. It was black model and I really enjoyed using it except for one little flaw. My example had a slight misaligned rangefinder (+). I could not figure out why I would have a few out-of-focus shots on a roll. One day I tested the rangefinder (+) mark to where it was actually focusing and it was slightly off center.
I have a IIIC big, along the 2 lens, for the money, get a IIIS, true interchangeable lens.
Thanks everyone for the suggestions so far.
One theme that's emerging I think, is that the my initial combined requirement of a 35mm or 40mm as a do-it-all AND a huge viewfinder (ideally .8-1X) will restrict my choices a fair bit.
So then I'd say I'll relax the focal lens requirement to include 50mm lenses, too.
What I see emerging so far is
top tier
--------
Leica M2 + Summaron
Earlier Leica with collapsible lens
Pros (as I see them): mechanical and optical quality, can be resold without loss if unsuitable
Cons (as i see them): price, will likely need a thorough CLA. Bling factor: might attract unwanted attention.
"Budget" (whatever that means)
@John Wiegerink, you must be talking about Hexar AF which has nothing in common with Hexar RF on @albireo's list.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?