geezer
Established
Somewhere on this site I've read the pros and cons of the 'legendary' Canon g111 and how many copies were sold etc. I came across some interesting data last evening while searching the web.
The Canon ql17 g111 was produced from 1972 until 1982. A scant 10 year run.
The gsn was brought into production in 1973 and continued for 17 years, ending in 1990. I haven't been able to learn the actual sales numbers ofor the gsn nor, have I seen any actual Canon data on their g111 sales numbers. I've read about the millions of ql17 g111 sold but nothing beyond what I suspect are wildly inflated numbers made by g111 devotee's.
I wonder what the truth is? I wonder if it really matters ?
just pondering
geezer
The Canon ql17 g111 was produced from 1972 until 1982. A scant 10 year run.
The gsn was brought into production in 1973 and continued for 17 years, ending in 1990. I haven't been able to learn the actual sales numbers ofor the gsn nor, have I seen any actual Canon data on their g111 sales numbers. I've read about the millions of ql17 g111 sold but nothing beyond what I suspect are wildly inflated numbers made by g111 devotee's.
I wonder what the truth is? I wonder if it really matters ?
just pondering
geezer
sirius
Well-known
What would be the point of inflating numbers? That's an absurd thing to say. Following are Karen Nakamura's figures. I would rather believe her research abilities over the abilities of your feelings to do research. So what that the giii was produced for a shorter time and sold very well? Is it therefore less of a camera than the Yashica? I'm sure that you have seen the various pros and cons of both cameras discussed on this forum. Which is better is a rather silly question because "better" is completely relative.
Are you following the example of the recent trolling threads on RFF just to pull people's chain? Trolling does not inform people and it does not benefit this community. I mean nothing personal. You should rethink how you phrase your posting.
http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/index-frameset.html?CanonCanonetGIIIQL17.html~mainFrame
Are you following the example of the recent trolling threads on RFF just to pull people's chain? Trolling does not inform people and it does not benefit this community. I mean nothing personal. You should rethink how you phrase your posting.
http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/index-frameset.html?CanonCanonetGIIIQL17.html~mainFrame
Jeremy Z
Well-known
Wow Sirius, I can't for the life of me see why you got all aggressive with geezer. He was just asking an honest question.
As far as I'm concerned, they're both legendary. No, I don't think there is a point in exagerating the numbers. The higher sales numbers just show that Canonets were well-loved, and perhaps were better-marketed, or more suited for most peoples' use than the Yashicas.
Personally, I have a Yashica GS (1966, I believe) and a GIII (not G111) QL17. Just from my brief ownership with each, I believe that the Canon may have outsold the Yashicas because of the smaller size. They're both good optically. The Yashica has a better viewfinder, IMO. It shows more outside the frame and is easier to see. But there's no question that it's a beast. Remember that those were the days of people wanting smaller cameras with top quality. Also, the Canon had more features in a smaller package than the GSN. This was probably a huge selling point.
Nowadays, they are both forgotten, except by us. Cameras are so advanced now that one doesn't have to know the first thing about the art of photography to take acceptable pictures. They are so small, they can be slipped into a hip pocket and forgotten until needed. But that has made many of us have kind of a renaissance. Bigger cameras are easier to hold. Manual or part-manual control makes us think more about our photography.
Here's another analogy: (as if we need one, hehehe) If I have two babies, one of them is big & heavy, but very smart, and the other one is thin, pretty & popular, which one is "better" The more popular one is more well-known and universally liked, but does it matter? Not to the people who love them!
To the popular kids (i.e. Canon) it matters. It is bragging rights.
As far as I'm concerned, they're both legendary. No, I don't think there is a point in exagerating the numbers. The higher sales numbers just show that Canonets were well-loved, and perhaps were better-marketed, or more suited for most peoples' use than the Yashicas.
Personally, I have a Yashica GS (1966, I believe) and a GIII (not G111) QL17. Just from my brief ownership with each, I believe that the Canon may have outsold the Yashicas because of the smaller size. They're both good optically. The Yashica has a better viewfinder, IMO. It shows more outside the frame and is easier to see. But there's no question that it's a beast. Remember that those were the days of people wanting smaller cameras with top quality. Also, the Canon had more features in a smaller package than the GSN. This was probably a huge selling point.
Nowadays, they are both forgotten, except by us. Cameras are so advanced now that one doesn't have to know the first thing about the art of photography to take acceptable pictures. They are so small, they can be slipped into a hip pocket and forgotten until needed. But that has made many of us have kind of a renaissance. Bigger cameras are easier to hold. Manual or part-manual control makes us think more about our photography.
Here's another analogy: (as if we need one, hehehe) If I have two babies, one of them is big & heavy, but very smart, and the other one is thin, pretty & popular, which one is "better" The more popular one is more well-known and universally liked, but does it matter? Not to the people who love them!
