Underrated film cameras

[Carlini Fotograf]

The Yashica TLRs are popular but so often plagued by sticky shutter, they're a complete risk to buy. I'd say most listed for sale have been "fixed" with lighter fluid.
Admittedly, the Yashinon lens is very good.

Yes I agree the 4 element Yashinon which is on my Yashica-Mat is very good. The Yashica A.B.C and D have the 3 element
Yashikor and or Yashimar which are not bad, but I think the later Yashinon is better..

On the sticky shutter issue you brought up...

Ive purchased 1 Yashica-Mat, 1 Yashica-D, 5 Yashica A's in the past 8 months off eBay all at super low prices with the intent of
restoring them and not one of them had any issue with a sticky shutter from the get go. In fact one of the Yashica A I got for $22
looked like it had been buried for 35 years. Before getting it, I thought it was going to be a parts camera. surprisingly the shutter fired
on all speeds right from the get go..I totally restored it.

Here's a before and after.

 

[Don_ih]

Yes I agree the 4 element Yashinon which is on my Yashica-Mat is very good. The Yashica A.B.C and D have the 3 element
Yashikor and or Yashimar which are not bad, but I think the later Yashinon is better..

On the sticky shutter issue you brought up...

Ive purchased 1 Yashica-Mat, 1 Yashica-D, 5 Yashica A's in the past 8 months off eBay all at super low prices with the intent of
restoring them and not one of them had any issue with a sticky shutter from the get go. In fact one of the Yashica A I got for $22
looked like it had been buried for 35 years. Before getting it, I thought it was going to be a parts camera. surprisingly the shutter fired
on all speeds right from the get go..I totally restored it.

Here's a before and after.
View attachment 277994 View attachment 278002

That looks pretty good. The Yashica LM I bought on ebay worked when I got it and quite suddenly developed a gummed up shutter. I fully expect it had a bit of Zippo fluid treatment before it was sent to me, just enough to make it work for a month or two.

 

[Carlini Fotograf]

That looks pretty good. The Yashica LM I bought on ebay worked when I got it and quite suddenly developed a gummed up shutter. I fully expect it had a bit of Zippo fluid treatment before it was sent to me, just enough to make it work for a month or two.

Sounds like your shutter needs to be opened up and cleaned and re-oiled. Did you have it serviced?

Yes.. that Yashica A was a total restore... Surprisingly the lenses had no scratches,fungus, haze or cleaning marks on them.
The other ones I had got were not even close to the bad, just needed some minor cosmetic restore. All of them had totally working
shutters.

Actually one of them was mint in the original box I got for $36...Only thing missing was the nameplate...

 

[Don_ih]

Sounds like your shutter needs to be opened up and cleaned and re-oiled. Did you have it serviced?

Yes.. that Yashica A was a total restore... Surprisingly the lenses had no scratches,fungus, haze or cleaning marks on them.
The other ones I had got were not even close to the bad, just needed some minor cosmetic restore. All of them had totally working
shutters.

Actually one of them was mint in the original box I got for $36...Only thing missing was the nameplate...

View attachment 278022

No, I haven't had it serviced. I have a different Yashica tlr which works perfectly - and I don't really like using tlrs very much.So, it's just sitting in a cupboard being ignore....

 

[Carlini Fotograf]

No, I haven't had it serviced. I have a different Yashica tlr which works perfectly - and I don't really like using tlrs very much.So, it's just sitting in a cupboard being ignore....

My Favorite to shoot with is my Yashica-Mat 2.8. The one I have is the latest model from 1971.
The Yashinon lenses were made in the same factory as the Zeiss Contax lenses at the Yashica / Tomioka
Optical factory and I read in several places that Yashica took full advantage of their Zeiss contract and used
the Zeiss machines and and coatings for some of their later lenses. Not sure if this is exactly true, but I read
it in several places and I have to say those Yashinons on my Yashica-Mat are very good.

 

[Huss]

The lens on the Yashicamat that I briefly had (returned it as it had film transport issues and was sold as 'perfect') was superb. Couldn't tell the difference between it and my Rolleiflexes.

 

[Dali]

Yashicamat main issue is not the lens but the back which cannot keep the film flat. In everyday life, it won't be an issue though, unless you shoot brick walls.

 

[Huss]

Yashicamat main issue is not the lens but the back which cannot keep the film flat. In everyday life, it won't be an issue though, unless you shoot brick walls.

Never noticed an issue. Took killer pics. But for what people are asking for them now, I'd pay a couple o bux more and get a Rolleiflex/cord.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

My Favorite to shoot with is my Yashica-Mat 2.8. The one I have is the latest model from 1971.

Do you have a 2.8 taking lens on your Yashicamat? If so, is it a 5 or 6 element lens?

