Some questions about alpa cameras

[SindreS]

Hello all. I want to mimize my camera equiptment. Have one slr and one rangefinder. I have heard many good things about alpas, for instance that they have a "leica" feel to them. However many are also saying that they are heavy and unrealible. I diden't know that the leicas were unreaible? And heavy? Alpa 9d weights almost the same as a canon ae-1 (which is compareable in many ways since it has a 1/1000th shutter speed) and it weights a lot less than a nikon f3 (which has great build quality). The reason why i'm not going for a nikon f3 or a late contax is because of reparability. I want a solid camera that I can use for the rest of my life and it must be able to be repaired.

Have anyone owned the 9d, 10d and 11e/11el? How would you say that the differences are in build quality? Have the later models significantly improved the mechanics? Also how are the noise on these quirky slr's?

 

[Paul Howell]

A friend of mine wife inherited a 11e from her uncle who used it as a scientist, he was a professor and was involved with research in botany. Mike sent the camera to me for a few weeks so that I test it out. Must have in storage for a long time, but worked flawlessly. Other than the odd position of the film advance, from front and pull with a finger, which took time to get use to the camera had a nice feel, I have owned Leica IIIG, similar but not the same.

The 50mm Kern Swiss is the best 50mm I have ever used or shot with. I have Minolta AF, Pentax M42, Konica, and Sigma 50 with a brace of other 42MM and have owned Leica and Nikon in the past, it might have been the best 50mm ever made. She also got a 90mm which I think is Angenieux , and a 28 which is a Schneider. Later after I sent to the camera back they found a zoom, must be a Zoomar. Mike bought a Sony Mirrorless and adaptor, the images form the 50mm hold up. they have in touch with an auction house in New York and are likely to put it up for action next year.

If you want a quality built 35mm SLR and don't mind some of it odd mannerisms and can afford the lens, and willing to go the extra mile for service and maintenance the Alpa is worth considering. I don't know who in the US can repair a late model Alpa, Alpa was made in such small numbers you might have to have parts machined.

 

[Paul Howell]

Additional thought, what about a F2 or F or Leicaflex? For the cost of 11e and lens you can Nikon F 6.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

There are two ways of looking at the weight of a camera. It can be a measure of the quality of the workmanship. Additionally extra weight can also lessen camera shake.

 

[Paul Howell]

The build quality is certainly there, I have a vague recollection of a web site that I can no long find, the person who owned the site was a Swiss MD and he had posted a lot good information about Alpa and Topcon. Alpa started making parts for watches and some of the Alpa movements were jeweled. I did not feel the 11e I used was a heavy camera. With the shutter release on the front of the body I thought it was easy to hand hold to a 1/30th.

 

[flavio81]

And heavy? Alpa 9d weights almost the same as a canon ae-1 (which is comparable in many ways since it has a 1/1000th shutter speed)

I think there is a big difference in weight.

Alpa 9d (body only) = 710g
Canon AE-1 (body only) = 590 g
Also, you have to consider that for the Canon the Lens (50mm Canon FD 1.8) weights only 170g! I bet the kern-macro-switar for the ALPA would weight at least 300g.

Anyways, I don't think both cameras could be comparable in any way. They are very, very different. To make a quick comparison:

ALPA vs CANON
- rare to find VS ubiquitous
- extremely high build quality VS good build quality
- all metal VS plastic top and bottom covers
- fully mechanical VS computerized, battery dependent
- restricted lens system VS huge lens selection
- extremely expensive lenses VS perhaps the best value in manual focus lenses
- people admire your camera VS they don't
- experienced photographers think you are a collector VS experienced photographers think you're a sensible photographer
- slow to operate VS very quick to operate
- all manual VS automatic mode if needed

I understand that if you value extremely high build quality and extremely good optics, the ALPA would be the choice. However if I was going that route I'd be plenty happy with the original Canon F-1 and a Canon FD 50/1.2L or "55/1.2 Aspherical" lens. That would give you extremely high build quality, perhaps not to Alpa standards but close, and amazing optics.

 

[Paul Howell]

[
ALPA vs CANON
- rare to find VS ubiquitous
- extremely high build quality VS good build quality
- all metal VS plastic top and bottom covers
- fully mechanical VS computerized, battery dependent
- restricted lens system VS huge lens selection
- extremely expensive lenses VS perhaps the best value in manual focus lenses
- people admire your camera VS they don't
- experienced photographers think you are insane VS experienced photographers think you're sensible
- slow to operate VS very quick to operate
- all manual VS automatic mode if needed

I understand that if you value extremely high build quality and extremely good optics, the ALPA would be the choice. However if I was going that route I'd be plenty happy with the original Canon F-1 and a Canon FD 50/1.2L or "55/1.2 Aspherical" lens. That would give you extremely high build quality, perhaps not to Alpa standards but close, and amazing optics.[/QUOTE]

I agree with most, and although FD lens are very good, in my book the only reason to use a Alpa is the superior optics. Which is why Leica users buy very expensive adaptors for Alpa lens.

 

[SindreS]

Thank you all for the prompt and throughtout answears. This is why im asking here at APUG.

I'm located in Europe so I guess my usual camera repair center can do them. The parts you might be right about. Who will custom make parts like these? Is it possible to just rent a CNC machine or something and make them yourself and give them to the workshop?

Well I think i'll be able to live with the weight. Regarding the lenses i'm (sadly) not going to get the kern macro switar due to economy. I'm considering the schneider curtagon 35 2.8, angenieux 90 2.5, schneider 50 1.9.

Also what mount does the alpas use? I'm thinking of asking a company to produce an adapter for me, from c/y to alpa. Since contax have a lot of zeiss class that arent too terribly expensive and also far more recent.

I do not need automatization, however faster than 1/1000th would be nice but oh well you cant have it all. Also, I can get my hands on an alpa 9d for the same price of an canon f1n. That have to be a steal or what?

 

[leicarfcam]

Years ago I had a 6c. It does take a bit to get used to the layout but once you master it it can be a fun and reliable camera to use..

My experience was that the Kern Switar's are on a par with Leica and Nikon glass.. The problem though is getting it repaired at a reasonable cost. Most repairmen who still service this camera want your first born just as a down payment..

If you can find a recently serviced one at a reasonable price...go for it..

 

[Dan Fromm]

Alpa mount, of course. Its register is 37.80 mm. I think this is the shortest 35 mm SLR register, could be mistaken. Alpa made adapters to accept lenses from many other SLR systems.

 

[Paul Howell]

Thank you all for the prompt and throughtout answears. This is why im asking here at APUG.

I'm located in Europe so I guess my usual camera repair center can do them. The parts you might be right about. Who will custom make parts like these? Is it possible to just rent a CNC machine or something and make them yourself and give them to the workshop?

Well I think i'll be able to live with the weight. Regarding the lenses i'm (sadly) not going to get the kern macro switar due to economy. I'm considering the schneider curtagon 35 2.8, angenieux 90 2.5, schneider 50 1.9.

Also what mount does the alpas use? I'm thinking of asking a company to produce an adapter for me, from c/y to alpa. Since contax have a lot of zeiss class that arent too terribly expensive and also far more recent.

I do not need automatization, however faster than 1/1000th would be nice but oh well you cant have it all. Also, I can get my hands on an alpa 9d for the same price of an canon f1n. That have to be a steal or what?

I am sure a good machine shop can made parts, keeping the light meter in working order may be more of challenge, a really good camera tech might be able to use a third party light sensor cell, I dont recall if the shutter is metal or cloth. Unless you are trained setting up a CNC machine? A 9d at the same price as a F1n would be a good buy. As already noted there are many adapters or other lens, Nikon, Canon, Pentax M42. Not that the Schneider is not a very good lens in it's own right.

The other camera you might want to consider a Rollie 2000 or 3000. Another rare camera, at least in the US.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

... I want a solid camera that I can use for the rest of my life and it must be able to be repaired.

I've never owned or used an Alpa, but my feeling is that most of them are now on the shelves of collectors and get little, if any, use. I suppose there are exceptions. If you want something to last decades and be reasonably repairable, I wouldn't choose Alpa simply because you'll be relying on a specialist being alive many years from now to repair it and find parts.

Are you looking for both a rangefinder and an SLR?

Regardless, there are many solid reliable SLR's that have much support in terms of repairability and parts supply. For a "lifetime" camera, I would choose among: Nikon F or F2 (plain prism), FM or FM2, Canon FTb, or Pentax Spotmatic.