To the popular kids (i.e. Canon) it matters. It is bragging rights.
sirius
Well-known
Ok, sometimes I'm too serious. Maybe I over-reacted, I should have just bit my finger and not commented.
Last edited:
rogue_designer
Reciprocity Failure
I've also seen theorized that Shutter priority is easier to explain to a layman than aperture priority - which may have had some (albeit probably minor) effect.
shutterfiend
cheap and lazy
If it were up to me, I'd add a few additional millions to the production figures. Drive the resale price down.
Al Patterson
Ferroequinologist
I have two of each, although only one of the Canon's is fully functional. (The other three need light seals and batteries).
From what i can tell, they are both great inexpensive rangefinders. (That's mostly from reading around on this site BTW).
From what i can tell, they are both great inexpensive rangefinders. (That's mostly from reading around on this site BTW).
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
What the truth i? i don't know.
Does it matter really? not to me.
They are different cameras, very different. But the results are good from both. Or, they can be good.
Does it matter really? not to me.
They are different cameras, very different. But the results are good from both. Or, they can be good.
NickTrop
Veteran
The GSN is the only aperture priority model rangefinder with a stepless shutter(!) The Canon is another (yawn) shutter priority camera, albeit with an unmetered (if memory serves me) manual mode. The GSN is known for its legendary metering capabilites and lens - qualities a photographer would want. The Canon has a "QL" device so CONSUMERS wouldn't screw up loading the film.
Yashica put out a couple compact models (GX and CC) near the end of the rangefinder era that were as small as the Canon but the larger GSN outlived them all, surviving well into the "peak" of the SLR era /and/ competed against plastic poin-n-shoot.
Maybe it survived so long because it was simply a kick-ass camera design?
Yashica put out a couple compact models (GX and CC) near the end of the rangefinder era that were as small as the Canon but the larger GSN outlived them all, surviving well into the "peak" of the SLR era /and/ competed against plastic poin-n-shoot.
Maybe it survived so long because it was simply a kick-ass camera design?
R
ruben
Guest
Nick, my friend, your assesment is very arguable in both directions. What you see as virtue, many folks may see as sin and vice versa, with quite legitimate grounds.
At the same time I agree with you about the Electro, for me, the GIII is not just "another" shutter priority camera, but THE shutter priority one (and what a pitty it wasn't THE aperture priority one), with due respect to our friend Trius.
) )
Jeremy Z has thrown many good points. I could add more, (wouldn't you agree that manual override and smaller size would make the GTN even a better camera, perhaps perfect?) but by now I invite you to have a virtual coffee with me, Nick.
Cheers,
Ruben
PS
Here in Israel, perhaps in other lands too, Statistics is said to be the science of prostitution. Just pay and it will give you what you want.
At the same time I agree with you about the Electro, for me, the GIII is not just "another" shutter priority camera, but THE shutter priority one (and what a pitty it wasn't THE aperture priority one), with due respect to our friend Trius.
) )Jeremy Z has thrown many good points. I could add more, (wouldn't you agree that manual override and smaller size would make the GTN even a better camera, perhaps perfect?) but by now I invite you to have a virtual coffee with me, Nick.
Cheers,
Ruben
PS
Here in Israel, perhaps in other lands too, Statistics is said to be the science of prostitution. Just pay and it will give you what you want.
Last edited by a moderator:
geezer
Established
It was just a question Sirius. Wasn't trolling or baiting anyone. Both are very good fixed lens rangefinders it's just that when figures are so loosely thrown about I tend to question them. I wasn't casting aspersions on Karen Nakamura as I'm certain someone has given her reason to believe it is true.
I've owned several examples of each camera and my only complaint against the Canon is that it's too small for my hands. ...that and I'm old and prefer the heavier larger camera. As someone mentioned above I hope the Canon remains a cult item and the gsn remains unpopular with the crowd.
geezer
I've owned several examples of each camera and my only complaint against the Canon is that it's too small for my hands. ...that and I'm old and prefer the heavier larger camera. As someone mentioned above I hope the Canon remains a cult item and the gsn remains unpopular with the crowd.
geezer
anirbax
Member
I have a GSN and two QL17GIIIs, all perfectly working. I find the bokeh on the GSN is "creamier" than the GIII, but the GSN lens seems to be slightly more prone to flare. To my untrained eyes, both the lenses seem to be equally good fully opened.NickTrop said:
The really bad engineering part on the GSN is the POD. I fail to understand why Yashica would allow its baby go out with the proverbial "Achilles' heel".
