Your first rangefinder ... would you buy it again?

darkosaric · Jan 19, 2018

Ko.Fe. said:
You are lucky one!

Yes. M6 and IIIf I got from Leica store - with warranty, M1 I got in another local store with warranty (slow shutter speeds are not ok, but I don't care, using it as it is - it was cheap, did not want to give it back).
Only M3 I got from not verified source - but I was lucky there as well.

If they all go bad (I doubt it) - I will get myself new MP, and then I am set up for a lifetime.

SilverShutter · Jan 19, 2018

blockend said:
Yashica Minister D, maybe not. Leica M5, yes. Kiev 4A, definitely.

Ha, another Minister D here, but I never really bought it, it was gathering dust in a shelf. Wouldn't pay too much for one of them, but I like the camera, the lens and espcially that silent Copal shutter.

Patrick Robert James · Jan 19, 2018

My first RF was a Contax II with a collapsible Sonnar. I wish I never sold it. I have had a bunch of different RFs since then, and never had a bad one. Zorkis, Canons, Leicas, Yashicas, Minoltas, blablabla. All good. The Contax was nice though. I have a little 2x3 image hanging over my desk I took with it of my father's garden. I think it was on the first roll of film testing the camera. I'll get another Contax one day. I had that thing down to a science. I could do the ol' double wrist twist and advance the film in a split second.

blockend · Jan 19, 2018

SilverShutter said:
Ha, another Minister D here, but I never really bought it, it was gathering dust in a shelf. Wouldn't pay too much for one of them, but I like the camera, the lens and espcially that silent Copal shutter.

Yeah it wasn't a bad camera, it just died one day. I believe Yashica rangefinders of the era suffered from something called the pad of death. Can't remember what that involved but it's on the web somewhere. I quite like Yashica cameras and have about 6 SLR lenses.

Ko.Fe. · Jan 20, 2018

darkosaric said:
Yes. M6 and IIIf I got from Leica store - with warranty, M1 I got in another local store with warranty (slow shutter speeds are not ok, but I don't care, using it as it is - it was cheap, did not want to give it back).
Only M3 I got from not verified source - but I was lucky there as well.

If they all go bad (I doubt it) - I will get myself new MP, and then I am set up for a lifetime.

I see! It was no luck but thoughtful decision. Leica store product with warranty! Way to go and win. I'm just bottom feeder, for luck pusher. And it only really worked with M3, but I never really needed it with 50 frames only...

darkosaric · Jan 20, 2018

Ko.Fe. said:
I see! It was no luck but thoughtful decision. Leica store product with warranty! Way to go and win. I'm just bottom feeder, for luck pusher. And it only really worked with M3, but I never really needed it with 50 frames only...

I really like those Leica stores (in Hamburg and in Berlin) - many used equipment, with fair prices for used Leica's, and with warranty:
http://meister-camera.com/
And the second store is:
https://www.photohaus.de/
Also many stuff I got there - those 2 stores are my top recommendation.

Stefan Gonzalevski · Jan 20, 2018

I had a Leica CL once. I never could get used to rangefinder system. I like to see what I shoot. Then if I need a small 35mm, I rather use my Pentax ME.

Even if Leica, Canonet and others look very cool from outside and are nice pieces of engineering.

albada · Jan 20, 2018

blockend said:
Yeah it wasn't a bad camera, it just died one day. I believe Yashica rangefinders of the era suffered from something called the pad of death. Can't remember what that involved but it's on the web somewhere. I quite like Yashica cameras and have about 6 SLR lenses.

The Yashica Minister series do not have that pad-of-death problem, which is specific to the Electro 35 models.
I like the Yashica rangefinders from the 60's, but I've avoided the Electro models because they are auto-only and need a battery.

Mark Overton

wjlapier · Jan 21, 2018

Dead Link Removed

Buy and sell was my motto back in the day. Not to make money just being stupid. My first rangefinder was a Leica M3. Potential buyers avoided it because it looked like a big dent in the top plate. Seller assured me there was no dent. Sold the 35 Summaron that was attached to the camera and the thing cost me $500 net. It arrived in mint condition and worked great for several years. Long story short, I sold it. Most reliable Leica I ever had.

Marco Gilardetti · Jan 25, 2018

Although many people like rangefinder cameras, of course with their own good reasons, they never really appealed to me just for the fact itself that they are "rangefinders". The few indisputable "pro" points that they have over single lens reflexes are seemingly not really important for my photography: I prefer single lens reflex cameras by far.

So, when I decided to purchase a rangefinder, it was a weighted decision that had specific reasons. I wanted to own a 6x9 rollfilm camera, the largest format that I consider truly portable and handy on top of the Alps. For space reasons in the backpack, it had to be of the folding type, or I would have had to leave it at home most of the times anyway. Unfortunately, already a dozen years ago, nobody made this type of camera anymore; so I carefully went through literature in order to select a quality camera that was affordable, truly available on the used market, and reasonably dependable. In the end I selected the Zeiss Ikon Super Ikonta 531/2.