As for lenses, unless you regularly photograph test charts or brick walls, the lenses from any of those manufacturers are as sharp as you're likely to need unless shot at the widest apertures maybe.

For a rangefinder, it's hard to beat the Leica M3, M4, or M6, and the Leica lenses. Totally solid and reliable.

 

[Jim Jones]

Rather than an Alpa, I'd go with an early Nikon SLR or maybe Canon. Nikon made an extremely wide range of accessories, and Nikon lenses are plentiful, good, and inexpensive. A few Nikons in good condition may cost less than the Alpa or even servicing the Alpa. Don't underestimate the Nikkormat. They used most of the Nikon accessories, and are quite reliable in my experience.

 

[SindreS]

Well. My heart says "go for an Alpa" due to it's great looks and feel (altought I haven't felt it yet). But if reliability is an issue then that puts me off. Nikon F2 with lightmeter (oh, did I mention. I need a built in lightmeter) weights at least 1 kg. Ok thats becoming a bit much. How about the F3? I have always liked it looks (except the look of the motor drive) and they say that it's a tank. Or is it too much electronics? While im waiting for responses I'll try to google around for some repair shops and prices for an alpa.

Adapters to alpa: Yes they say that they made plentiful of them, the issue is I can't really find any! Where do you find them?

E: Yes i'm looking for a rangegfinder aswell. Trouble is that the leicas are so expensive. I have no issue getting a cheap one and fix its lightmeter or CLA it. But I can't even seem to find a cheap one..

 

[Paul Howell]

Well. My heart says "go for an Alpa" due to it's great looks and feel (altought I haven't felt it yet). But if reliability is an issue then that puts me off. Nikon F2 with lightmeter (oh, did I mention. I need a built in lightmeter) weights at least 1 kg. Ok thats becoming a bit much. How about the F3? I have always liked it looks (except the look of the motor drive) and they say that it's a tank. Or is it too much electronics? While im waiting for responses I'll try to google around for some repair shops and prices for an alpa.

Adapters to alpa: Yes they say that they made plentiful of them, the issue is I can't really find any! Where do you find them?

E: Yes i'm looking for a rangegfinder aswell. Trouble is that the leicas are so expensive. I have no issue getting a cheap one and fix its lightmeter or CLA it. But I can't even seem to find a cheap one..

I owned a F3J when working as a PJ, prior to the F3 I had an F and F2, The F3 is more advanced than the F2 but is electronic, while the F2 is all mechanical and repairable as is the F. Other options, Pentax LX, or Olympus OM 4, for the price of a Leica you can 3 F3 or other bodies, put 2 away as replacements. Oh the other option, a Yashica FR and Ziess lens. Many claim the Yashica FR was a better camera than the Contax.

 

[Eugene B.]

I have one - a 6c - it needs an overhaul, the mirror is heavily stained (don't know how, but I did lend it to someone). The shutter is also misfiring so I don't use it.
Buy a Nikon F series for an easier life! Thats what I did.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Welcome to APUG
I have never owned an Alpa but when I sold cameras I handled them. They are well built and yes they have mass so they could feel heavy. On the other hand they were not made of plastic and have a high reliability. I do not know about the availability or service. They have a very good feel when they are handled and used.

 

[ph]

Some of the Alpas had both a rangefinder and a groundglass, in case you wished to use one over the other. Most were SLRs. If one did not like the Kinoptiks, Angenieux, Oude Delft, Spectros, Schneider , Kerns, Kilfitts etc., absolutely all other SLR lenses could be fitted.

The original Pignons company in Ballaigues is long gone, but detailed repair manuals do exist. Watch repairers and camera mechanics in general are becoming rarer, however, just like silver halide films.

In my experience, the Alpas were robust and the Alpa engraved optics stil perform well. Prices is another matter.

p.

 

[fotch]

If your more into being a camera collector vs a photographer, the Alpa. If the camera is a tool for you to get the photo, get a Nikon.

I collect clocks. Most of which I can enjoy working or not. For info on what time it is, its either a quartz watch or my phone. JMHO

 

[jimjm]

If weight is an issue, my F2 Photomics come in at about 840g, not 1 kg. F3 or F3HP weigh around 750g. If you don't need removable prisms, consider the Nikon FM or FM2 which are under 600g and a bit more compact.

If reliability / repairability is important, these are all hard to beat. Bodies are plentiful, as are lenses, spare parts and accessories. Some are concerned about the electronics in the F3, but Nikon made that camera for 20 years and it was probably used by more pros than any other single camera for quite awhile. Easy to find service for all of these, including the metered heads for the F and F2. Sover Wong in the UK and Stephen Gandy in the US are two resources that come to mind.

A Nikon F is also great, but has some quirks and is less ergonomic than the F2, IMHO. The metered heads are also pretty bulky. I've bought beater "parts" F2 bodies for less than $50, only to find they were 100% functional after a cleaning and new light seals. No camera will ever give you 100% reliability, but being able to carry (and afford) a backup body is the next best thing.

As others have noted, the Canon F1 and other older FD-mount bodies are also a great option. Lots of bodies and lenses available and finding service will probably not be a problem.

 

[Paul Howell]

Some of the Alpas had both a rangefinder and a groundglass, in case you wished to use one over the other. Most were SLRs. If one did not like the Kinoptiks, Angenieux, Oude Delft, Spectros, Schneider , Kerns, Kilfitts etc., absolutely all other SLR lenses could be fitted.

The original Pignons company in Ballaigues is long gone, but detailed repair manuals do exist. Watch repairers and camera mechanics in general are becoming rarer, however, just like silver halide films.

In my experience, the Alpas were robust and the Alpa engraved optics stil perform well. Prices is another matter.

p.

The first few Alpas had both a rangefinder and SLR, these date from the 40s and early 50s, no built in meter, I would think the viewfinder will dim? There is so little information on line difficult to determine what the difference are between the models, the only Alpa I used for a few weeks was the 11E, .open aperture metering, diodes rather than match needle.

 

[SindreS]

One final attempt from you to make me not want the alpa. What is so unrealible about it? I know a workshop who can do a CLA cheap however maybe not fix it i guess due to rare spare parts. Don't quite comprehend why alpa (with adapters for afforable lenses) is such a bad choice. I really want to try something that just feel amazing in your hands. When we are talking about unrealibity, how unreaible are they? Major breakdown every year? If there are any other cameras that tick these boxes then i'm considering those.

What if I told you that I wanted this.
- Small body (small body over weight)
- Reliable
- High build quality
- Must have build in lightmeter
- Shutter sound (or lack of)
- Don't need any accesory finders
- Good selection of quality lenses.
- Battery dependancy is not an issue.
- I prefer diodes (LED for instance) however not that big of a deal

All these points are very important for me.


Other cameras that I know of is the Nikon fm2 and pentax lx. How are the pentax lenses? Are there any good slr's with a low shutter sound? Also places that repair the nikon f3? I think the nikon f3 is very good looking. Sure the f2 is also good looking but also a bit bulky looking and the fact that the f3 is a lot newer with higher shutter speeds makes me go towards the f3. However I heard the shutter (or motor, not quite sure) on an f3 and it was nosiy. Very nosiy. Is it the motor thats noisy or the shutter?

I am truly sorry for all these bothersome question. If it wasen't for the darn good looks then I would have gone away from alpa much faster but... However if I get more posts about why going down the alpa road is bad then I will have to listen to you. So final post, I promise!

 

[flavio81]

One final attempt from you to make me not want the alpa. What is so unrealible about it? I know a workshop who can do a CLA cheap however maybe not fix it i guess due to rare spare parts. Don't quite comprehend why alpa (with adapters for afforable lenses) is such a bad choice. I really want to try something that just feel amazing in your hands. When we are talking about unrealibity, how unreaible are they? Major breakdown every year? If there are any other cameras that tick these boxes then i'm considering those.

What if I told you that I wanted this.
- Small body (small body over weight)
- Reliable
- High build quality
- Must have build in lightmeter
- Shutter sound (or lack of)
- Don't need any accesory finders
- Good selection of quality lenses.
- Battery dependancy is not an issue.
- I prefer diodes (LED for instance) however not that big of a deal

All these points are very important for me.


Other cameras that I know of is the Nikon fm2 and pentax lx. How are the pentax lenses? Are there any good slr's with a low shutter sound? Also places that repair the nikon f3? I think the nikon f3 is very good looking. Sure the f2 is also good looking but also a bit bulky looking and the fact that the f3 is a lot newer with higher shutter speeds makes me go towards the f3. However I heard the shutter (or motor, not quite sure) on an f3 and it was nosiy. Very nosiy. Is it the motor thats noisy or the shutter?

I am truly sorry for all these bothersome question. If it wasen't for the darn good looks then I would have gone away from alpa much faster but... However if I get more posts about why going down the alpa road is bad then I will have to listen to you. So final post, I promise!

On SLRs i've owned the F3, F2, F, also Canon F1 and F1 New.
The quietest of all is the Nikon F by far.
The best made is the Canon F-1 followed by the F-1New and Nikon F (tie).

The one that feels best in your hands is the new F-1 followed by the F3.

 

[Paul Howell]

One final attempt from you to make me not want the alpa. What is so unrealible about it? I know a workshop who can do a CLA cheap however maybe not fix it i guess due to rare spare parts. Don't quite comprehend why alpa (with adapters for afforable lenses) is such a bad choice. I really want to try something that just feel amazing in your hands. When we are talking about unrealibity, how unreaible are they? Major breakdown every year? If there are any other cameras that tick these boxes then i'm considering those.

What if I told you that I wanted this.
- Small body (small body over weight)
- Reliable
- High build quality
- Must have build in lightmeter
- Shutter sound (or lack of)
- Don't need any accesory finders
- Good selection of quality lenses.
- Battery dependancy is not an issue.
- I prefer diodes (LED for instance) however not that big of a deal

All these points are very important for me.


Other cameras that I know of is the Nikon fm2 and pentax lx. How are the pentax lenses? Are there any good slr's with a low shutter sound? Also places that repair the nikon f3? I think the nikon f3 is very good looking. Sure the f2 is also good looking but also a bit bulky looking and the fact that the f3 is a lot newer with higher shutter speeds makes me go towards the f3. However I heard the shutter (or motor, not quite sure) on an f3 and it was nosiy. Very nosiy. Is it the motor thats noisy or the shutter?

I am truly sorry for all these bothersome question. If it wasen't for the darn good looks then I would have gone away from alpa much faster but... However if I get more posts about why going down the alpa road is bad then I will have to listen to you. So final post, I promise!

All good questions, the more you ask the better position you will in to make the final choice.

The systems that I think meets your needs is either the Pentax LX or Olympus OM 4. The Pentax LX is small light with great build pro level quality, Pentax makes some of the best lens, wide range, and many good quality 3rd party lens such as Vivtiar series one. If you like the Pentax lens you can upgrade to a AF body and still use your manual focus lens. The LX had a option of a winder or motor drive, interchangeable focusing screens and finders. Olympus O&M had very good build quality, lens are excellent, and it was made until the early 2000s. Drawback is that is a dead end, no autofocus or digital upgrade. Althouth with an adpator you can shoot OM lens on the digital bodies.

Unless you really don't want a AF system think about the Minolta 9. Last of the Minolta AF pro bodies, small but heavy, all metal body, good weather sealing for the day, the titanium version is a little lighter, very rugged, the fastest shutter speed 1/1250 of a second, flash syn of 1/300 5 fps motor drive. Lens are very good, wide range, the standard lens kit is inexpensive, lots of 3rd part lens, with a $20.00 adapter you can shoot with M42.

The Alpa I used for 2 weeks was a just different breed, build quality, hand built, factory tested and certified, craftsmanship was superior. But it was the lens quality that had me, the lens are the reasons to shoot with an Alpa. As I have been posting over the past couple of days I recalled that when I was working for the wires in the late 70 in African, I knew one German photographer, Marion was his first name cant recall his last name who used Alpa, when I ran across him the in 80s he had a Canon T90 and 70, when asked why the switch, Alpa had fallen so far behind that the build quality was no longer a factor.

If you want an Alpa then you want an Alpa, just know what the long terms costs might be.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

I think if you want the Alpa very much, you should get it. Otherwise, if you choose something else, you will always wonder about the Alpa.

Besides, you can always buy another camera. Even Benji here has more than one camera.