Why are rangefinders so expensive?

[msage]

They are not, sorta.
A new LeciaM7 is $4400, a Canon 1Ds III is $6500.

About 6 or 7 years ago, I picked up a Pentax K1000 manual SLR in tip-top condition, with lens, and fully serviced, for about $300 Canadian from a local camera repair shop. Recently, I thought it'd be fun to add a rangefinder camera to my arsenal, but I'm discouraged by the prices I've been seeing. Leicas are out of the question; this is just a hobby and no 35mm still camera is worth that kind of money to me. Someone suggested some of the Voigtlander rangemasters might be good "entry-level" models, but from what I've seen, even those are quite expensive ($800 and up). The old Soviet cameras I've seen on eBay and elsewhere seem reasonably priced, but as some have put it, buying one of these is a bit like playing "Russian roulette"; you may get a good one, or you may not.

Why are rangefinder cameras so much more expensive than SLRs? It's counterintuitive to me, since the rangefinders seem mechanically simpler than SLRs. Is there a rangefinder equivalent to the Pentax K1000?

 

[Mark Antony]

About 6 or 7 years ago, I picked up a Pentax K1000 manual SLR in tip-top condition, with lens, and fully serviced, for about $300 Canadian from a local camera repair shop.

Is there a rangefinder equivalent to the Pentax K1000?

If you want a 1960s RF why not try a Canon RF:
http://cameraquest.com/canonp.htm

or a Canon 7
http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/index-frameset.html?Canon7.html~mainFrame

They come up on evil bay every so often for the sort of money you're talking about, and probably cheaper than the overpriced K1000 and will take Leica screw lenses

here:
http://cgi.ebay.com/Canon-P-Rfdr-Ca...2302af0819&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14#ht_547wt_1167

Also RFs come in other formats like this Fuji:
http://photo-utopia.blogspot.com/2008/02/fuji-6x7-range-finder.html
or possibly a 1950's Zeiss super Ikonta:
http://www.cameraquest.com/zikontc.htm

Lots of choices considering RFs were a small part of the market compared to SLRs

Mark

 

[Igor_P]

Thanks for the suggestions everyone. I'm confident that I'll find something I'll be happy with with all the leads I've been given in this thread.

 

[colrehogan]

An Argus C3 (or probably any Argus cameras) are good little rangefinders. I've only had experience with the C3. I'm surprised no one mentioned them before now.

 

[stealthman_1]

The great thing about Leicas is they really are never actually out of the question. a very nice IIIf can be bought for less than some of the new Bessa RFs. Yep, you'll be limited to LTM lenses, but it's not like that's a terrible sacrifice...and for the most part they are not expensive either. Made for Velvia...no, but that's really not the point.
If you are going to consider the Argus C3 route and you don't want it by this weekend, save a search on the evil auction site for an Argus C33 and be much better off. Sure you'll pay...maybe $100 vs. $25, but you get interchangeable lenses (though you'll have to wait for them to come up), an integrated viewfinder/RF unit, that...committing sacrilege here...is nearly the equivalent of an M3, and an integral (well it doesn't go on the hot shoe) lightmeter that, incredibly enough, may still work. I love my C3s but, the C33 really is a technological wonder...of a brick!

 

[nuckabean]

What about canon RFs? I see Canon 7's sell for as low as 150 sometimes on rangefinderforum. Those classifieds are a great resource.

 

[elekm]

There are many, many different rangefinder models, from fixed lens to interchangeable lens to those targeted at novices, amateurs, advanced amateurs, professionals and nearly everything in between.

The trick is to find the one that works best for you.

For one thing, the sun doesn't rise and set with Leica, Canon or Nikon -- or even Zeiss Ikon (it pains me to say that).

There are other systems: Voigtlander Prominent (not a fan of this camera), Voigtlander Vitessa (great lenses), Kodak Retina IIIS (excellent and affordable), Braun Paxette (lower end camera), Foca (French rangefinder system), Carl Zeiss Jena Werra (unique body with excellent build) and the aforementioned Agfa Ambi Silette. On the U.S. side in affordability is the Kodak Signet 80 with three lenses and a somewhat funky, boxy body. Someone already has mentioned the Argus. Both are very inexpensive -- often less than $50.

As always, it depends on your budget. Most of the European cameras that I mentioned above sell for less than $200 and generally between $100 and $170.

Buyers of the Nikon S rangefinders are split between photographers and collectors, who often are willing to pay exorbitant prices ($5,000 lens shade) for what most of us consider to be normal accessories. The overall effect of collectors has pushed up the prices for Nikon rangefinders, lenses and accessories. Some Nikons will need to have new shutter curtains (pinholes are common).