Having it been purchased after such premises, perhaps it's not suprising that I would buy again my first rangefinder. Actually, I have bought it again three times, each time upgrading the previous one with a more recent or improved lens. As a matter of fact, 531/2s come with a variety of lens and shutter combinations, some of which are uncommon, expensive and hard to find in good shape and "ready to go conditions". It has proven to be a good choice indeed. The only camera with which I would possibly replace the 531/2 is a Voigtlander Bessa III, should ever Cosina decide to expand it to 6x9 format, which however I believe will never happen, unfortunately.

Dead Link Removed

cooltouch · Jan 25, 2018

That's a beautiful Super Ikonta C, Marco. I can't tell from the photo -- does it have a Compur Rapid or Synchro Compur shutter? I have a BX with the coated lens and Synchro Compur. I love it. But I'd love to get a nice "C" someday.

My first rangefinder was a Canon IVSb that I bought from a pawn shop. It had a Kyoei Super Acall 135mm f/3.5 attached to it. The set cost me $75. That was back in 1982 or 1983. Like a fool, I sold it several years later. Well, I started getting the itch for another, and a found a IIIa on eBay for a lot more than $75, but it came with a nice Serenar 50/1.8, so I couldn't complain. The only difference between the IVSb and the IIIa is the flash rail. The IVSb has it, whereas the IIIa does not. But in answer to the OP's questions, hell yes, I'd get another one. Already did, in fact.

This is a pic of the IIIa. You'll note it has no flash rail on the side, so that tells you it isn't a IVSb. But this camera had a flash sync installed after purchase. You see that plate with the two pc connectors on the front of the camera? It has connectors for bulb and X-sync flash. The flash sync was added some time at or after the time of sale.

Marco Gilardetti · Jan 26, 2018

Hello Michael! The one in picture has a Compur Rapid; it was my second Super Ikonta. Last year I have (very reluctantly) replaced it with a Synchro Compur unit. To be frank I didn't really care about the shutter, and I figure I will never have the chance to use it with a flash: I replaced it only because the new camera came with a "red T" Tessar lens. Aesthetics are a little bit less good than the one you see in picture, but I had to come to terms with that as "red T" Tessars are hard to find and "mint" units sell for insane prices (to the point that I really wonder if it's true that there wouldn't be a market for a replica).
Had you asked any advice (I know you didn't! ) I would suggest that you begin with a 531/2 equipped with a Novar Anastigmat. Despite not being a Tessar it is an excellent lens nonetheless, and the camera comes with a galileian (non-albada) finder which is waaay less prone to be problematic. These cameras are significantly cheaper than Tessars' but they have quite the same quality. It will give you the opportunity to understand if you're in touch with this camera and if you will be going to use it often; then eventually you will upgrade it later (although, as said, there isn't really much to be upgraded). The only thing you would miss is the opportunity to reduce the frame to 4,5x6, but frankly I never really used the reducing mask as it basically turns the camera in a portrait-specialised unit, and I have other cameras with which taking a portrait is much more practical than with this.

Your Canon looks in terrific conditions too. What a beautiful camera. Yes it's funny how sometimes we sell something and then perhaps years later we realise it was not a good move, and re-purchase what we already got! I haven't really done that so far, but I am indeed tempted to re-purchase a Helios 85mm lens that I owned 20-something years ago and couldn't get in touch with at the time. There was very little information available about these things 20 years ago, and it could happen quite easily that you misused specialty lenses.

Theo Sulphate · Jan 26, 2018

wjlapier said:
Dead Link Removed

What is that? A black Leica M3 "Panda" of some sort?

Looks good.

Stefan Gonzalevski · Jan 26, 2018

Hello !

Thank you for your post, Marco. I didn't realize that rangefinder included these type of cameras !
Funny that I was thinking to buy a similar camera lately.

My grand mother gave me my grand father one when he passed away, some years ago, a french Manufrance Luminor built around 1935. It works perfectly but I consider it more as a souvenir than a usable camera.

So, I thought to buy a "new" one, and your advice come at the right time !

Marco Gilardetti · Jan 26, 2018

Thank you Stefan, I'm glad to have given "unrequested advice" then!

You can also consider a Voigtlander Bessa II with Heliar lens. The two cameras were rivals at their time, and they perform quite the same way. (Quite amazingly, later the two companies joined their efforts in the Zeiss-Ikon-Voigtlander society). I am currently also considering to buy a "Voigt" in order to alternate the two cameras and reduce wear.

cooltouch · Jan 26, 2018

Marco Gilardetti said:
Had you asked any advice (I know you didn't! ) I would suggest that you begin with a 531/2 equipped with a Novar Anastigmat. Despite not being a Tessar it is an excellent lens nonetheless, and the camera comes with a galileian (non-albada) finder which is waaay less prone to be problematic. These cameras are significantly cheaper than Tessars' but they have quite the same quality. It will give you the opportunity to understand if you're in touch with this camera and if you will be going to use it often; then eventually you will upgrade it later (although, as said, there isn't really much to be upgraded). The only thing you would miss is the opportunity to reduce the frame to 4,5x6, but frankly I never really used the reducing mask as it basically turns the camera in a portrait-specialised unit, and I have other cameras with which taking a portrait is much more practical than with this.

