raydm6
Yay! Cameras! 🙈🙉🙊┌( ಠ_ಠ)┘ [◉"]
Second the M6 and add a SVGOO bright-line when shooting the 90.
35mm film rangefinder buying advice
- Thread starter jtwg
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 41
- Views 4K
KyleCharles
Vagabond
Sadly, the RF camera that meets all of your criteria simply does not exist.
You want a camera that is good with wide lenses (without using an external viewfinder), long lenses & fast lenses but has a meter and costs less than a used Ikon.
IMO, your best bet is to make one of the following compromises:
1. Spend more than you wanted to and get an Ikon or M6
2. Get a Bessa R2-R3 and an external viewfinder for wider lenses
3. Give up the internal meter and get an M4P or M2
4. Get an SLR
The good news is that options 2 & 3 aren't as bad as they sound if you really can't afford option 1!
Even if you go with option 2, you still might want to get an SLR for 85-135mm lenses. The Bessas have a short EBL that is not conducive to the consistent, accurate focusing of longer lenses up close and wide open, especially the faster ones. There is a reason why Voigtlander's 90mm was not faster than f3.5.
As far as a meter goes, It kind of depends on what film you will be using. If you are going to be shooting slower slide film then yes, a meter is good and external meters are a pain. But if you will be using faster B&W negative film, then it won't take too long to train yourself to get good exposures without a meter. ISO 400 B&W has a wide exposure latitude and does not demand perfect exposures for good results.
I was in the same situation as you and I ended up with a nice used M2 for $600. I literally could not afford an Ikon or M6. Since I only use 400 speed B&W film, I got a light meter app for my phone and trained myself to guess the exposure and would double check my guesses with my phone. I turned it into a game of sorts and would use the meter app even when I was not shooting. In no time at all, the internal meter in my head was accurate enough most of the time for the film I use. I hardly use the phone for metering anymore. Besides all of that, I have found that with "street shooting" The exposure does not really vary for a given situation. In the daytime I only have 3 different exposure settings: One each for the sunny side of the street, the shady side of the street, and one for the overcast cloudy days.
In order for Leica to squeeze 28mm framelines into their .72x cameras, they simply shrunk all of the framelines. This means that even though the M4P - M6.72x have 28mm framelines and the M2, M4 & M4-2 do not... it doesn't really matter because the 28mm lines are a lie anyway. The truth is that a 28mm lens covers the whole .72x finder without framelines. My solution is to have a square piece of gaffer's tape stuck to the bottom plate of my camera. When I want to use a 28mm lens without using an external VF I just use the tape to cover the frameline illumination window. That way, the frame lines disappear and leave me with an uncluttered view and accurate enough framing. Remember, the wider your lens, the less effect parallax error has on it anyway.
If you wear glasses however, this may not be a very viable option.
These compromises have worked well for me in my particular situation. YMMV. Good luck!
(Edit) I always forget about the Leica M5. It's pretty large and does not have 28mm framelines, but it does have a meter. I don't know what they sell for but I imagine fair prices are somewhere in between an M2 and M6/Ikon. If you can deal with the size of it, it might be the least compromise for you overall.
You want a camera that is good with wide lenses (without using an external viewfinder), long lenses & fast lenses but has a meter and costs less than a used Ikon.
IMO, your best bet is to make one of the following compromises:
1. Spend more than you wanted to and get an Ikon or M6
2. Get a Bessa R2-R3 and an external viewfinder for wider lenses
3. Give up the internal meter and get an M4P or M2
4. Get an SLR
The good news is that options 2 & 3 aren't as bad as they sound if you really can't afford option 1!
Even if you go with option 2, you still might want to get an SLR for 85-135mm lenses. The Bessas have a short EBL that is not conducive to the consistent, accurate focusing of longer lenses up close and wide open, especially the faster ones. There is a reason why Voigtlander's 90mm was not faster than f3.5.
As far as a meter goes, It kind of depends on what film you will be using. If you are going to be shooting slower slide film then yes, a meter is good and external meters are a pain. But if you will be using faster B&W negative film, then it won't take too long to train yourself to get good exposures without a meter. ISO 400 B&W has a wide exposure latitude and does not demand perfect exposures for good results.