Also, I don't think producing the GSN for so long was such a good idea for the Yashica/Kyocera company. There was no innovation in this particular line, and producing rangefinders for mostly an amateur clientèle did not leave much profit margin.Anirban
Mister_Hat
Established
I have a GIII, a GSN, and a GT. All three are fantastic photo takers. For my use, the edge goes the Yashicas because their compensating circuitry allows them to use modern (non-mercury) batteries. Maybe one of these days I'll solder a compensating diode into the Canon and that advantage will disappear, but right now, the Yashicas get more use.
geezer
Established
Sirius,
I followed up on the 1.2 million number that you cited and according to the official Canon site that number is an aggregate number covering the several models that preceeded the Canonet ql17 g111. ie the i9 as well as the G111. Still, not a bad number all in all.
Unfortunately with Yashica having changed hands no such numbers seem to be available. If it had been successful as Canon I'm sure it could be found somewhere but, I can't find it.
regards,
geezer
I followed up on the 1.2 million number that you cited and according to the official Canon site that number is an aggregate number covering the several models that preceeded the Canonet ql17 g111. ie the i9 as well as the G111. Still, not a bad number all in all.
Unfortunately with Yashica having changed hands no such numbers seem to be available. If it had been successful as Canon I'm sure it could be found somewhere but, I can't find it.
regards,
geezer
Rey
Well-known
If we want to talk just about lens quality, The Canon and the Electro are very close, the Electro may have a slight edge, based on my results. However, if we want to speak about construction quality, feel during use, (highly subjective) portibility, and (I believe this is very important) the ability to manipulate the image in manual mode, then the Canon wins hands down. I know this says nothing about which camera had more mega-sales, but really the most popular camera may not be the best. And then again, sometimes it is!
Last edited:
R
ruben
Guest
Rey, I love these kind of strap VS.... threads, as they bring the spirit of the Roman Colliseum at its time. We can seat out of the arena and eat modern popcorn too.
So if you would be sitting besides me I would comment to you that while the Canonet gladiator has many edges over the GSN, the last one has the killer spirit for the fastest sure shot. Both are great cameras and it all depends what you want them for. Would you take your Canonet to the jungle without hand meter ? Personally not, but with the GSN a handheld meter is rather a liability.
Cola ? No thanks, perhaps later. Lets see who enters the arena next.
Cheers,
Ruben
So if you would be sitting besides me I would comment to you that while the Canonet gladiator has many edges over the GSN, the last one has the killer spirit for the fastest sure shot. Both are great cameras and it all depends what you want them for. Would you take your Canonet to the jungle without hand meter ? Personally not, but with the GSN a handheld meter is rather a liability.
Cola ? No thanks, perhaps later. Lets see who enters the arena next.
Cheers,
Ruben
geezer
Established
Since I'm technologically challenged I'm not quite able to figure out how to respond to p.m..'s...SO...I'll answer your e-mail here Sirius. I hope you don't mind.
Never worry that you have upset me. The older I get the less upset I get. I don't take things personally these days. I thought we had a great exchange myself and look forward to more.
Never worry that you have upset me. The older I get the less upset I get. I don't take things personally these days. I thought we had a great exchange myself and look forward to more.
geezer
Established
Ah Ruben perhaps rain is an even bigger liability to our gsn. Other than that I still prefer my gsn. No cola, think I'll have another Java thanks.
geezer
Established
Back again.
Lest I violate copywrite laws I'll just post a link to a site that will show just how versatlie the gsn is. Reveals way to turn the camera into a shutter priority mode etc.
http://www.yashica-guy.com/document/manual.pdf
I believe that's correct
Lest I violate copywrite laws I'll just post a link to a site that will show just how versatlie the gsn is. Reveals way to turn the camera into a shutter priority mode etc.
http://www.yashica-guy.com/document/manual.pdf
I believe that's correct
filmgoerjuan
Established
I love both my Canonet(s) and my GSN, but I have to say that there's a third camera that probably trumps both for my favourite combination of features and quality: the Konica Auto S2.
It's roughly the same size and heft as the GSN. It allows both automatic (shutter priority) and manual operation; however, unlike the Canonet, the meter still works in manual mode. There's even a meter readout on the top. The 45mm f1.8 Hexanon lens is tack, nay, razor sharp. There's a built in lens hood...heck, there's even an infrared focusing mark. All in all, it's a fantastic camera.
I'm very lucky to own a CLA'd version of this camera from RFF's own greyhoundman.
It's roughly the same size and heft as the GSN. It allows both automatic (shutter priority) and manual operation; however, unlike the Canonet, the meter still works in manual mode. There's even a meter readout on the top. The 45mm f1.8 Hexanon lens is tack, nay, razor sharp. There's a built in lens hood...heck, there's even an infrared focusing mark. All in all, it's a fantastic camera.
I'm very lucky to own a CLA'd version of this camera from RFF's own greyhoundman.