Suggest a color film that's one step better than Kodak Gold or ColorPlus?

[dcy]

Minolta 7, Nikon F4 and Fs, Canon EOS 1N, Pentax MZ1, all under $500, under a $100, Nikon N90, N80, so other than price what is your criteria?

The main one that those cameras don't have is compactness. Something like an Olympus XA and many (most?) rangefinders can fit in a pocket. I wouldn't go on a hike or to a farmers market with a camera strapped around my neck. If it was in my backpack, I'd end up not using it a lot.

The situation seems to be that I can have a camera that

(1) Fits in a large pocket.
(2) Has both auto mode and manual mode.
(3) Has a decent (say ... < $200) price.

"pick two".

In general, I can find:

(1) SLRs with a good price, and auto+manual modes, but are bulky.
(2) Rangefinders with a good price, but either no auto mode or no manual mode (e.g. Yashica Electro 35 GSN/GTN/GX/etc).
(3) Rangefinders with auto+manual mode, for $1,000+ (e.g. Contax G1, Konica Hexar RF).


Perhaps there's an option I haven't thought of. I don't know much about cameras, or the market.

 

[aconbere]

I have an Olympus 35RC that I like a lot and has a simple shutter priority automatic mode as well as fully manual controls. Very compact little camera, very nice lens.

The Canon Canonette QL17 is a similar camera that’s reputed to be very nice (but one I haven’t used).

 

[Taylor Nankervis]

. Something like an Olympus XA and many (most?) rangefinders can fit in a pocket.

That's likely all you will need!
My li'l Olympus XA is from 1983 — not a single fault or skipped beat — or any fault — ever over that time (and how much time are we talking about?). I don't use it as often (but I should); great little camera that still commands a keen following from collectors.

 

[albireo]

Taylor, I've always wanted to have an XA but I've been really unlucky with these cameras..

I bought it twice. First an XA, then an XA4. The XA used but in excellent condition, the XA4 stone cold mint, close to unused, boxed from eBay Japan. The XA4 came with original labels, and price tags in Japanese and even a necklace doubling as a distance/focusing aid.

Both had significant issues when shooting and gave me objectively subpar pictures.

I never knew what was wrong with the XA, and I sent it back before I found out why the images were always soft with horrible corners. The left corner was softer than the right so I suspect lens element misalignment.

The XA4 had a faulty aperture which means all my pictures were shot wide open, resulting in overexposure and softness.

I returned both, and have -sadly- ticked the XA off my 'must own" list. Too risky in 2025.

 

[Agulliver]

I would suggest that over time you'll get used to how your Pentax 17 meters in various conditions and learn when you need to compensate + or - a stop or two. In reality, that's all you *need* to do.

I have a collection of cameras from the simplest box cameras taking in totally manual cameras, cameras with non-coupled meters and cameras with various different metering systems. And a light meter app on my phone (my Weston Mk III light meter died and is now a movie prop). But I also have 47 years of experience with manual cameras...and that really helps. You'll learn as you go, making mistakes but also finding that some tricky photos come out perfectly. It might be worth noting down the circumstances of your shots as you go, especially if you do make any adjustments, for later reference.....this worked, that didn't, oh look....that did something odd that worked out.

 

[dcy]

1I have an Olympus 35RC that I like a lot and has a simple shutter priority automatic mode as well as fully manual controls. Very compact little camera, very nice lens.

The Canon Canonette QL17 is a similar camera that’s reputed to be very nice (but one I haven’t used).

Thanks!

I looked them up and watched a few reviews. I thought I knew about the Canonet, yet I didn't know it had a manual option. Ditto for the 35RC.

I can totally see myself buying one of those as a "second" camera. Being a product of the 1970s, it is not fair to complain that they cannot match a camera from 2024/5. I am sure that ISO 400 was considered fast in 1970. But having a manual option while still being pocket-size can earn them a place in my collection for when I want that experience.

 

[dcy]

I would suggest that over time you'll get used to how your Pentax 17 meters in various conditions and learn when you need to compensate + or - a stop or two. In reality, that's all you *need* to do.

Definitely.

But I also have 47 years of experience with manual cameras...and that really helps. You'll learn as you go, making mistakes but also finding that some tricky photos come out perfectly.

Yeah. There's no replacement for experience. Already in the short year that I've had my camera I've noticed patterns that I now try to incorporate when I shoot.

It might be worth noting down the circumstances of your shots as you go, especially if you do make any adjustments, for later reference.....this worked, that didn't, oh look....that did something odd that worked out.

