What 35mm camera should I try...

[Jonnysound]

Olympus OM1n
Olympus Trip 35
Smena Symbol
Zorki 4k

After seeing photographers using Leica cameras, it feels like the past 4 years has been a waste, and my cameras are rubbish, I thought they were good, especially my latest edition of Zorki 4k seems to be really good and really sharp images. Are they considered good? Any of my cameras? I like this Zorki 4k, any other rangefinders or 35mm cameras anyone could recommend trying? Have been looking at the Rollei 35 S. Is it possible to use a leica 50mm with the Zorki 4k? Not something really expensive.
☺

(2 photos from 1st roll using Zorki 4k and cheap Agfa Vista 200)

 

[rrusso]

Remember a camera is just a box, and, assuming everything works as it should (no light leaks, accurate shutter speeds, etc.), I wouldn't say you necessarily need a different camera.

Most will tell you it's all about the glass, and it looks like your Zorki has an M39 lens mount*, so if you're otherwise happy with the Zorki, I'd look into investing in some good lenses.

*Not an expert on the true LTM vs. others, so do some research, or maybe an expert here can chime in.

 

[Alan Gales]

Any SLR from Canon, Contax, Leica, Minolta, Olympus, Pentax, Ricoh, etc. will have sharp lenses. Of course Leica M series also has nice lenses. Canon, Minolta, Olympus, Pentax and Ricoh can be had cheap too.

What's wrong with your Olympus OM-1n?

 

[Theo Sulphate]

The Zorki and the other cameras you listed are perfectly fine. The photos you posted show that you know what you're doing. No reason not to be happy. A different camera won't make a better photo -- unless maybe you start using medium or large format (which won't be as convenient as 35mm).

 

[Ko.Fe.]

All four are very good as long as they are working.
Where are Canon LTM rangefinders, not expensive to try. Very close to Leica but some of them are with its own goodies.
Where are Bessa R LTM and M mounts after R model. Those are modern rangefinders and will do same as Leica does.

If you want to be as good as those whom you look at with Leica RF, go for M2 or M4-2 and get 35mm lens for it. Start not only look at their pictures, but read about them. Some Henri Cartier-Bresson books are with text from him to read. He explains a lot.

Photos of yours are good, but they are better to be taken with two Oly cameras you have, IMO. Try to use Zorki and Smena for something more spontaneous. Don't worry about sharpness, good photos often lacks of it.

Oh, if you ask about RF, here is sub-forum for it.

 

[removed account4]

The Zorki and the other cameras you listed are perfectly fine. The photos you posted show that you know what you're doing. No reason not to be happy. A different camera won't make a better photo -- unless maybe you start using medium or large format (which won't be as convenient as 35mm).

and even ( with large format ) your photographs won't be any better
for the most part using LF or MF is just bragging rights that you used a bigger or more expensive camera/

i couldn't agree more with theo your photographs are fine ..
have you taken your zorki to someone for a CLA - its a spa day for your camera
where they give it a tune up ( sometimes older cameras need to be cleaned adjusted + lubricated)
you might "bracket" your exposures, so you meter at f8 and you expose at 8 11 and 5.6 to make sure your camera lab and you
are " in concert " ..
good luck with your photography, ... i had a zorki 4 and loved it !

 

[Sirius Glass]

Welcome to APUG

There is nothing wrong with your photographs. The lens optics are good. Stick with cameras that you can afford to buy and keep properly serviced. Then enjoy photography. Later if and when you can afford more expensive cameras that you desire, consider whether you want or need to spend more. Need is a need, but a want is not necessary.

Better equipment has greater importance with medium format and large format photography.

 

[jim10219]

You're photos aren't bad, but there still room for improvement in your technique. I would invest in more film and experience at this stage before buying more cameras. You've got a long ways to go before you reach the maximum potential of those cameras.

 

[ac12]

WHAT EXACTLY IS YOUR PROBLEM?
All I seem to get from your post is that you think a Leica is a better camera, and yours are "rubbish."
But I see nothing about exactly what is the problem that you think you have.

The camera is only a tool. Buying an EXPENSIVE camera will not automatically give you better photographs.
It is the photographer that makes the photograph.
I've seen better photos come out of simple inexpensive box cameras than many high $$$$ SLRs and lenses.
The camera will not help you with composition or framing or arranging your subject or finding a different perspective or . . .
This is all the job of YOU the photographer.

The only camera of yours that I know about it the Olympus OM1n, and that should give you good negatives, IF you do your part.

 

[Craig75]

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/08...y+bartlett&dpPl=1&dpID=41RCWBMGVAL&ref=plSrch

For the princely sum of 1p plus postage you can see peoples negatives and how (and how much work!) the printer turned them into prints.