I was in the same situation as you and I ended up with a nice used M2 for $600. I literally could not afford an Ikon or M6. Since I only use 400 speed B&W film, I got a light meter app for my phone and trained myself to guess the exposure and would double check my guesses with my phone. I turned it into a game of sorts and would use the meter app even when I was not shooting. In no time at all, the internal meter in my head was accurate enough most of the time for the film I use. I hardly use the phone for metering anymore. Besides all of that, I have found that with "street shooting" The exposure does not really vary for a given situation. In the daytime I only have 3 different exposure settings: One each for the sunny side of the street, the shady side of the street, and one for the overcast cloudy days.
In order for Leica to squeeze 28mm framelines into their .72x cameras, they simply shrunk all of the framelines. This means that even though the M4P - M6.72x have 28mm framelines and the M2, M4 & M4-2 do not... it doesn't really matter because the 28mm lines are a lie anyway. The truth is that a 28mm lens covers the whole .72x finder without framelines. My solution is to have a square piece of gaffer's tape stuck to the bottom plate of my camera. When I want to use a 28mm lens without using an external VF I just use the tape to cover the frameline illumination window. That way, the frame lines disappear and leave me with an uncluttered view and accurate enough framing. Remember, the wider your lens, the less effect parallax error has on it anyway.
If you wear glasses however, this may not be a very viable option.
These compromises have worked well for me in my particular situation. YMMV. Good luck!
(Edit) I always forget about the Leica M5. It's pretty large and does not have 28mm framelines, but it does have a meter. I don't know what they sell for but I imagine fair prices are somewhere in between an M2 and M6/Ikon. If you can deal with the size of it, it might be the least compromise for you overall.
presspass
filmshooter
The Zeiss Ikon has the nicest finder of all - clear, bright, and the framelines are marked. That can be handy. The only downside is the metering on the side of the finder - it can be hard to see in bright light. The Leicas and Zeiss automatically index the lens - the right frame comes up when you put the lens on. The Bessas, which have very clear finders, have to have the frame set manually. The Bessas are workhorses and seem to last well. The long-term repair possibility for Zeiss is unknown.
aizan
Veteran
how about a used r4 and r3? you can still come under the price of one zeiss ikon.
Huss
Veteran
Built in metering and 'cheap'?
Bessa R3a - fantastic 1:1 finder, speeds up to 1/2000 sec
Minolta CLE - fantastic finder (best there is in 35mm RF land) for 28mm lenses, has 90mm frame lines.
Both in perfect condition can be had for about $400. I use both, but now as I have an M7 they are seeing less use..
Huss
Veteran
Aren't the electronic guts and shutter of the Zeiss Ikon exactly the same as that of the Bessa R2/3/4? Both are made by Cosina in the same factory, and they seem identical to me. Difference being the RF and VF as well as the body shell.
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
I find this difficult to believe; I own a few of each and find the FED 1 and Leica II to behave and feel the same. The engraving is a better on the Leica but the FED has one or two improvements to the II's design.
The FED is very cheap to repair but I've yet to have anything done other than routine servicing to both cameras.
Neither meet the criteria laid down.
Nor, for that matter, can I suggest a camera that ticks all the boxes. Although I can easily suggest a dozen or so small, RF's with a fixed lens, metering and so on but add in the budget, interchangeable lenses and fast lens and it gets impossible, imo.
Regards, David
Whateverist
Well-known
My experience - which is purely subjective - has been one of two FED's and one Zorki that never worked reliably and eventually failed, compared to an even older IIIa that goes like clockwork.
This is not to say FSU gear is bad - I have a Kiev 4 that I adore and rely on blindly. However, I think my 'you get what you pay for' point is still valid.
ForestCap
Well-known
As system RFs, Barnack Leica and it's copies (with collapsible lens on) are the only cameras I find small enough to be discreet. You don't need to hang them on the neck nor shoulder. They can stay in your jacket pocket, easily coming in and out of it without tediousness. When the lens is at extended position, the cameras can just stay in your hand since they are so light. So it's fast to operate too.
If a camera is not working, then it's not working, same for Leica. A CLA'ed and tested Zorki 1 is hard to beat if you want to warm up with an affordable and capable model of 35mm system RF. My personal experience is Zorki 1 can be a very smooth camera to use.
If you consider fixed-lens RF, there are Yashicas Electro 35 family and Olympus XA which are Aperture priority cameras. also Olympus 35 family and Minolta 7SII, which are shutter speed priority cameras with manual override.
If a camera is not working, then it's not working, same for Leica. A CLA'ed and tested Zorki 1 is hard to beat if you want to warm up with an affordable and capable model of 35mm system RF. My personal experience is Zorki 1 can be a very smooth camera to use.
If you consider fixed-lens RF, there are Yashicas Electro 35 family and Olympus XA which are Aperture priority cameras. also Olympus 35 family and Minolta 7SII, which are shutter speed priority cameras with manual override.
michaelwj
----------------
This. The OP will need to compromise something. The SLR is the mother of all compromises - the perfect camera for the OPs use.
Either that or an RF for wide and an SLR for tele. Which is just another compromise.
johank
Established
Sofare nobody hav had bravery in suggesting a Contax G2, fine glass and much for your greens.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
As I said, RF for wide and normal, SLR for long. The OP did not set a specific budget. A good example of a Hexar is $485 - $ 550, then lenses. So not shoestring, agreed. But less than a well sorted M4-P which requires a meter added or good Sunny 16 skills, or an M6. Contax G is a serious consideration, but I think lens selection is more limited and more costly?
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
There are several points to make in my defence; firstly we are talking about second-hand and elderly cameras. A FED could be anything up to about 80 years old and a Zorki up to about 70 years old. Talking to people I get the impression that when digital came along (20 to 25 years ago) a lot of film cameras were abandoned for it. But Leicas are different, they are seen as a precision machine that costs money and must be looked after, cherished and handed down as an heirloom. So you are buying from two different markets.
Regardless, I'd expect any machine that was used and more than a few years old to need careful checking and, perhaps, adjustment etc. My Leicas certainly do, just as my FEDs and Zorkis do.
Bitter experience means I expect Leica repairs to start at a couple of hundred pounds Sterling and go up and up and up to even more. Oleg charges a flat rate of about 35 pounds Sterling. As for parts, Oleg asks about 5 pounds for a pair of blinds but I was quoted 150 pounds for a pair for the Leica when I asked.
So I'd say that a FED or Zorki bought with your eyes open and then a trip to Oleg would result in a very pleasant camera, with a reasonable lens on it for very little money. Or you could get a dealer or previous owner to do it for you with a Leica but you'd pay out a lot more...
As for getting what you pay for, I've always thought that sounds like a second hand car salesman's excuse. With second-hand elderly stuff it seems to be a matter of luck, unless you are able to examine and check the things thoroughly. And even then you might easily miss something.
Regards, David
Santtu Määttänen
Visual Poet
About soviet gear, I must say that my Kiev 4a must be one of the most solid cameras I have. Of course they need maintenance every now and then. Heck even my tailboard camera needs maintenance (bellows mainly) every few decades 🙂 Besides when it's Kiev in question there's added benefit of very simple lenses (in wide angle to 50mm) with out many moving parts.
Of course there have been quite a huge quality differences in soviet cameras. My positive experiences have been with FKD and Arsenal build Kiev. Some Zorkis I've handled seemed amazingly well built while others less so.
If purchased with a clear head (as in a good example) and cared for and maintained as it should. There's nothing wrong with soviet cameras. My Kiev doesn't seem any better or worse then my Olympus, Nikon, Contax, etc gear. They feel different, but that's an other discussion 🙂
Of course there have been quite a huge quality differences in soviet cameras. My positive experiences have been with FKD and Arsenal build Kiev. Some Zorkis I've handled seemed amazingly well built while others less so.
If purchased with a clear head (as in a good example) and cared for and maintained as it should. There's nothing wrong with soviet cameras. My Kiev doesn't seem any better or worse then my Olympus, Nikon, Contax, etc gear. They feel different, but that's an other discussion 🙂
goamules
Well-known
I buy a lot of cameras online for their lenses. When I get the camera, it's a lottery to see if it will work. I run film through all of them. Here is the reliability of rangefinder cameras in order of my experience:
Canon - Most reliable, I've had 3 III and IV, 3 VTs, a P, and a few others. All shot a roll of film fine, and had good viewfinders. None ever needed any work.