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Some may take argument with this, but:

the Contax/Yashica line of Contax SLRs. In particular, the RTS III. The biggest reason for it being that they were manual focus when auto focus was no longer just a novelty. They were (and are still) immensely capable cameras, but they were always looked on as a bit of an also-ran.
But a 1/8000th top shutter speed for a mechanical shutter is nothing to sneeze at even in this day and age when to get faster you have to have an electronic shutter on a digital camera. 5fps motor drive is also pretty darned good, combined with the ceramic pressure plate and vacuum to ensure smooth film transport and perfectly flat film at the film plane, and then there's the TTL flash metering for non-dedicated flash units. Some of those features no other camera ever offered. And then, if you really need to, the RTS III can do double duty as a self-defense weapon.

 

[Huss]

I was going to say Leica R9, but they now are going for $1500.

 

[Andrew Kleinfeld]

I like my Leica IIIf a lot, and my M-4. For me, the lenses, though great, are not as important as the handling. I take better pictures with these than other cameras, because it's easier -- they handle really well, so well that it's worth the hassle of loading the film into them.

 

[Don_ih]

worth the hassle of loading the film into them

My M4-2 has what I consider the "insert film and pray" way of loading. It's the main reason I don't use it more.

Contax/Yashica line of Contax SLRs

I don't think anyone who's used one would argue with that. The Yashica lenses for those cameras are also very good. The cameras themselves suffer from some unfortunate material choices - including the adhesive that holds the mirror in place (maybe they did better on the RTS, I don't know).

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

My M4-2 has what I consider the "insert film and pray" way of loading. It's the main reason I don't use it more.



I don't think anyone who's used one would argue with that. The Yashica lenses for those cameras are also very good. The cameras themselves suffer from some unfortunate material choices - including the adhesive that holds the mirror in place (maybe they did better on the RTS, I don't know).

I know there was an issue with the mirror adhesive on some models. I've fortunately never encountered that issue across any of the Contax bodies I've had - two 167MT bodies, an RX, and now an RTS III. Maybe I've just been lucky, or maybe the issue was confined to the cheaper, older models (the 159mm, 137 and 139 quartz, etc). I know a lot of those also had severe issues with the covering on the body - a lot of the "leather"/leatherette deteriorated badly, so they look more like a dirty sheep than a camera. The rubber on one of my 167 bodies was pulling away a little, not enough to interfere with anything, but it did look a touch puckered.

 

[Huss]

My M4-2 has what I consider the "insert film and pray" way of loading. It's the main reason I don't use it more.

What's wrong with your M4-2? I have had zero issues loading it, about the easiest camera outside a AF slr to load. Just follow the directions on the simple pictogram - drop the film in, extend the film leader into the spool as indicated, close the back. Wind on and you're set. Never failed for me whether using the M4-2, MP, MA, M7, M5... It's why Leica calls it the quick load system!

The big thing is to NOT PAY ANY ATTENTION to about 99.99% of the videos out there - including the one from Tamarkin - that shows you how to load the camera. They all claim that before you close the back you need to wind on several times to make sure it is correctly threaded etc. That messes things up as Leica designed it to read the tension from when the tulip spool thing on the film base plate comes into contact with the film lead when you close it up. It's why they have that pictogram!
That method of loading is fine with regular cameras like a Nikon F2, F3 etc, but they don't have the quick load system.

 

[Don_ih]

I know there was an issue with the mirror adhesive on some models. I've fortunately never encountered that issue across any of the Contax bodies I've had - two 167MT bodies, an RX, and now an RTS III. Maybe I've just been lucky, or maybe the issue was confined to the cheaper, older models (the 159mm, 137 and 139 quartz, etc). I know a lot of those also had severe issues with the covering on the body - a lot of the "leather"/leatherette deteriorated badly, so they look more like a dirty sheep than a camera. The rubber on one of my 167 bodies was pulling away a little, not enough to interfere with anything, but it did look a touch puckered.

I have cheaper Contax bodies and no mirror problems, although each had the rotten covering. I have an FX7 that had the mirror problem. Unfortunately, the mirror broke when I tried to get it out. I successfully took the mirror out of another Yashica body (one that was broken and already missing parts) and, after grinding one edge a bit, successfully grafted it into the FX7. When the mirror starts to slide, it also lifts off a little - that ruins focus. The original adhesive is pretty much just goo, so a mirror that can be pushed back up and into position would probably stay there for a few years (or until it gets too hot). It was an enormous pain getting the focus correct with the new mirror and an unspecifiable thickness of adhesive....

 

[Huss]

I was going to say Leica M7. It is absurd that a used M7 is cheaper than a brand new MP!

It's kinda crazy how cheap M7s used to be. For a while there an M4-P and M6 cost more! Maybe still do.

 

[Don_ih]

What's wrong with your M4-2? I have had zero issues loading it, about the easiest camera outside a AF slr to load. Just follow the directions on the simple pictogram - drop the film in, extend the film leader into the spool as indicated, close the back. Wind on and you're set. Never failed for me whether using the M4-2, MP, MA, M7, M5... It's why Leica calls it the quick load system!

The big thing is to NOT PAY ANY ATTENTION to about 99.99% of the videos out there - including the one from Tamarkin - that shows you how to load the camera. They all claim that before you close the back you need to wind on several times to make sure it is correctly threaded etc. That messes things up as Leica designed it to read the tension from when the tulip spool thing on the film base plate comes into contact with the film lead when you close it up. It's why they have that pictogram!
That method of loading is fine with regular cameras like a Nikon F2, F3 etc, but they don't have the quick load system.

I developed my problem with that loading mechanic because I was using Rollei Superpan 200 almost all the time and it's extremely thin. Tmax or Tri-x or HP5 --- no problem. Thin film - it winds for a while then stalls. Or it doesn't start winding at all. What I've needed to do with it is, as I push the back closed, poke the film into the spool toward the top of the camera. Otherwise, the sprocket won't go into the holes.

I don't watch any Youtube videos about anything. It's not likely I'll copy anything from one of them.

 

[Huss]

I developed my problem with that loading mechanic because I was using Rollei Superpan 200 almost all the time and it's extremely thin. Tmax or Tri-x or HP5 --- no problem. Thin film - it winds for a while then stalls. Or it doesn't start winding at all. What I've needed to do with it is, as I push the back closed, poke the film into the spool toward the top of the camera. Otherwise, the sprocket won't go into the holes.

I don't watch any Youtube videos about anything. It's not likely I'll copy anything from one of them.

Ahh. Never used Superpan, but pretty much used everything else! About those youtube videos, the one by Tamarkin - a Leica dealer! - is about the worst. He completely ignores Leica's instructions and winds on the film so many times that he has wasted about 4 exposures per roll.

Anyway, back on topic.. I think the Nikon S2 is very underrated. Cheaper than the S3 , and it has a much better viewfinder for 50mm lenses plus seems to have a rangefinder patch that is much brighter. At least compared to all the S3s I've handled.

 

[GRHazelton]

Right now K1000s are one of the "flavor of the month" cameras and clueless buyers are paying too much for them. Especially the last China model with plastic body parts and a viewfinder guaranteed to bleed black goop.

The early K1000 models are much nicer (if not abused) and more solidly built but the newbies don't know how to ID those. Or, better yet, get one of the more upscale K models like the KM, KX, K2 etc. for less than a K1000.

Amen to your post! I was given a K1000 by my ex-father in law. (One of the few nice things he ever did for me!) Later I scored a lovely KX with a f1.4 lens for around $120, less than is asked for many K1000s, probably because they are hyped as an ideal student camera. A student camera should allow checking depth of field which the K1000 does not permit.
The KX is what the K1000 should have been, IMHO. However if you view with your left eye the wind lever, which is pulled out to turn on the meter, could present a problem...

 

[Don_ih]

I really like the K1000. It's a decent camera to use and you can get great results from it. It's amazing they demand so much money, though, when you consider they are the Volkswagon Beetle of SLRs. A Spotmatic feels more sophisticated, somehow. But Spotmatics go for far less. The best one, though, is the MESuper - which is quite a capable camera if everything is working - and you can buy that for a handful of beans. It's normally cheaper to by a 50mm Pentax SMC lens attached to an MESuper than it is to buy the lens alone.

 

[Paul Howell]

The K1000 is a Spotmatic with K mount and open aperture metering. It's not that the k1000 is a bad camera, it really a very nice basic camera, but it has become a cult fav driven by students who need a all manual body for photo 101 classes. Under rated is the ZX-M an manual focus version the ZX10, it replaced the K1000, integrated motor winder, and auto exposure modes, lacks the build quality of the early K1000.

 

[tomkatf]

Nikkormats... although they seem to have a bit of a cult following here... for good reason. I love 'em...

 

[logan2z]

Nikkormats... although they seem to have a bit of a cult following here... for good reason. I love 'em...
View attachment 278210

Great cameras and still cheap. Shhh, hoping they stay underrated...

 

[abruzzi]

Great cameras and still cheap. Shhh, hoping they stay underrated...

absolutely, but fortunately, I already have several, so I’m good for 100 years, since I’m sure their lifespan will exceed that. The FTn is probably my favorite 35mm camera ever (I prefer it over the FT2 because it doesn’t have a flash shoe, which ruins the beautiful lines of the later Nikkormats.)