I should definitely do that.

I've noticed a few times when I was trying something, sure I would remember, and by the time I got to the end of the roll 2 weeks later I can't remember what I was trying to do (e.g. "Hmm... I think I was testing exposure... but was I over or under exposing?..."). I should carry a little notebook with me.

 

[snusmumriken]

I should carry a little notebook with me.

Yeah, I’ve kept one in my camera bag for years. Of course, you have to remember to use it. Mine is still totally blank.

 

[dcy]

I have an Olympus 35RC that I like a lot and has a simple shutter priority automatic mode as well as fully manual controls. Very compact little camera, very nice lens.

The Canon Canonette QL17 is a similar camera that’s reputed to be very nice (but one I haven’t used).

Thanks again for mentioning those. I spent the last week reading, watching reviews, and learning about those cameras, as well as the close cousins Olympus 35SP and RD.

I just ordered a Canonnette QL17 from eBay. I think it's going to be a fun "second camera" that will let me shoot in manual mode when I'm in the mood for that, and still let me switch to shutter priority when I want.

In the strictest sense, I've "always" been able to shoot manual with my digital camera, but it'll be nice to have that option for film.

 

[brbo]

Canonet is a fine camera. Depending on condition, viewfinder will probably be much dimmer than what you are used to in Pentax 17 and you will need some luck to get one with contrasty rangefinder patch. Of course, one bad thing about it is that the meter does not work in manual mode.

 

[dcy]

Canonet is a fine camera. Depending on condition, viewfinder will probably be much dimmer than what you are used to in Pentax 17 and you will need some luck to get one with contrasty rangefinder patch. Of course, one bad thing about it is that the meter does not work in manual mode.

Yeah. If the viewfinder is as clear as the one in my Olympus Pen EE, I'll be more than happy. Buying from eBay is always a bit of a gamble, but the pictures in the listing looked "pretty good".

Last week I bought an Argus C3, mainly as a collectible. Now that camera has a dim viewfinder. I haven't tested it yet.

 

[reddesert]

I used a Canonet QL17 a lot in the 1990s to early 00s. It is good. One minor irritant is that you have to turn the aperture dial to "A" to get a light meter reading and then turn it back to your desired aperture. I think the light meter on the one I used back then is no longer accurate, but I have some others. Often you will have to do something about light seal foam on the back that has deteriorated.

There are lots of other auto/manual modest-size RFs from that era, Olympus (35RC), Minolta (Hi-Matic 7?), and others made them. I like the Konica auto S2 as well (first of this type I owned), but it is bigger than a Canonet. At the time (1960s to early 1980s), these occupied the market niche of roughly amateurs who wanted something better than an Instamatic, but not ready or willing to buy into an SLR. They were eventually displaced by the 35mm AF point-and-shoot.

 

[BrianShaw]

Also, for the Canonet please start doing your homework on batteries and conversion alternatives. That camera is from the (now banned) mercury battery era. I used a CrisCam voltage dropping adapter with silver-oxide cell to great advantage with my QL17 GIII. Nice camera when in good operating condition.

 

[dcy]

Also, for the Canonet please start doing your homework on batteries and conversion alternatives.

It would've been a bit foolish of me to not start doing that homework before purchasing the camera.

I haven't yet decided on which alternative I will go for, but I think I've narrowed it down to three:

(1) Quick & Cheap & Wrong --- Just pop in an LR44 and hope for the best. --- The wrong voltage and wrong discharge curve will make the meter inaccurate by +/- 1.5 stops, ranging from -1.5 to +1.5 as the battery discharges over a few months. An LR44 has a smaller diameter than an PX625, so I imagine it rattles too.

(2) Quick & Expensive --- Buy the WeinCell PX625 battery replacement. Some sources recommend it as the most reliable drop-in replacement for the mercury battery. $6.67 for a battery that dies in 30 - 90 days.

(3) Buy Once, Cry Once --- The option you went for. Buy a $40 CrisCam MR-9 voltage dropping adapter and use silver oxide 386 batteries from then on.

Yeah... I'm thinking of buying the CrisCam.

 

[dcy]

I just ordered the CrisCam.

 

[blee1996]

It would've been a bit foolish of me to not start doing that homework before purchasing the camera.

I haven't yet decided on which alternative I will go for, but I think I've narrowed it down to three:

(1) Quick & Cheap & Wrong --- Just pop in an LR44 and hope for the best. --- The wrong voltage and wrong discharge curve will make the meter inaccurate by +/- 1.5 stops, ranging from -1.5 to +1.5 as the battery discharges over a few months. An LR44 has a smaller diameter than an PX625, so I imagine it rattles too.