Hey Marco, thanks for your response. Actually, ever since I let a Super Ikonta B slip with the coated lens and Synchro Compur shutter slip through my fingers a couple of decades ago, I had been on a quest to get another. I had collected a couple of other very good 6x6 folders along the way, but they just weren't the same. Finally, last year, I fell into a fantastic deal on a BX with the coated lens and Synchro Compur. It's in amazingly good condition, came with a case AND the original instructions! But that didn't do away with my desire for a good 6x9. For me, a Super Ikonta C with a Compur Rapid would be good enough, as long as it was one of the late ones that had X-sync. It is that feature which is why I prefer the Synchro Compur over the earlier models. But it seems like any of the nice later model ones these days cost almost as much as a Hasselblad. Well, that's a bit of an exaggeration, but not by much. So I did the next best thing, and bought a Moskva 6x9. I ended up getting a model "5", which has been restyled It looks something like a stretched Super Ikonta III or IV. Anyway, my Moskva is a bit rough cosmetically and kinda crude mechanically. And I have to make sure the right rail locks down when I open it up. But the lens is haze and fungus free, the shutter works fine, and the bellows are light tight. And I tell you what, that lens ain't half bad. I've taken some nice pics with it so far. So my itch for a SI "C" has been -- for the moment -- satisfied. I would like to eventually have clean examples of the A, B and C to go along with my BX.

Glad you like the looks of my Canon IIIa. I actually prefer this model over the IVSb because it doesn't have the useless flash rail. But from what I learned just recently, the one to get from this era is the IVSb2 -- useless flash rail and all. It has an improved rangefinder/viewfinder -- a larger opening from what I understand. Given how squinty-tiny the viewfinders are with this series, that can be a welcome upgrade. Also the slow speed dial starts at 1/30 (the IVSb starts at 1/25).

wjlapier · Jan 26, 2018

Theo Sulphate said:
What is that? A black Leica M3 "Panda" of some sort?

Looks good.

Anti-Panda. The best working M I've ever owned which has been many. Huge regret selling it.

John Earley · Feb 22, 2018

First rangefinder was a nearly mint-in-box Olympus RC that I bought 22 years ago at a yard sale for $15. My son needed a camera for his HS photo class and he made some very nice photos with it. Four years later his brother took it to school for the same class and someone stole it the first day. I let him use my Nikkormat FTn instead and fortunately he took better care of it.
Would I buy it again? Yes, I've been looking for one at a good price in nice shape but unfortunately the nice ones have gone up in price.

Mainecoonmaniac · Feb 22, 2018

My first rangefinder I still have. My wife gave me her dad's old Zeiss Super Ikonta IV. Knowing what I know about it, it'd but it again for these reasons. Overall, a great camera.

1. High quality lens.
2. Compact.
3. Shoots 120 film.
4. A accurate non coupled selenium meter.

Jim McLean · Feb 22, 2018

My first rangefinder was a Leica M3 with nice clean 35mmf2 summicron I picked up for $12 at a flea market in Southern PA last summer. The leather strap was worn and I thought- ugh- I really want a strap that is in good shape- not some worn down old 60 year old dribble like this one. So I told the booth guy I’ll give you $9 considering the garbage strap. He agreed but I was still convinced I was getting robbed. After I removed the filter- I think it was a Helio something-I saw dust particles on the front element. dust!!! Oh- and worse—Cleaning marks from the previous idiot that owned this garbage. So I sent it up for a clad?? Everyone says you need a clad ever 3 months on these old tanks. So I sent mine up to this nice Jap fellow in Boston. I paid $190 to clean a $9 camera- cripples. So I get my camera back and it looks exactly the same. But I think it’s going to really do better now that it’s worth $199. So I went out with some expired film and shot my usual, bike racks, depth of field fence shots, a few cats, some foliage, and of course some close up flowers to test the bokahh. I posted some shots on my flickr group-random vintage film shots. Anyone still on here-or did everyone leave in 2013.

blockend · Feb 23, 2018

Jim McLean said:
So I went out with some expired film and shot my usual, bike racks, depth of field fence shots, a few cats, some foliage, and of course some close up flowers to test the bokahh.

I appreciate your sense of humour, but it'll be lost on many hereabouts.

Theo Sulphate · Feb 23, 2018

Well, a 35mm lens on an M3 needs the clip-on finder or separate viewfinder for proper framing. So, he should've paid only $5 tops.

Scott Micciche · Feb 23, 2018

blockend said:
I appreciate your sense of humour, but it'll be lost on many hereabouts.

Not lost, but rather ignored.

Kodachromeguy · Feb 23, 2018

blockend said:
I appreciate your sense of humour, but it'll be lost on many hereabouts.

This would have gone over as serious material at Dpreview, where the "photographers" really do blather over bokeh, sharpness of cat hairs, depth of field, and whatever it takes to justify their recent purchases of the latest and greatest. Or, whatever it takes to cut down any brand that is not the one they are using this week.

cooltouch · Feb 24, 2018

They do tend to pick at nits over there, don't they?

Your first rangefinder ... would you buy it again?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency