Rangefinder Reccomendations

[Toby Roberts]

Hey!

I've been using a Praktica SLR for quite a while now and have thoroughly enjoyed it and have got some great results.

However, it's a bit of a beast and can be a pain to carry around & use quickly, so I've been thinking that moving on to a rangefinder might be a good idea to give me a bit more flexibility and make life a little easier.
If possible, I'd like to get something that is:
Small & light (relatively speaking)
Aperture priority would be great but definitely isn't a deal breaker, although a light meter is
Manual wind
Decent build quality
Not going to break the bank (ideally well under £100)

I appreciate for my budget there isn't going to be anything spectacular but if anyone has any recommendations of cameras that they have enjoyed using that take a half decent photo I'd like to hear it!

Cheers!

 

[E. von Hoegh]

Canon/Minolta/Olympus/Mamiya fixed lens camera, most are shutter priority though - not that it matters, just change the shutter speed if you don't like the aperture selected by the camera.
I use a Canonet QL19, shutter priority, excellent lens and viewfinder, very good build quality.
Edit - Forgot about the aperture priority Yashica 35 series, well worth looking into and (I think) in your price range.

 

[macfred]

What about a nice Olympus XA ? http://www.diaxa.com/xa.htm
Magnum photographer Ernst Hartmann traveled France by train in 1979 - he used exclusively the Olympus XA and brought nice results https://pro.magnumphotos.com/C.aspx?VP3=SearchResult&ALID=2K7O3R1VUF5N
The original XA costs less than £100 - you'll have some money for film to start.

 

[markjwyatt]

What about a nice Olympus XA ? http://www.diaxa.com/xa.htm
Magnum photographer Ernst Hartmann traveled France by train in 1979 - he used exclusively the Olympus XA and brought nice results https://pro.magnumphotos.com/C.aspx?VP3=SearchResult&ALID=2K7O3R1VUF5N
The original XA costs less than £100 - you'll have some money for film to start.

That is a stealth mode street camera.

 

[John51]

Before you give up on SLRs, try an SLR that isn't a Praktica or a Zenit.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

It is hard to find working XA, to tiny and old electronics.
I would just look for made in Japan anything with rangefinder and tested with film.
Nikon FG20 with 50E might be possible to find within this budget.
With 50E mm it is small and light. And because it is this small it is very close to RF. With 50mm it is 1:1 in VF and allows to focus with both eyes open.
Where are some horror stories about this camera, but I've got one tested in 2017 and sold it in 2018 still working.

 

[Frank53]

Olympus Trip?
Regards,
Frank

 

[jimjm]

Honest recommendation - Olympus OM-2 with a 50/1.8 lens. Smallest "quality" SLR I've ever used, but might be a bit above your budget. Best VF I've ever used in a 35mm SLR, very small and light and AE if you need it.

 

[R.Gould]

one of the Retina's seem to be plenty around and reasonably priced, no automation but many have lightmeter's still working, werramatic or other werra, the Matic has built in meter viewed though the viewfinder, and extra lenses, Voigtlander Vitessa T, or earlier Barndoors vitessa, the T has a very usable meter, also if you can find them the T has the smallest 235mm lens I have ever seen plus a 35 and 100 lens

 

[blockend]

The advantage of rangefinder cameras is the permanently in focus viewfinder, which makes composition easier. The disadvantage is a limited range of focal lengths through which to view the scene. The ideal finder is your preferred focal length, with a little extra outside the frame lines from which to compose the picture. Which is what nearly all simple viewfinder cameras had by the 1970s.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

3 ot of 10 replies reccomend slrs. Why? The op asked about rangefinders.

 

[darinwc]

3 ot of 10 replies reccomend slrs. Why? The op asked about rangefinders.

Because the reason the op gave was that he was free up with practika slrs.
So the thought is to recommend a better slr as an alternative.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

Well, Tony, as usual, you have received a jumble of opinions or suggestions on cameras that you did not ask for. Maybe I can provide a summary:
1. Rangefinder camera with interchangeable lenses.
a. The Leicas (both M and thread) are among the best but beyond the budget you listed.
b. One of the Canon thread-mount rangefinders might work, but they are getting up in years, so consider the cost of cleaning and repair.
c. Nikon S rangefinders: nice, expensive, and getting up in years. They are a bit bulky.
d. German rangefinders like the Retina. Nice, good lenses, not sure if a decent working one will be above your price range.
e. Zeiss Contax rangefinder cameras from the 1950s. Gorgeous! But beware of high maintenance cost - there is no "bargain" overhaul of a Contax except by incompetents. The Nikon (above) is similar shape and operation, but has a less complex shutter (=easier repair).
e. For most of the above, you need a hand-held light meter.

