rolleistef
Well-known
Hello all,
I'm looking for a reliable camera now I have experience the great FSUrf thrill (californian photography?), and I'm thinking about buying a yashica RF. Would you rather take a Lynx, with its stepless, automated shutter, or a Lynx for its mechanical shutter and the possibility of an 1.4 aperture for the Lynx 14? (or even a Canonet? or any portable compact RF)
Thanks for your advices!
Stéphane
I'm looking for a reliable camera now I have experience the great FSUrf thrill (californian photography?), and I'm thinking about buying a yashica RF. Would you rather take a Lynx, with its stepless, automated shutter, or a Lynx for its mechanical shutter and the possibility of an 1.4 aperture for the Lynx 14? (or even a Canonet? or any portable compact RF)
Thanks for your advices!
Stéphane
Last edited:
kzim56
Karl Zimmerman
I have both and tend to use the Lynx 5000 more. I like the build quality and the fact that it's metered manual. You can't go wrong with either. I had a Lynx 14 but it was too big and heavy. Not compact by any means.
Karl
Karl
oftheherd
Veteran
I am sure I am telling you what you already know:
First, I don't own any of those cameras except the Canonet. Fixed lens RF's are usually chosen for their size. The Lynx with the f/1.4 lens is not apprantly not in that category. The only other reasons for the fixed lens RF (IMHO) are convenience in that most are completely automatic in exposure control and fairly fast to use as far as rf focus. Also with wide lenses, focus isn't quite as critical. If your style of photography requires the f/1.4, by all means go for it. If not, why get something that is bigger and heavier than you may wish to carry and use?
All the Yashicas get rave reviews here in the forums from those who have them. Same with the Canonets. Especially the III17. I also have that one and can vouch that it is small and fun to carry and use. YMMV.
First, I don't own any of those cameras except the Canonet. Fixed lens RF's are usually chosen for their size. The Lynx with the f/1.4 lens is not apprantly not in that category. The only other reasons for the fixed lens RF (IMHO) are convenience in that most are completely automatic in exposure control and fairly fast to use as far as rf focus. Also with wide lenses, focus isn't quite as critical. If your style of photography requires the f/1.4, by all means go for it. If not, why get something that is bigger and heavier than you may wish to carry and use?
All the Yashicas get rave reviews here in the forums from those who have them. Same with the Canonets. Especially the III17. I also have that one and can vouch that it is small and fun to carry and use. YMMV.
P
pshinkaw
Guest
The Lynx-14 series, Lynx 5000 series and Minister series do not require batteries to fully operate the shutter. However, the CdS cell cameras require a battery to operate only the meter.
The biggest functional difference between these models is the lens, the Lynx-14 has an f1.4 lens, the Lynx 5000 has an f1.7 lens, the Minister D has an f2.8 lens and the very hard to find Minister 700 has an f1.7 lens.
The Electro series does require a battery to get full shutter functionality plus the metering. Howevere it is very forgiving as to battery voltage and so an adapter is easy to make.
-Paul
The biggest functional difference between these models is the lens, the Lynx-14 has an f1.4 lens, the Lynx 5000 has an f1.7 lens, the Minister D has an f2.8 lens and the very hard to find Minister 700 has an f1.7 lens.
The Electro series does require a battery to get full shutter functionality plus the metering. Howevere it is very forgiving as to battery voltage and so an adapter is easy to make.
-Paul
NickTrop
Veteran
Partial to the Lynx over the GSN personally but I love both cameras and use both often. That said, I would go with the GSN first time out. The Lynx is more of an acquired taste due to its size. With the Lynx you get a "very good" f1.4 lens. With the GSN you get a great 1.7.
IMO true 1.4's behave differently than "F2-ish" 50 mm lenses. They're in their sweet spot between f2.8 and F4. Though you have an f1.4 the depth of field is shallow, contrast attenuates at this aperture, and resolution is considerably lower. Between the range specified, all the above are acceptable and you'll get the best "3D" pop with good bokeh (the Lynx has good bokeh but not the best... certainly fine) and the Lynx 1.4 is surprisingly sharp. The lens is flare prone outdoors in the sun, you'll need a hood, and the hood will cut into the lower right of the viewfinder quite a bit. This doesn't bother me a bit, but some it will drive nuts.
The 1.7 on the GSN behaves more like a normal 50 and is a higher contrast lens. It's at its best at f5.6-f8 and has the capability of producing sharper images due to this. Some say the lens on the GSN is "legendary" - dunno about that but it's a damned good "standard" lens. (Both lenses are 45mm but I conserder them in the "standard" focal length range. Most fixed lens RFs are semi-wides in the 40mm range) Flare is better managed and the lens and camera is considerably lighter though both camera bodies are the exact same size. (Yes, they are!)
That said, love the Lynx 14 for its faster lens and all manual controls. It's great to have this fast a lens on a fixed lens leaf shutter RF. But, if I were to recommend a camera, I would recommend the GSN over the Lynx. The Lynx - due to its heft and the quirks of its flarey f1.4 lens, is an acquired taste.
IMO true 1.4's behave differently than "F2-ish" 50 mm lenses. They're in their sweet spot between f2.8 and F4. Though you have an f1.4 the depth of field is shallow, contrast attenuates at this aperture, and resolution is considerably lower. Between the range specified, all the above are acceptable and you'll get the best "3D" pop with good bokeh (the Lynx has good bokeh but not the best... certainly fine) and the Lynx 1.4 is surprisingly sharp. The lens is flare prone outdoors in the sun, you'll need a hood, and the hood will cut into the lower right of the viewfinder quite a bit. This doesn't bother me a bit, but some it will drive nuts.
The 1.7 on the GSN behaves more like a normal 50 and is a higher contrast lens. It's at its best at f5.6-f8 and has the capability of producing sharper images due to this. Some say the lens on the GSN is "legendary" - dunno about that but it's a damned good "standard" lens. (Both lenses are 45mm but I conserder them in the "standard" focal length range. Most fixed lens RFs are semi-wides in the 40mm range) Flare is better managed and the lens and camera is considerably lighter though both camera bodies are the exact same size. (Yes, they are!)
That said, love the Lynx 14 for its faster lens and all manual controls. It's great to have this fast a lens on a fixed lens leaf shutter RF. But, if I were to recommend a camera, I would recommend the GSN over the Lynx. The Lynx - due to its heft and the quirks of its flarey f1.4 lens, is an acquired taste.
R
ruben
Guest
Hi Stephane,
With exeption of the Lynx 5000, I do have all your mentioned models, and you are asking a very difficult question. There is the issue of convenience, vs the issue of personal attraction. Within the issue of convenience, there is a question of convenience for what.
If you are on the wagon of ISO 1600 and low light without flash, then the Lynx 14 (it has two versions sligthly different), is the one. They are rather big and heavy. Now let's not be hysterical on the latter as there is no much reason. But certainly it is not a pocketable you will carry daily.
The GSN are a celebrity for great lens, great auto exposure, perhaps world record on silent shutter, great viewfinder and yellow patch. Although there is no manual override like in Lynx, and they are slightly smaller and lighter than the Lynx 14.
Now there is a somehow disdained Lynx 1000 which attracts me a lot. It is quite smaller than the GSN, fully manual, f/22 and 1/1000 !. Besides it has another great feature of great appeal to me, perhaps the world record in short firing release. Built in there is a sellenium meter that usually works within daylight. The general feeling it gives me is great quality. Yet beware specially from stiff distance rings, besides all other things you know.
Finally we arrive to the Canonet QL GIII. What can I say if not that it is the most featured camera, BY FAR, being the smallest among all I mentioned. It doesn't attract me specially, but is the one I am using until I fix my Kievs. No doubt, in terms of general convenience, for the general photographer, with general likes, the Canonets are the most convenient.
I will leave to others the long discourse of the many features of the
Canonets.
Now, Stephane, Nick has touched something to be taken into account, although I cannot put it in objective grounds. All mentioned Yashicas are 45mm lens. I feel a non-mathematical difference between 40mm lens and a 45, making the 45 very much alike the 50mm lens.
Continuing with the same, the 40mm lens and view is not alike the 35mm, but a cathegory by itself. But of course there is no bible in which it is written the 40mm is better. The fact is that had I a soft distance ring at my Lynx 1000, I would be using it despite the 45mm stuff, instead of the 40mm Canonet. A pure personal preference of attraction over objective convenience.
Cheers,
Ruben
With exeption of the Lynx 5000, I do have all your mentioned models, and you are asking a very difficult question. There is the issue of convenience, vs the issue of personal attraction. Within the issue of convenience, there is a question of convenience for what.
If you are on the wagon of ISO 1600 and low light without flash, then the Lynx 14 (it has two versions sligthly different), is the one. They are rather big and heavy. Now let's not be hysterical on the latter as there is no much reason. But certainly it is not a pocketable you will carry daily.
The GSN are a celebrity for great lens, great auto exposure, perhaps world record on silent shutter, great viewfinder and yellow patch. Although there is no manual override like in Lynx, and they are slightly smaller and lighter than the Lynx 14.
Now there is a somehow disdained Lynx 1000 which attracts me a lot. It is quite smaller than the GSN, fully manual, f/22 and 1/1000 !. Besides it has another great feature of great appeal to me, perhaps the world record in short firing release. Built in there is a sellenium meter that usually works within daylight. The general feeling it gives me is great quality. Yet beware specially from stiff distance rings, besides all other things you know.
Finally we arrive to the Canonet QL GIII. What can I say if not that it is the most featured camera, BY FAR, being the smallest among all I mentioned. It doesn't attract me specially, but is the one I am using until I fix my Kievs. No doubt, in terms of general convenience, for the general photographer, with general likes, the Canonets are the most convenient.
I will leave to others the long discourse of the many features of the
Canonets.
Now, Stephane, Nick has touched something to be taken into account, although I cannot put it in objective grounds. All mentioned Yashicas are 45mm lens. I feel a non-mathematical difference between 40mm lens and a 45, making the 45 very much alike the 50mm lens.
Continuing with the same, the 40mm lens and view is not alike the 35mm, but a cathegory by itself. But of course there is no bible in which it is written the 40mm is better. The fact is that had I a soft distance ring at my Lynx 1000, I would be using it despite the 45mm stuff, instead of the 40mm Canonet. A pure personal preference of attraction over objective convenience.
Cheers,
Ruben
Last edited by a moderator:
rolleistef
Well-known
Ok, I think I'll go for a Lynx 5000 since it's the most pocketable. I was thinking of a GSN for its AE feature, since I may not be the only user... anyway, I'll go for the cheapest, it's nice to be able to find such nice and cheap camera, and get wonderful glasses for 30€! (fortunetely, at least for me, 1€ = 1.37$ 
)
)
FallisPhoto
Veteran
Personally, I'd go with the GSN for street photos, because it would be quicker to get into action. I'd go with the Lynx 5000e or Lynx 14e for anything else, because of its full manual controls.
ully
ully
I had a Cannonet and a Lynx 5000 at the same time and used the Lynx 5000 much more. I really liked the match needle in the metering system and the lens was as good as my GT and GSN that I have now.
Enjoy
Enjoy
rolleistef
Well-known
isn't the GSN a bit big? When pictured, it always looks like a kind of shiny brick, or rather, a 1950s fridge or caravan .
Yeah the GS/GSN definitely looks the right choice for street photo and as the other potential user might prefer a simple camera, a semi-automated camera could be an advantage. And anyway I could get a 5000 another time!
The Lynx 14 seems a bit heavy and 1.4 isn't that big a difference compared to 1.7, especially for a central shutter RF with which 1/15th isn't a problem...
Other feedback of those lovely cameras?
.Yeah the GS/GSN definitely looks the right choice for street photo and as the other potential user might prefer a simple camera, a semi-automated camera could be an advantage. And anyway I could get a 5000 another time!
The Lynx 14 seems a bit heavy and 1.4 isn't that big a difference compared to 1.7, especially for a central shutter RF with which 1/15th isn't a problem...
Other feedback of those lovely cameras?
FallisPhoto
Veteran
rolleistef said:isn't the GSN a bit big? When pictured, it always looks like a kind of shiny brick, or rather, a 1950s fridge or caravan
Yeah the GS/GSN definitely looks the right choice for street photo and as the other potential user might prefer a simple camera, a semi-automated camera could be an advantage. And anyway I could get a 5000 another time!
The Lynx 14 seems a bit heavy and 1.4 isn't that big a difference compared to 1.7, especially for a central shutter RF with which 1/15th isn't a problem...
Other feedback of those lovely cameras?
Yeah, the GSN is kind of big, but it has aperture priority autoexposure, which I personally find far more useful than shutter priority autoexposure (Canonets, Hi-Matics and etcetera). It is also a very quick camera to get into operation and it isn't that heavy for its size. The only other fixed lens rangefinder remotely in its price range and class that had aperture priority was the Olympus XA, which was really tiny, felt cheap, and had fiddly little controls.