A Leica screw-mount camera is an excellent camera, but not without its shortcomings: Two windows -- one for focusing and another for composing; a finicky bottom-loading system that works best when you trim the leader (some will take issue with this statement).

The Zeiss Ikon Contax usually needs to be overhauled, because most were used as cameras and not simply played with in a nearly inappropriate manner. They are well made but not nearly as svelte as the Leica (the Contax IIa comes close).

I don't know enough about the Canons to criticize them, other than to note that one author said that those bodies with metal curtains will sometimes have wrinkled curtains, which doesn't affect their operation. The early Canons were pretty much Leica ripoffs -- visually and mechanically. I owned one of these. It was a decent camera.

 

[imush]

My favorite fixed lens rangefinder is a Voigtlander Vitessa with fixed 50/2.0 Ultron. It has an excellent lens (here are my pictures to show off). I got mine at a garage sale accidentally for about $25.

You can often find a working specimen with clean lens for less than $200 on eBay (less than that with 50/2.8 Color-Skopar), but be careful to make sure that the rangefinder functions. It has a tricky design and few repair shops have parts and know how to fix it. Otherwise the camera is Voigtlanders' masterpiece of all time.

Cheaper but also very good old Japanese fixed lens rangefinders by Konica, Yashica or Canon can be found for $50 or less.

 

[JohnRichard]

Why not go Russian? There is a complete website dedicated to the Russian Rangefinder family. http://www.ussrphoto.com

Ok well it's not dedicated to Rangefinders, but still... its the best your gonna get in that regards.

Also, I just picked up a Yashica Electro 35 for $10 at the Flea Market. Works and everything!

You don't have to buy a Leica...

 

[sangetsu]

Ditto on the old Russian cameras. I picked up an old Zorki 1C with a lens for less than what a replacement film spool would cost for an old Leica. It's as smooth and quiet (not kidding) as a Leica II, and the quality of the images I get from it is amazing.

 

[goamules]

I second the Voigtlander Vitessa with the Ultron lens. And I had a Yashica Electro that took nice pictures too. You can get a rangefinder from 20-300 dollars quite easily.

 

[paradoxbox]

i picked up a konica c35 for 10$ on auction. in perfect condition besides the light meter wire which needed to be resoldered. works fine now with a new battery that cost me 50 cents

 

[elekm]

I like the smaller-bodied fixed-lens rangefinders.

Among the Japanese, I've owned the Konica C35 Automatic (very nice little camera) and Olympus 35 RC (has fully manual operation as well as automatic exposure). The Canons and Minoltas are popular and have roughly the same features as the Konica. Oddly enough, Nikon never joined in this category of cameras.

With the Japanese cameras, they tended to copy each other with Olympus often going its own way: Olympus Wide-S, 35 RC, Pen, Pen F, OM-1, Four-Thirds, etc.

There's also a Petri f/1.9. Well-built, all manual camera without a meter. I'm not sure it has a model name, but it says "Color Corrected" on the front of the camera.

And there are the various Yashica models, but I'm not well-versed in those.

Among my favorites are the Zeiss Ikon Contessas: folding and early rigid models.

The Voigtlander Vito IIb is a cute little camera although heavy (prolific use of metal).

And the folding Agfa Super Solinette and rigid Super Silette are both very nice cameras, as is the Karat IV.

For sure, there are plenty of cameras, and most are available for a reasonable amount.

 

[Sirius Glass]

The Voigtlander Vito IIb is a cute little camera although heavy (prolific use of metal).

My first 35mm camera. I shot lots of slides with it. Technically it is not a rangefinder camera. I added a flash mounting shoe to the camera and a rangefinder slide into the mount.

Steve

 

[kennethcooke]

It could have something to do with the volume of sales. I am sure SLRs are by far bigger volume sellers than rangefinder cameras. I guess a similar analogy might be why is a Ferrari so much more expensive than say an Audi R8. I hope I have got my car models right here but the reason is that if a manufacturer only sells limited quantity the R&D and engineering and tooling set up have to be shared amongst a limited number of units

 

[jeffreyg]

I have a Contax TVS. It has a fixed lens but can be used manually including focusing and f-stop control or program. It fits in a pocket and comes in handy although I use MF and LF sometimes it is very useful.

 

[Pumal]

I have 5 Rangefinders; all cheap and great: Yashica Lynx 14 e IC with an f/1.4 lens, Yashica Minister III with a Yashinon f/2.8, Yashica Electro 35 GSN with a Yashinon DX 1:1.7 f=45mm, Yashica MG-1 with a Yashinon 45mm 1:2.8 and a Minolta Himatic 7 with a Rokkor-PF 1:1.8 f=45mm

 

[elekm]

My first 35mm camera. I shot lots of slides with it. Technically it is not a rangefinder camera. I added a flash mounting shoe to the camera and a rangefinder slide into the mount.