2. Fixed-lens rangefinder cameras.
a. Mid-level Japanese cameras from the 1970s and 1980s with CDS meter. There are many models from Canon, Minolta, Olympus, Yashica, Konica, and others. Most had amazingly good lenses in the 40-45mm focal length range. Typically the ones with aperture of f/1.8 or f/1.9 were the "premium" models, while the f/2.8 lenses were the more economy versions. Beware: most sellers (at least on ePrey) have absolutely no idea if the light meters work. Most of these 1970s cameras used the mercury batteries, so you will need to use a Wein Cell of one of the hearing aide batteries (uncover only one of the air holes).
b. German rangefinders with fixed lens. Many models were made by Zeiss and others. As usual, you probably need to consider a cleaning expense.
c. Electronic compact cameras like the Olympus XA. Beware of aging electronics.
d. Premium compacts like the Nikon 35TI and 28TI. Expensive and I am not sure about reliability, not that they are 20+ years old.
e. Japanese rangefinders from the 1960s and 1970s with selenium meter. Excellent mechanical construction, excellent lenses, but the selenium meters may have failed. As usual, the ePrey sellers are clueless.

3. Information.
a. Ken Rockwell: fun to read, opinionated, but useful.
b. Cameraquest: maybe the best summary in one place of compact rangefinders.

Have fun!!

 

[Ko.Fe.]

3 ot of 10 replies reccomend slrs. Why? The op asked about rangefinders.

Because it is how many people are able to read and understand in average.
Three of ten realized what OP thinks what RF cameras are something small and quick. While where are small and quick to operate SLRs and lenses.

 

[Chan Tran]

Hey!

I've been using a Praktica SLR for quite a while now and have thoroughly enjoyed it and have got some great results.

However, it's a bit of a beast and can be a pain to carry around & use quickly, so I've been thinking that moving on to a rangefinder might be a good idea to give me a bit more flexibility and make life a little easier.
If possible, I'd like to get something that is:
Small & light (relatively speaking)
Aperture priority would be great but definitely isn't a deal breaker, although a light meter is
Manual wind
Decent build quality
Not going to break the bank (ideally well under £100)

I appreciate for my budget there isn't going to be anything spectacular but if anyone has any recommendations of cameras that they have enjoyed using that take a half decent photo I'd like to hear it!

Cheers!

You may not like it but the Olympus XA meets your specs.
1. It's certainly small and light.
2. It has aperture priority and only aperture priority and no manual and thus it has a meter.
3. It's manual wind although the thumb wheel isn't all that great
4. I do think it has good build quality.
5. I am sure you can find a good working one for less than 100 pounds. I bought my brand new one in 79 for $170 with the flash so it was about 100 pounds then.

 

[Toby Roberts]

Thanks for the replies!
I appreciate the points being made that I could probably get a different SLR that would be smaller and lighter - however I think it is specifically a rangefinder I would like, film photography is very much a hobby for me and something that I enjoy and I think I'd like to try using something a little different to what I've been using so far. But thankyou anyway!

The olympus XA is definitely something I've been looking at so if I find one for the right price I might go for that. Any more recommendations still appreciated.

 

[Toby Roberts]

Well, Tony, as usual, you have received a jumble of opinions or suggestions on cameras that you did not ask for. Maybe I can provide a summary:
1. Rangefinder camera with interchangeable lenses.
a. The Leicas (both M and thread) are among the best but beyond the budget you listed.
b. One of the Canon thread-mount rangefinders might work, but they are getting up in years, so consider the cost of cleaning and repair.
c. Nikon rangefinders: nice, expensive, and getting up in years. They are a bit bulky.
d. German rangefinders like the Retina. Nice, good lenses, not sure if a decent working one will be above your price range.
e. For most of the above, you need a hand-held light meter.

2. Fixed-lens rangefinder cameras.
a. Mid-level Japanese cameras from the 1970s and 1980s with CDS meter. There are many models from Canon, Minolta, Olympus, Yashica, Konica, and others. Most had amazingly good lenses in the 40-45mm focal length range. Typically the ones with aperture of f/1.8 or f/1.9 were the "premium" models, while the f/2.8 lenses were the more economy versions. Beware: most sellers (at least on ePrey) have absolutely no idea if the light meters work. Most of these 1970s cameras used the mercury batteries, so you will need to use a Wein Cell of one of the hearing aide batteries (uncover only one of the air holes).
b. German rangefinders with fixed lens. Many models were made by Zeiss and others. As usual, you probably need to consider a cleaning expense.
c. Electronic compact cameras like the Olympus XA. Beware of aging electronics.
d. Premium compacts like the Nikon 35TI and 28TI. Expensive and I am not sure about reliability, not that they are 20+ years old.
e. Japanese rangefinders from the 1960s and 1970s with selenium meter. Excellent mechanical construction, excellent lenses, but the selenium meters may have failed. As usual, the ePrey sellers are clueless.

3. Information.
a. Ken Rockwell: fun to read, opinionated, but useful.
b. Cameraquest: maybe the best summary in one place of compact rangefinders.

Have fun!!

Thankyou for the very in depth answer! Think I'm more likely to go for a fixed-lens because as you say they tend to be the ones with light meters. The olympus XA is tempting although I'm not sure how I feel about the look (very shallow of me I know!). Would you be able to clarify at all what you mean about the batteries with 1970s cameras?

 

[Kodachromeguy]

Thankyou for the very in depth answer! Think I'm more likely to go for a fixed-lens because as you say they tend to be the ones with light meters. The olympus XA is tempting although I'm not sure how I feel about the look (very shallow of me I know!). Would you be able to clarify at all what you mean about the batteries with 1970s cameras?

This is a common topic. Most 1960s and 1970s cameras used a light meter circuit with a CDS cell that depended on a highly stable voltage output. In effect, the battery voltage was the calibration standard. That was provided by the 1.35 volts from a mercury battery. Mercury batteries are no longer available, so you need a substitute with the same stable output. Alkaline and silver batteries may fit, but the voltage drops off with time. Wein makes a mercury-free replacement for mercury cells. CRIS make a holder or adapter that accepts a modern battery. Many people use hearing aide batteries, that also run 1.35 volts. They wear out quickly once you expose them to air, but if you only uncover one of the air holes, that last many weeks or months. Your choices:

1. Buy a camera that originally used mercury cells but use the appropriate adapter or hearing aide battery.
2. A few cameras from the era had more sophisticated circuits that could use different batteries. One example is the Yashica Electro 35CC. It takes a modern lithium cell. You will have to check specifications.
3. Find an older camera that used a selenium cell meter. The Olympus Trip 35 is a famous example. Problem: over the decades, many of the selenium cells have corroded and no longer function. Most older selenium cell rangefinders have mechanical shutters, so the camera will still function, but you will need an external meter.

Cheers,

 

[Chuckwade87]

I've had decent luck with Soviet Rangefinders, I have a Zorki 1 and a Kiev 4AM. Like them both.

 

[JimCee]

Well, Tony, as usual, you have received a jumble of opinions or suggestions on cameras that you did not ask for. Maybe I can provide a summary:


2. Fixed-lens rangefinder cameras.
a. Mid-level Japanese cameras from the 1970s and 1980s with CDS meter. There are many models from Canon, Minolta, Olympus, Yashica, Konica, and others. Most had amazingly good lenses in the 40-45mm focal length range. Typically the ones with aperture of f/1.8 or f/1.9 were the "premium" models, while the f/2.8 lenses were the more economy versions. Beware: most sellers (at least on ePrey) have absolutely no idea if the light meters work. Most of these 1970s cameras used the mercury batteries, so you will need to use a Wein Cell of one of the hearing aide batteries (uncover only one of the air holes).



3. Information.
a. Ken Rockwell: fun to read, opinionated, but useful.
b. Cameraquest: maybe the best summary in one place of compact rangefinders.

Have fun!!

I recently acquired a very nice condition Minolta AL-F rangefinder camera at an extremely low price of $20.00 from a local book and entertainment store (Bookmans). I've only started using the camera with my first roll of film which I haven't finished or developed. From my initial impressions the camera functions well, with the meter giving readings that are in a range that appears accurate and all shutter speeds seem fine. Of course, the test will be after I have my first roll of film developed.

One thing I've found from multiple searches, is that these compact fixed-focus Minolta rangefinder cameras of the 1960's-1970's seem to have almost no detailed information available through the web. Your recommendation of the Cameraquest site is an example, there's not one entry for these Minolta rangefinder cameras. The Minolta/Leica CL of course is represented, but the multiple models of the earlier Minolta rangefinder cameras (AL, AL-F, Al-S, etc.) are no where to be found. Similarly, there's precious little information about these cameras to be found on this user forum.

My impressions of my little AL-F is that it was a well made camera, that certainly wasn't cheap at the time of its manufacture. With a simple inflation calculator, using an estimated price of $75.00 in 1967 (the year the AL-F was introduced) the equivalent purchasing power today is $589.00!

Interestingly, there is a Flickr group for the Minolta AL-F cameras that are being used around the world - https://www.flickr.com/groups/minolta_al-f/pool/ . Judging by the photographs from the group, this little camera gets around and produces some quite nice images!

Jim Cloud
Tucson, AZ

 

[guangong]

If you want a pocketable camera and don’t want to go with all automation or no rangefinder at all, the Olympus xa is a great choice, but be aware that rangefinder is a bit squinty. I have taken some very interesting pictures under adverse situations with an XA. I am shooting with a Retina folder at present. Also great cameras but care must be taken with winding-cocking lever...the weak point of Retina folders. Another excellent folder is Zeiss Ikon Contessa...built to last but meter usually kaput. A decent Contax IIa, also no meter, is hard to find at a good price. The Russian copies of Contax II are not bad cameras and cheap. The II is bigger than the IIa.
Then there are all those Japanese fixed lens cameras. I would consider one if able to inspect at a swap meet, store or reputable dealer but not the auction site. Not all of them used the 625 battery...and finding proper batteries can be a PITA.
If I were you I would find a way to look at a Leica thread mount Leica or Canon, fondle it, look through finder, and if you like it save up and buy one. Quality is always cheaper in the long run. These cameras are definitely repairable should the need arise. Or you may just decide on that Olympus slr. Not a bad choice.

 

[Chan Tran]

I have the Yashica Lynx 14 with the f/1.4 lens. I like it a lot but to have the meter you need to find the right battery. I use it without the meter as meter isn't important for me. The camera I think is larger than the Olympus OM2 with the 50mm f/1.8 lens.

 

[Arklatexian]

Honest recommendation - Olympus OM-2 with a 50/1.8 lens. Smallest "quality" SLR I've ever used, but might be a bit above your budget. Best VF I've ever used in a 35mm SLR, very small and light and AE if you need it.

+1, though it is not a RF!

 

[Ko.Fe.]

XA is old camera with tiny analog electronics which are prone to quick failure now, once camera gets back in use.
The RF patch is not always visible. Very small RF base. It is more like scale focus camera.
Good luck to find one which still works. Where are two light meters, one for shutter, one for VF. Usually VF light meter quit first and then shutter light meter quits it is good source of 35mm viewfinder to use on Zorki.

Where is AFGA Optima Sensor as RF. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agfa_Optima_1535_Sensor.
Also small. I used to have one, after XA crapped out. Sold it. Too small.

 

[Chan Tran]

If you want a pocketable camera and don’t want to go with all automation or no rangefinder at all, the Olympus xa is a great choice, but be aware that rangefinder is a bit squinty. I have taken some very interesting pictures under adverse situations with an XA. I am shooting with a Retina folder at present. Also great cameras but care must be taken with winding-cocking lever...the weak point of Retina folders. Another excellent folder is Zeiss Ikon Contessa...built to last but meter usually kaput. A decent Contax IIa, also no meter, is hard to find at a good price. The Russian copies of Contax II are not bad cameras and cheap. The II is bigger than the IIa.
Then there are all those Japanese fixed lens cameras. I would consider one if able to inspect at a swap meet, store or reputable dealer but not the auction site. Not all of them used the 625 battery...and finding proper batteries can be a PITA.
If I were you I would find a way to look at a Leica thread mount Leica or Canon, fondle it, look through finder, and if you like it save up and buy one. Quality is always cheaper in the long run. These cameras are definitely repairable should the need arise. Or you may just decide on that Olympus slr. Not a bad choice.

I have a Retina IIC. I love it but I don't recommend to the OP as it has no meter.