Nicca - Very reliable, I've had 4 or 5, III and Lever winds. Only one had it's shutter curtains released from the spool.
FED - Most are reliable, I've had 5, and only one had a jammed shutter wind. Some of the others worked, but were stiff or had minor problems.
Leica - I've had 4 or 5, every one had major problems and didn't work when I received it, and needed a trip to a camera repairman.
However, the OP wasn't even talking about these old antiques. He was asking about much more modern rangefinders, with meters, from 10 or 20 years ago.
Canon - Most reliable, I've had 3 III and IV, 3 VTs, a P, and a few others. All shot a roll of film fine, and had good viewfinders. None ever needed any work.
Nicca - Very reliable, I've had 4 or 5, III and Lever winds. Only one had it's shutter curtains released from the spool.
FED - Most are reliable, I've had 5, and only one had a jammed shutter wind. Some of the others worked, but were stiff or had minor problems.
Leica - I've had 4 or 5, every one had major problems and didn't work when I received it, and needed a trip to a camera repairman.
However, the OP wasn't even talking about these old antiques. He was asking about much more modern rangefinders, with meters, from 10 or 20 years ago.
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
As I read the thread it was started by dismissing the Bessa R2A & R4A and Zeiss Ikon but went on to say a lens with a Leica M mount was the long term aim.
Of course, the budget excluded the Leica but he wanted something "small and discreet, with faster lenses... [and] ...a built-in meter...". Not unnaturally the problems this raised led on to other cameras and my 2d worth was to say that I thought one of the fixed lens RF's (like the Konica C35, Canonets and all the neat Olympus RF's) would fit the bill but wouldn't allow for interchangeable lenses.
Mention of the USSR made ones led to my second post.
As for RF's made in the last 10 years, I've a pretty good idea of the cost of an excellent one and a couple of lenses but no one who considers budgets should even think of them, imo. As the saying goes and the OP realised, if you have to ask etc, etc...
Regards, David
As I read the thread it was started by dismissing the Bessa R2A & R4A and Zeiss Ikon but went on to say a lens with a Leica M mount was the long term aim.
Of course, the budget excluded the Leica but he wanted something "small and discreet, with faster lenses... [and] ...a built-in meter...". Not unnaturally the problems this raised led on to other cameras and my 2d worth was to say that I thought one of the fixed lens RF's (like the Konica C35, Canonets and all the neat Olympus RF's) would fit the bill but wouldn't allow for interchangeable lenses.
Mention of the USSR made ones led to my second post.
As for RF's made in the last 10 years, I've a pretty good idea of the cost of an excellent one and a couple of lenses but no one who considers budgets should even think of them, imo. As the saying goes and the OP realised, if you have to ask etc, etc...
Regards, David
KyleCharles
Vagabond
I really don't understand why this thread keeps drifting back into FSU camera reliability.
Except for the fact that FSU's are indeed rangefinder cameras, they don't meet a single one of the OP's other four criteria.
Except for the fact that FSU's are indeed rangefinder cameras, they don't meet a single one of the OP's other four criteria.
goamules
Well-known
You're right. But it was more than 4 critera. He wanted small body, fast lens, wider than 35mm lenses, M-mount, a meter. Needing an M-mount and a meter are the clinchers, eliminating antique rangefinders.
jtwg
Newbie
I wound up going with a Bessa R2A. I don't foresee using anything longer than a 75mm, so I guess we will see how it goes. I do appreciate all the advice given. I have an SLR and I just don't like its bulkiness and loud shutter, at least not for the use I have in mind for an RF. I may well wind up going with a Leica body at some point. From what I could see online, Zeiss Ikon bodies are close enough in price to Leica bodies that I don't see why I wouldn't just go with a Leica down the road.
I am considering picking up a Jupiter 50mm for the Bessa, speaking of Russian gear.
I am considering picking up a Jupiter 50mm for the Bessa, speaking of Russian gear.
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
Well they are small; anyway, it drifted into older USSR cameras for the same reason that it drifted into screw thread Leicas and M2's and so on. Only no one queried the reliability of them. I expect if someone had questioned the reliability of the all-electronic Minolta CLE it would have gone that way for it as well.
Regards, David