Steve

You're correct. I was thinking of the Vitomatic IIb -- a different camera.

 

[Perry Way]

.....There are of course also some less rational factors affecting the price of certain RFs... suffice it to say that a camera is worth what people will pay for it. That's just the way the market works.....

That's actually the most rational reason; supply and demand. There are no camera laws declaring their "should be" value and no camera cops who's duty it is to ensure that everyone abides by those laws.

 

[elekm]

I do seem to notice that camera prices rise and fall, sometimes apparently for no reason. One example: Retina IIa (lever wind).

For several years, this camera had been selling in the $75-$90 range. Earlier this year, the price dropped to an average of $50-$75. I haven't looked lately, but from what others have said, the price still seems to be down a bit.

I agree -- supply and demand mean a lot, but sometimes rational thought gets tossed out the window. More recently, I notice that some Canon QL rangefinders are selling for $200 and more. It's essentially no different than its competitors, and therefore there's no reason to pay those kind of prices. It's a $40 camera.

 

[Perry Way]

My favorite fixed lens rangefinder is a Voigtlander Vitessa with fixed 50/2.0 Ultron. It has an excellent lens (here are my pictures to show off). I got mine at a garage sale accidentally for about $25.

I love the bokeh on that lens!

 

[Perry Way]

Well if the OP is still searching for a good quality rangefinder, I know someone local to me who offered me his Minolta Hi-matic for dirt cheep ($100) including a bunch of other little goodies from a bygone era. I did buy an old Seconic light meter from him though, the old battery-less selenium cell ones that still works. I am using it often lately. Anyway back to the camear, it is basically sound and in very good condition. The rangefinder still works excellently. I seem to recall it came with the case too. And I think it had a fixed lens but I could be wrong on that. And my memory is 40 mm in that vicinity.. maybe 38 mm? The meter was not working but I believe those are all selenium meters from those times and I don't believe its a matter of changing the battery, but for that price someone might be able to justify the expense to have a camera repairman replace the selenium cell. I believe that is all that would be required to have the meter functioning again. Anyway, if the OP wants, I'd be happy to put the two of them in contact with each other. It was a nice camera. I just have too many 35 mm's already and it's not really my preferred film size.

 

[Joe Grodis]

Rangefinders are simply fun to collect and seem to last indefinitely. I've been collecting rangefinders for 30 years and people that love them are in the "Cult" of rangefinders. The zorki's are fun but have widely varying build quality. Of all the rangefinders I have (40+) the Retina IIA as AgentX pointed out is an amazing camera that still turns out excellent work. The Retina IIa (type015) is nice but most used ones you'll find will have gumed up shutter blades and will need a good CLA. If you can't find a Retina try a Zorki-5 with a Jupiter-8 lens which I use more than the rest.

-Joe

 

[michaelbsc]

How easy is it to get RF's -- either the Russian ones or the fixed-lens ones from the 70's -- fixed? I know a few shops that will fix just about any 35mm SLR you can bring in, but they won't touch RF's.

If you're in the US, or I suppose anywhere else, you can look Edward Smolov in Brooklyn. He's from the Ukraine, does excellent work inexpensively working from his apartment, and he won't rip you off. He's easy to find with Google. (Caution, if you are a US Southern country boy like me his accent takes a few minutes to decipher.)

He's done work on a number of cameras for me, including 3 FEDs and two Kiev 4 Russian rangefinders. All work flawlessly. I've also had him repair several 'bargain' lenses, and a number of other mechanical Japanese and German cameras. He doesn't like electronics.

All in all, you can pick up a very marginal Russian example and get him to go through it for less money than you can buy a 'perfect' specimen.

Eddy is a mechanic, not a museum curator. So you get a completely functional and mechanically sound camera, but there's no polishing the chrome to a high luster and decorative color leatherette replacement. It comes back clean and functional, but if it was humble when you sent it, then it's still humble when it comes back.

If you're in Europe there are a number of other folks who do work there that are probably a better fit for you. I can't say much about Asia. I don't have any experience with them.

I have a '50s FED with a collapsible Industar that I'll take head to head with a '40s Leica/Elmar. No, mine is not "better" than the Leica/Elmar, but it costs 1/10 the money. And you'll need a loupe to see the difference in an 8x10 enlargement. That's good enough for me. Nobody looks at my pictures with a loupe anyway. At least nobody in their right mind.

MB

 

[WarEaglemtn]

A few years ago someone did a study of the cost of cameras. Leica was compared to inexpensive 35mm cameras and over the life of the Leica the cost was much less than the great number of inexpensive cameras one would have purchased to last that long.
Leica M series was a good investment for the quality and you bought once, not 24 times or so over the years.
You get what you pay for.