Most of what you are liking in photos you are seeing is darkroom work / pp i suspect

 

[rpavich]

I know how you feel; that there is a better camera out there and you keep searching for it BUT...learn from me; there isn't.

I've had a LOT of cameras, first "dig&%tal" and then film. I LUSTED after a Leica film cam and bought an M6 which is a beautiful work of art, I have a Nikon FM2n with several lenses, and a few others, but the hard fact is; they are just a box that let's light in to expose film. None make the pictures better, they just feel different to me.

I ended up selling my M6 and many of my other cameras and now almost all of the time I use an Olympus Trip 35 because I enjoy the shooting experience it gives me and it does the same thing other cameras do...it lets light in to expose film.

It's hard to fight that "gear lust" feeling...take it from me...I know, but you have to. The cure is to go out and take pictures, have fun, DO photography!

SEE the world differently, get low, get high, close, far, just get out there and shoot shoot shoot!

PS: "and really sharp images"

Forget this line of thinking. CONTENT is what you want...what's HAPPENING in the frame? is what you are looking for...THAT will make you happier than getting "sharper".

I've been down that road too, sad to say. If I only had the money I'd wasted on the "next best" camera or the "sharpest lens" I'd be retired by now.

 

[Sewin]

Nothing wrong with your cameras, even the Symbol can produce good pictures.

I've done the rounds with cameras just like rpavich. Never had or wanted a Leica though.

The Zorki 4K is a good camera, wish I hadn't sold mine.

About a year or two ago I had a clear out, sold most of my 35mm and 120 gear . ( I even went digi for a year)

Then decided on the basic route back , simple mechanical cameras, nothing expensive, stuck with my Prakticas and a Zenit, all functioning and working fine together with a few basic lenses.
These cameras do get some adverse comments, classed as being crude and a bit rough, they do the job though.

I could if I wanted to buy more expensive cameras, but don't feel the need to, I'm quite happy with my DDR and USSR cameras,perhaps I just like the challenge.

I might treat myself to another medium format camera in the future though

 

[Jim Jones]

The main advantages of Leica RF cameras are durability and reliability. Over many decades I never had a Leica fail except in cases of much trauma. Nikons and Nikkormats were also durable. Many other cameras also capture fine photographs, but perhaps not for as many years of hard use. Excuse the heresy, but today's inexpensive d****** cameras compete with my Leica M4 in image quality and excel in convenience.

 

[DF]

As I've recommended hundreds of beginner as well as advanced photog's - the Minolta X-700. You can't go wrong with this good reliable, sturdy cam. They're dirt cheap anywhere on Ebay or your local Craigslist chapter. "Dirt cheap" meaning they've comedown, way down from the $400 price tag in '84 - today's market maybe $800 . Using nothing but X-700's since then. MD & MD Rokkor lenses major plus as well.

 

[Paul Howell]

All of your lens are better than Agfa or Fuji 200, they will out resolve Tmax 100 200/linesMM, color looks to be good. Olympus glass is some of the best on the market, Russians make good lens as well. Some feel that Leica glass has a different look, contrast, color, what ever, might have true decades ago. What you do get is, as Jim Jones has stated, reliability. If you want a reliable camera then Leica, otherwise invest in additional Olympus glass and film, go places to shoot, practice and practice will improve your work.

 

[Montaggio]

I agree - nothing wrong with your current setup. You won't be able to buy your way to great pics - trust me, I've tried . Having said that, I have tried quite a few cameras in search of a better mousetrap. Some just didn't work for me. Others just fit (like my F4S - love that thing). With film bodies typically quite cheap, you can probably try a bunch of different ones and sell them on if they don't work for you. But I would rather invest in a few good lenses over time and hold onto them. For me, Nikon's backwards compatibility was a big draw and I have a few favourites that I'll probably take to the grave.

You have some great options in LTM without breaking the bank - like the Jupiters. Based on where you seem to be heading, you might look here. LTM to m mount is an easy adaptation if you eventually want to move to Leica, or end up with a Bessa along the way. I wouldn't be in a big hurry though - as has been said, that is just a light box. I would focus on glass you like and want to build a system around - work from there.

It's the journey that is the fun part. I've probably taken just as many "good" photos by accident as I have on purpose. Likely more. But you learn from that and that's the fun part.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

There's a certain joy in doing the very best you can with what you already have (and what you have is not rubbish).

That's what I did for 15 years with my only camera: an old Pentax and a single 55/2 lens.

 

[CMoore]

I have Had/Bought A LOT of 35mm SLR in the last few years.
Canon
Minolta
Nikon
Olympus
There was Not One that did not need to be opened up and cleaned, repaired, adjusted and given a grease job. Spending 100 bux on a 40 Year Old Camera (to "fix" it) is absolutely NOTHING.
They probably all need 2x-4x that much work.
I am not saying that many cameras will not be OK with a 100 dollar CLA. But if you have a good tech, and he is doing a Good Job of a CLA for 100 bux, you should be very happy.
I was a Painter for 30 years. In my line of work 100 bux will buy you absolutely Nothing. We are VERY Fortunate to still have these qualified techs that work for (IMO) a very reasonable wage.
I am not being flippant about money...i wish they worked for Free...but my experience has been that they do a good job and are at the lower end of the pay scale for skilled labor.
good luck

 

[Jonnysound]

and even ( with large format ) your photographs won't be any better
for the most part using LF or MF is just bragging rights that you used a bigger or more expensive camera/

i couldn't agree more with theo your photographs are fine ..
have you taken your zorki to someone for a CLA - its a spa day for your camera
where they give it a tune up ( sometimes older cameras need to be cleaned adjusted + lubricated)
you might "bracket" your exposures, so you meter at f8 and you expose at 8 11 and 5.6 to make sure your camera lab and you
are " in concert " ..
good luck with your photography, ... i had a zorki 4 and loved it !

Zorki 4k seems to be ok, ive kept records of the speeds and f stops, using an old lightmeter (plusmeter 110) i wasnt sure worked but they seem to be exsposed ok. I paid £4 for the zorki, it had some fungus inside, took it apart myself and cleaned from youtube tutorial before i used it

 

[Ian Grant]

it's not just the camera it's how you use it.

From the list:

Olympus OM1n
Olympus Trip 35
Smena Symbol
Zorki 4k

The Smena Symbol is the weakest link, the Olympus Trip is quite capable. The Zorki 4K is an excellent camera but you need a hand held light meter, the Russian Lenigrad meters are surprisingly good, the downside is no low shutter speeds.

The OM1 should be way ahead. However I would have more fun with the Zorki and Jupiter lens,

I've been shooting with perhaps one of the best Soviet Block cameras a Praktina FX, build quality is on a par with Leicam but you can't say that of Zorki, fed and other Eastern Block cameras.

Ian

 

[David T T]

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/08...y+bartlett&dpPl=1&dpID=41RCWBMGVAL&ref=plSrch

For the princely sum of 1p plus postage you can see peoples negatives and how (and how much work!) the printer turned them into prints.

Most of what you are liking in photos you are seeing is darkroom work / pp i suspect

Great point, and thanks for linking the book. I just ordered a copy.

 

[Svenedin]

The Olympus OM1n is a wonderful camera. That is the one I would use. Olympus OM Zuiko lenses are excellent and you can find good examples without spending a lot (unless you want the fast versions). You have to be fussy though as many lenses on sale will have faults of one kind or another. There is nothing wrong with your pictures IMHO (The Olympus OM cameras are the only SLRs I have and so I am heavily biased towards them).

What makes you feel your cameras are "rubbish" (they are not)? Are you unhappy with your photographs (and if so why)?

 

[drmoss_ca]

Jonny,
I'm sorry you've had some angry responses, but this is a bit of an angry place at times. Don't worry; they're all paper tigers.

No, you don't need other cameras. Pretty much any camera can take a great photograph. The bit that makes it great is what goes on in the photographer's head even before he lifts the camera to his eye. I'm still working on that part myself. I've made lots of mistakes on my way to where I am, and I can't pretend to have any magical wisdom. I do have some experience, and what I have learned, sometimes the hard way, is this: a lot of us take a long time to realise that having too many choices ruins the chance of that great photo happening. It is far better to walk out with one lens and take, say, 90mm photos that day, than to take all your lenses and be paralysed by too much choice. Don't buy gear at this stage. Buy film, buy chemicals. Use the film profligately - really! Don't think of the cost of what you have bought, think instead of what you might get from each film. Try to know what each print will look like before you press the shutter button. Do that enough times and one day it will become the norm that what you have visualised resembles the print pretty closely. You will still need to have some sense of what makes one composition great, and another boring. I don't know if that can be taught, but if it is inside you, it might be inspired to show itself by studying the work of photographers you admire. Copy them, learn as you do it. Maybe one day you'll be doing original stuff, maybe not. Neither I nor anyone else knows what makes one person have that sense of art. If you have it, that's how to find it, I think. If you don't, you'll still learn to take a competent photograph. None of it will depend on the camera you use.

Good luck, and have fun.

 

[mr rusty]

The camera doesn't make the photo. Remember there's only air between lens and film, and even old lenses can be sharp. Check this out from a 1913 kodak 3a

Kodak 3A - first attempt paper negs - looking for tips