True, the Lynx 14e's f/1.4 lens isn't a LOT different from an f/1.7 lens, but that tuna can sized chunk of glass can make all the difference if you're doing night photography and you need to go just one shutter speed faster.
R
ruben
Guest
FallisPhoto said:
Hi FallisPhoto and Rolleistef:
I would like to friendly argue with both of you, just a bit.
For street photography it is a good question if we go for an aperture priority or shutter priority. Perhaps it depends on each of us and there is no fixed law.
Then, within the street photography genre, I would think if I do rush pics or not. If not, the GSN will bring its best honey. And there is plenty.
But if we make pics in a rush quite frequently, and have to change without previous e-mail from sunlit to shadow - then the ligthened auto stops of the Electros will become a burden, instead of a help.
I have used both the GSN and "Canonets, Hi-Matics and etcetera" for street photography, and prefer the Canonet, because I make rush pics, because I prefer shutter priority, because I prefer the 40mm lens quick focusing and extra focusing speed help by a focusing lever. But my technical version of street photography is just a version, nothing more. Photography is your own creativity and self, or there is no Photography.
As for the size issue, it is my opinion that although a GSN is MUCH bigger than a Canonet, public attention will not dramatically increase or decrease due to that difference.
Cheers,
Ruben
R
ruben
Guest
FallisPhoto said:
Hi FallisPhoto and Rolleistef:
I would like to friendly argue with both of you, just a bit.
For street photography it is a good question if we go for an aperture priority or shutter priority. Perhaps it depends on each of us and there is no fixed law.
Then, within the street photography genre, I would think if I do rush pics or not. If not, the GSN will bring its best honey. And there is plenty.
But if we make pics in a rush quite frequently, and have to change without previous e-mail from sunlit to shadow - then the ligthened auto stops of the Electros will become a burden, instead of a help.
I have used both the GSN and "Canonets, Hi-Matics and etcetera" for street photography, and prefer the Canonet, because I make rush pics, because I prefer shutter priority, because I prefer the 40mm lens quick focusing and extra focusing speed help by a focusing lever. But my technical version of street photography is just a version, nothing more. Photography is your own creativity and self, or there is no Photography.
As for the size issue, it is my opinion that although a GSN is MUCH bigger than a Canonet, public attention will not dramatically increase or decrease due to that difference.
As for the shape of each camera, I find that the GSN black version (GTN) has a strong personality, while the Canonets shape is not attractive at all. Therefore I had to do some home works to wear it on the street.
Cheers,
Ruben
FallisPhoto
Veteran
But if we make pics in a rush quite frequently, and have to change without previous e-mail from sunlit to shadow - then the ligthened auto stops of the Electros will become a burden, instead of a help.
I have used both the GSN and "Canonets, Hi-Matics and etcetera" for street photography, and prefer the Canonet, because I make rush pics, because I prefer shutter priority, because I prefer the 40mm lens quick focusing and extra focusing speed help by a focusing lever. But my technical version of street photography is just a version, nothing more. Photography is your own creativity and self, or there is no Photography.
As for the size issue, it is my opinion that although a GSN is MUCH bigger than a Canonet, public attention will not dramatically increase or decrease due to that difference.
As for the shape of each camera, I find that the GSN black version (GTN) has a strong personality, while the Canonets shape is not attractive at all. Therefore I had to do some home works to wear it on the street.
Cheers,
Ruben[/quote]
I too, have a Canonet GIII QL-17, a QL-19, a Hi-Matic 7s and a Hi-Matic 9, and then I've got a Minister D, a GSN, a GTN, a G, a GT, an MG-1, a Lynx 5000, a Lynx 14e, and, well, a whole lot of rangefinders (I've been collecting, restoring and using vintage equipment for about 20 years now -- mostly folders and rangefinders and I've got somewhere over 100 cameras).
I much prefer the GSN/GTN, with its aperture priority autoexposure for street photography, simply because I want to know what the depth of field is going to be and I quite often need to get the photo now. I'm not one of those guys who thinks you should ask permission first and have everyone "pose like you did a few minutes ago." I think that's pretty much a guarantee that you are going to get photos with people mugging for the camera and it isn't really street photography. I need a camera that I can get into action fast. Its stepless autoexposure is remarkably accurate too, under a variety of lighting conditions. The GSN/GTN fits my needs.
Now that said, if I have time to set a shot up, then I'd prefer to use something else, simply because I prefer fully manual controls and the GSN/GTN doesn't have that option. In that case, a Canonet, Hi-Matic or a Lynx would indeed be better.
I have used both the GSN and "Canonets, Hi-Matics and etcetera" for street photography, and prefer the Canonet, because I make rush pics, because I prefer shutter priority, because I prefer the 40mm lens quick focusing and extra focusing speed help by a focusing lever. But my technical version of street photography is just a version, nothing more. Photography is your own creativity and self, or there is no Photography.
As for the size issue, it is my opinion that although a GSN is MUCH bigger than a Canonet, public attention will not dramatically increase or decrease due to that difference.
As for the shape of each camera, I find that the GSN black version (GTN) has a strong personality, while the Canonets shape is not attractive at all. Therefore I had to do some home works to wear it on the street.
Cheers,
Ruben[/quote]
I too, have a Canonet GIII QL-17, a QL-19, a Hi-Matic 7s and a Hi-Matic 9, and then I've got a Minister D, a GSN, a GTN, a G, a GT, an MG-1, a Lynx 5000, a Lynx 14e, and, well, a whole lot of rangefinders (I've been collecting, restoring and using vintage equipment for about 20 years now -- mostly folders and rangefinders and I've got somewhere over 100 cameras).
I much prefer the GSN/GTN, with its aperture priority autoexposure for street photography, simply because I want to know what the depth of field is going to be and I quite often need to get the photo now. I'm not one of those guys who thinks you should ask permission first and have everyone "pose like you did a few minutes ago." I think that's pretty much a guarantee that you are going to get photos with people mugging for the camera and it isn't really street photography. I need a camera that I can get into action fast. Its stepless autoexposure is remarkably accurate too, under a variety of lighting conditions. The GSN/GTN fits my needs.
Now that said, if I have time to set a shot up, then I'd prefer to use something else, simply because I prefer fully manual controls and the GSN/GTN doesn't have that option. In that case, a Canonet, Hi-Matic or a Lynx would indeed be better.
T
tedwhite
Guest
I just got a gorgeous GSN from a fellow RFF member. It was recently CLA's by Greyhoundman, has the battery adapter and new seals. The shutter release sound equals (perhaps betters?) that of my friend's M6.
I like the stepless shutter. All you do is focus and rotate the aperture ring until both lights go off, and snap!
It is a bit large, but seems lighter than my Minolta AL or my Canonet 19.
When I saw those photos from China a few months back, I determined to get a GSN.
Ted
I like the stepless shutter. All you do is focus and rotate the aperture ring until both lights go off, and snap!
It is a bit large, but seems lighter than my Minolta AL or my Canonet 19.
When I saw those photos from China a few months back, I determined to get a GSN.
Ted
Steve Bellayr
Veteran
For what it is worth my opinion. The canonet is the smallest and the lightest. The Yashica GSN has a very sharp lens but is larger and a little heavier. The Lynx with the f1.4 is quite heavy. Finding sunshades for them is difficult. For the first two I use hama hoods. For the Lynx I have not solved that problem as the f1.4 is 57mm. People often forget about the shade on the lens. If the Lynx 1000 is 55mm then the shade will be the same as the GSN.
amateriat
We're all light!
The first-ever 35 I ever owned was a 5000e Lynx (in 1973). Got used a lot. Broke down one hell of a lot, making things more than a little frustrating. Next camera was an Electro GTN. Broke a lot less, ran a lot more film through it, liked it a good deal.
Closest thing I have to that now is a Konica Auto S3, which I love. Smaller, great lens, shutter-priority AE, quiet.
- Barrett
Closest thing I have to that now is a Konica Auto S3, which I love. Smaller, great lens, shutter-priority AE, quiet.
- Barrett
pesphoto
Veteran
tedwhite said:
Enjoy, she is a beauty Ted. I may ask to buy it back one day.
R
ruben
Guest
FallisPhoto said:
hi Fallis,
I am with you in that the lack of depht of field scale in the Canonet is, hmmm
:bang:
Cheers,
Ruben
FallisPhoto
Veteran
Steve Bellayr said:
Actually, I think the Olympus XA is the smallest and lightest. http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/index-frameset.html?OlympusXA.html~mainFrame