(2) Quick & Expensive --- Buy the WeinCell PX625 battery replacement. Some sources recommend it as the most reliable drop-in replacement for the mercury battery. $6.67 for a battery that dies in 30 - 90 days.

(3) Buy Once, Cry Once --- The option you went for. Buy a $40 CrisCam MR-9 voltage dropping adapter and use silver oxide 386 batteries from then on.

Yeah... I'm thinking of buying the CrisCam.

There is another option
4) Compromise: buy a dumb adapter (brass $5), and use 675 zinc air hearing aid battery (1.4v, $0.35 each). This is exactly equivalent to WeinCell.

 

[aconbere]

It would've been a bit foolish of me to not start doing that homework before purchasing the camera.

I haven't yet decided on which alternative I will go for, but I think I've narrowed it down to three:

(1) Quick & Cheap & Wrong --- Just pop in an LR44 and hope for the best. --- The wrong voltage and wrong discharge curve will make the meter inaccurate by +/- 1.5 stops, ranging from -1.5 to +1.5 as the battery discharges over a few months. An LR44 has a smaller diameter than an PX625, so I imagine it rattles too.

(2) Quick & Expensive --- Buy the WeinCell PX625 battery replacement. Some sources recommend it as the most reliable drop-in replacement for the mercury battery. $6.67 for a battery that dies in 30 - 90 days.

(3) Buy Once, Cry Once --- The option you went for. Buy a $40 CrisCam MR-9 voltage dropping adapter and use silver oxide 386 batteries from then on.

Yeah... I'm thinking of buying the CrisCam.

Because what is this hobby except a never ending series of rabbit holes… I installed a Schottky diode in the camera to bring and SR44 down to 1.37V

 

[reddesert]

Honestly, I used to use an alkaline battery in my Canonet and I think the meter was only off by about a half stop over the range that I used it. You may not even know if the meter works yet.

I used a PX625A, which may not be easy to get any more, but is the right shape. I suspect that if one puts an LR44 in, it will slide around and not make good contact. It can be shimmed with aluminum foil.

The light meter on any of these older rangefinders is a not particularly sophisticated averaging meter so it is also important to learn to use such a meter and its limitations.

 

[dcy]

There is another option
4) Compromise: buy a dumb adapter (brass $5), and use 675 zinc air hearing aid battery (1.4v, $0.35 each). This is exactly equivalent to WeinCell.

I should've waited 1 more minute before buying.

 

[MattKing]

You didn't make a bad decision.
There is a whole world of older cameras that you can use that CrisCam adapter in - e.g. the Olympus OM-1 - and enjoy long battery life.
At the same time, those dumb adapters work great with the hearing aid batteries, for when you are happy to more frequently change cheap and very easy to obtain batteries.
I have happily used both approaches.

 

[BrianShaw]

I just ordered the CrisCam.

Smart man! This cost more but lasts a lot longer than the air-zinc cells. You'll rarely have to worry about a dead battery.

 

[BrianShaw]

You didn't make a bad decision.
There is a whole world of older cameras that you can use that CrisCam adapter in - e.g. the Olympus OM-1 - and enjoy long battery life.
At the same time, those dumb adapters work great with the hearing aid batteries, for when you are happy to more frequently change cheap and very easy to obtain batteries.
I have happily used both approaches.

... and a whole world of meters too.

 

[MattKing]

... and a whole world of meters too.

Brian - we don't want @dcy to go down the same rabbit hole that some of us have already travelled, do we?
Not only too many cameras and too many lenses to choose from, too many hand meters as well!

 

[BrianShaw]

DCY is the master of his own destiny. He seems to love rabbit holes and that’s a good thing because every hole leads to a fascinating discussion thread. He’s already “one of us”. I like the way he thinks and overthinks!

 

[dcy]

DCY is the master of his own destiny. He seems to love rabbit holes and that’s a good thing because every hole leads to a fascinating discussion thread.

It's a bit of a battle for me. I honestly think that the world is an interesting place and the more you dig into a subject the more fascinating it becomes. But trying to explore everything isn't healthy for me. One of the reasons I chose photography as a hobby is that it gets me out of the house and on my feet. Every rabbit hole is interesting, but I need to be judicious about which ones to follow.

He’s already “one of us”. I like the way he thinks and overthinks!