What's your favorite $200+/- Rangefinder?

ciniframe · Oct 26, 2014

analoguey said:
No one's mentioned half-frame shooters here? No good ones?

Sent from Tap-a-talk

Not sure there were any rangefinder half frame camera.* All the ones I've seen are scale focus.

*Except for the very rare Italian made Ducati and a few Leica 72, basically a Leica IIIa converted by the factory to half frame. Nikon also had some factory converted S3M rangefinder models. Leica also had made a few M cameras in half frame, cannot remember which model. These few exceptions, if you could even locate one would surely be well over $200

analoguey · Oct 26, 2014

Oh okay! I thought the Olympus Trip or the Pen were rangefinders?

Sent from Tap-a-talk

pdeeh · Oct 26, 2014

PENs aren't rangefinders and Trips aren't ½ frame

Regular Rod · Oct 26, 2014

nsurit said:
Why not come play with the big boys and get yourself a Voigtlander Bessa RF from the 30's/40's. Should be able to find one in the $200+/- range. Bill Barber

A good one at that price would be a rarity...

I do agree with you that a change to 120 would give the OP more improvements than any upgrade to another 35mm camera, especially with a budget of circa $200!

RR

fotch · Oct 26, 2014

sell them all & get a M2 or M3 w Leica glass

John Koehrer · Oct 26, 2014

02Pilot said:
That said, I have and really enjoy an Olympus 35SP as well. If I had to pick a single fixed-lens RF, that would be it hands-down. The lens is astonishing.

Yeah, The SP is the size of a real camera. You want a slippery slope to Leica? It fits the hand very much like an M camera.

DANGER, Will Robinson!

analoguey · Oct 26, 2014

pdeeh said:
PENs aren't rangefinders and Trips aren't ½ frame

Oops!
Okay, but i'm referring to the fixed lens half-frames not the pen-interchangeables - are those also not rangefinders?

Sent from Tap-a-talk

R.Gould · Oct 26, 2014

In that price range I have two, 1 is my Ambi Sillitte, terrific viewfinder, with switchable tramlines for 35,50 and 90mm lenses, complete with the set of 35 and 90 lenses, my second is my recently aquired Kodak Retina IIIc, so compact and with the xenon lens the picture quality is awesome
Richard

ciniframe · Oct 26, 2014

analoguey said:
Oops!
Okay, but i'm referring to the fixed lens half-frames not the pen-interchangeables - are those also not rangefinders?

Sent from Tap-a-talk

No, they are 'scale focusing'. The difference between a rangefinder and scale focusing is that a rangefinder has a optical device to measure the distance to the subject, usually as you focus the lens. For instance, my Leica M4-2 uses what called a 'superimposed image rangefinder' combined with the viewfinder. I have several Olympus Pen viewfinder type cameras and I focus them by making a guess as to the distance to the subject and then turning the focusing ring, marked in feet, to that distance. In scale focusing you usually count of DOF to cover your estimate of distance. Scale focusing can also be used on a rangefinder equipped camera. With my Leica and a 35mm lens I'll often set the distance at a hyperfocal setting and use the camera as a point and shoot. To do this the light is usually daylight and the aperture is set no larger than f8, but preferably at f11 or f16, that gives me plenty of DOF.

analoguey · Oct 26, 2014

Ah okay!
Thanks Pdeeh and Ciniframe(especially for the explanation)!

Sent from Tap-a-talk

Mark Fisher · Oct 27, 2014

You have a bunch of nice 70s era rangefinders so no point in getting any more of those. I'd save a little more money and get a screw mount Leica. Nothing is more solid and with a 50mm lens isn't too finicky to use. With a collapsible lens, it is probably more compact than a lot of the camera you already have. Another approach would be to get an OM1 or 2......almost as small as the larger 70s rangefinders and really pleasant to use......or a 6x6 folder. So many choices.

Pioneer · Oct 27, 2014

The Leica Barnack LTM cameras are surprisingly nice to work with and very compact, especially when combined with the Elmar 50/3.5 or Elmar 35/3.5. But that will almost certainly go past your $200 limit for one in good working condition. But, in this case anyway, you do get what you pay for.

flavio81 · Oct 27, 2014

Kirks518 said:
My problem is that I have too many already. Currently, I have 3 Rollei 35's (1 (German) Tessar, 1 S-K Xenar, 1 Sonnar), 2 Oly Trip 35's (1 black, 1 silver), countless Canon QL-17 GIII (probably close to 40 of these), 2 Voigtlander Prominents, 1 Minolta 7Sii, 1 Yashica IC 1.4, 2+ Yashica Electro 35 GSN's, 2 Oly XA's (one with shutter issues), and some others that I can't name off the top of my head ATM.
(...)
The Yashicas are kind of clunky feeling to me, and the batteries are a nightmare.
The Canons I have yet to keep one for myself. I refurb them and resell them. I keep saying I should use (keep?) one for myself, but I just haven't gotten around to doing it.

Ok, want the short answer? Grab a Kodak Retina IIIc before prices rise. Build quality and lens quality are extremely high, you would think this was a Leica. Compact; the lens is always protected, the rangefinder is precise. It can also be used as a scale focusing camera because the scale is good and clear. It is my favorite 35mm camera, and I have owned a lot of 35mm cameras.

If you can't grab a Kodak Retina IIIc, an alternative is the Agfa Karat IV, particularly with the 50/2.0 Agfa Solagon, or Schneider Xenon, or Rodenstock Heligon. The Solagon is amazing !

Long answer...

Rollei 35s: i own one and i find it limited; i need to use f8 or smaller to be sure that my focusing is OK. And i am very good at estimating distances, mind you. Also, it is prone to camera shake so for me it's 1/60 or higher shutter speed. In short, limited. Leave it to the collectors. If you want something better get a Minox 35GT. But they are not very reliable, and have no manual exposure setting.

Olympus Trip 35: It is a limited machine, but you already knew that. Otherwise, a very nice machine and quick to use.

Kirks518 said:
Oh, and I've been eyeballing the Olympus 35RD and the 35SP as potential candidates as of late.

Olympus 35SP: Overrated. I found the shutter action to be too noisy, I also felt a bit of shutter vibration which is a sin for a leaf shutter.

Olympus XA: Yes, very compact and cool and advanced, but that lens is crippled.

Canon QL-17: The lens is not as good as the 45/1.7 on the Yashica. I don't like 40mm focal length too much, to be honest.

Minolta 7SII: A bit bigger and heavier for what it brings to the table.

Yashica Electro 35GSN: Yeah, it is big, but the batteries are not a nightmare. One CR2 battery + two PX625A batteries, wrapped nicely, are a good substitute. I find this camera to be much better than what the features would indicate. The viewfinder is big and has parallax correction, the focusing is smooth, the lens is totally excellent in all respects, the metering is surprisingly accurate, and the camera is tough.

But in all honesty, all of the above cameras can be surpassed in results by an Agfa Isolette III with a Solinar lens... Which would be more compact that some of the cameras above, and also a rangefinder. And medium format (6x6).

Regular Rod · Oct 27, 2014

Go for bigger negatives...

RR

GRHazelton · Oct 27, 2014

Retina IIIc, the good, the bad, and the little bit ugly.

flavio81 wrote:

"Ok, want the short answer? Grab a Kodak Retina IIIc before prices rise. Build quality and lens quality are extremely high, you would think this was a Leica. Compact; the lens is always protected, the rangefinder is precise. It can also be used as a scale focusing camera because the scale is good and clear. It is my favorite 35mm camera, and I have owned a lot of 35mm cameras."

Granted, the Retina IIIc is lovely. I own two, one with the Xenon and one with the Rodenstock Heligon, for the latter I also have the WA and Tele converter modules. Both the Xenon and the Heligon are wonderful lenses.

But ... I find the Retina with its bottom advance no where as user friendly as the Vitessa L. The exposure counter doesn't reset automatically, and it counts down. Check with instructions about how to that, see this wonderful site: http://www.butkus.org/chinon/kodak/kodak_retina_iiic/kodak_retina_iiic.htm

My Xenon Retina needs work, which is not cheap. The shutter cocking rack or some such is a weak link and, needless to say, parts are difficult to find. That said, as I indicated in an earlier post, if the Vitessa rangefinder needs work it apparently is a real bear to work on. Needless to say, the built in selenium cell meters in these cameras may or may not work ... probably the latter.

John Koehrer · Oct 28, 2014

Micro tools sells/sold replacement cocking racks.

GRHazelton · Oct 28, 2014

John Koehrer said:
Micro tools sells/sold replacement cocking racks.

Thanks! Good to know.

davela · Oct 28, 2014

Almost any Canon LTM rangefinder. A Leica II or III series if one falls in that range -- same with the a Contax IIa or IIIa. The Voitgtlander Bessa R is a modern classic if you want something highly reliable with a first rate finder.

Newt_on_Swings · Oct 28, 2014

The retina iiic is a bit of a headache to take apart. the focusing linkage gear must be connected at the right length of travel on reassembly or it work work right or close up. It's the only camera that I haven't been able to fix myself as I didn't have that cocking rack, I put it all back together after disassembly and just left it. The piece is about $25 but I am not sure if the replacement has better teeth that won't wear as easily. Well since the iiic went for about that price I never bought the part. I think prices have gone up a bit more now especially for the big C version.

Ko.Fe. · Oct 28, 2014

Bessa R. Leica IIf. One has fresh electronics another is classic. Both takes not expensive LTM lenses.

ciniframe · Oct 29, 2014

Ko.Fe. said:
Bessa R. Leica IIf. One has fresh electronics another is classic. Both takes not expensive LTM lenses.

I guess not expensive is all relative to income bracket. *Some* of the FSU lenses are not expensive but most everything else, older CV lenses, Canon and Leica in LTM I would call expensive. Although they could certainly be called not expensive compared to more modern new and used M mount lenses.

Ko.Fe. · Oct 29, 2014

ciniframe said:
I guess not expensive is all relative to income bracket. *Some* of the FSU lenses are not expensive but most everything else, older CV lenses, Canon and Leica in LTM I would call expensive. Although they could certainly be called not expensive compared to more modern new and used M mount lenses.

Absolutely, my recommendation of Bessa R and Leica IIf is based to my single-income, large family budget.
All flavours of Industars 50mm lenses could be obtained well under $50. In clean&clear condition.

This thread is about $200 +/- RF, I suggested those two cameras also for the reason how fast you could sell them with minimal loss after you will realize, what here isn't big difference between $200 RF camera and $40 one.

narsuitus · Oct 31, 2014

Kirks518 said:
What's your favorite $200+/- Rangefinder?

The Leica MP falls within your price range (i.e. more than $200) and is my personal favorite.

Paul Howell · Oct 31, 2014

I have both the Canon QL17 III which I like and take with me as a back up camera, great lens, easy to use. I have a Retina IIIC for going on 45 years, still works, meter is still spot on, very good lens, but so different to use that over the years I use it less and less.
In the past I have had Leica IIIG and 7S, which I still had the 7s. I am saving for Konica M, I know it is overpriced but the matched lens are excellent and as a built in film advance.

Dismayed · Oct 31, 2014

There isn't a rangefinder in the $200 range that I like. Keep saving and buy a Nikon S2.

What's your favorite $200+/- Rangefinder?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency