Best Shot of the Day - Minolta Hi-Matic 7S

hey bill,
nice shot, looks like a great place for a walk.

i recently bought a 7s off ebay, only to find the meter not working.
just bought another with the promise of a working meter and now just sit waiting for it to arrive.

can i ask, what are your overall impressions of the 7s?

joe
 
My Hi-Matic Impressions...

My Hi-Matic Impressions...

>can i ask, what are your overall impressions of the 7s?

Well, I've had mine for awhile and had never gone out to shoot with it. I bought it at about the same time as a couple of Konica Auto S2's and a Petri Color 2.8. The Konicas were both jammed, the Petri had no rangefinder patch, and all 4 had been described as 'mint' (of course) on eBay. So in disgust, I put them all on a back shelf.

Last night, I got the bug to fix the Konicas if I could. I took one apart based on instructions I found online, and I seem to have fixed it. Adjusted the rangefinder, and decided to go out today and have a comparo.

I took a Konica Auto S2, a Minolta Hi-Matic 7S, a Diax IIa, a Ricoh 519, an Aires Viscount, and a Zeiss Contina IIa.

I took similar pictures with all of them (scanning them now on a Minolta Scan Dual III) and so far, my results are:

1 - Minolta Hi-Matic 7S. By far the sharpest lens. Build quality is similar to the Konica Auto S2 - which is to say, somewhat crappy. Lens wobbles on body. Viewfinder, which looks great indoors, seems cloudy outside. Not too hard to focus, but the rangefinder patch flares out a little bit. Frankly, it feels big, clunky, cheaply-made, and if I had to guess on looks alone, I'd have never bought it. However, the proof is in the pudding. That lens kills!

2 - Ricoh Five One Nine. Next to the Minolta, it has the sharpest lens. High marks for build quality, the absolute easiest to focus as well. Best viewfinder / rangefinder outdoors, period. Love that kinky trigger-winder on the bottom of the camera. Don't get the 500, get the Five One Nine. Also, seems to be better wide open than the Minolta - I'll post one of those as soon as I get the scans done.

3 - Aires Viscount. Who would have guessed it? El cheapo camera from a no-name manufacturer who bit the dirt a long time ago. Build quality feels better by far than the Minolta / Konica's, but the gold-plated rangefinder cover is hokey, and the patch is way too dim outdoors. Lens is hard to turn as well - old grease in there has hardened up. But nice, sharp images, with a touch of roundness to them - good bokeh. Not as sharp as either the Ricoh or the Minolta.

4 - Diax IIa. I dunno, I thought this would do better. Nice Schnieder lens, shutter speeds seem right on. Build quality is very high - solid steel, heavy little sucker. I like the feel of these nearly as much as I like the Braun Paxette, and the actual build quality is probably better. Overall, though, it was just so-so in perfomance.

5 - Konica Auto S2. My bad, most likely. Dang near everything is out of focus. But it could not have been my rangefinder adjustments for the shots I took at infinity - if the lens is cranked all the way out to the infinity mark, I should get sharp shots at infinity, right? But no, everything is totally fuzzy. Did get a couple of sharp shots by accident, so it's not the lens, either. I've destroyed the other one I have by disassembling it, so I guess I'll have to get another. Now that I know the trick of fixing the stuck shutter/aperture blades that they ALL seem to suffer from, I won't wreck the next one.

6 - Zeiss Contina. Not properly a rangefinder, but I put a Prasiza rangefinder on top and shazam! Should have been one of the sharpest, and maybe it was - but I cranked too hard on the last shot and broke the film off the take-up reel in the film canister. No way to rewind, no dark bag, so I just dumped the film out. No pictures from Mr Zeiss today...dang it.

My 7S seems to have a good meter. but I shot manual anyway - I have a nice Sekonic L-358, since I shoot so many cameras that lack metering or their meters are too old to be trustworthy. Surprisingly, the old BEWI meter on the Zeiss seems to agree with my Sekonic on every shot. Wow!

Hope you find this helpful!

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
 
backalley photo said:
hey bill,
nice shot, looks like a great place for a walk.

i recently bought a 7s off ebay, only to find the meter not working.
just bought another with the promise of a working meter and now just sit waiting for it to arrive.

can i ask, what are your overall impressions of the 7s?

joe
Click to expand...

One other thing...

On the Konica, the winder is similar to a modern SLR - that is one crank, about 45-50 degrees. The Minolta is one crank, about 135 degrees, and it 'feels' funny. Better mechanical advantage means it pulls the film through easier, but the feeling you get through your thumb is not constant. Sort of like easy-easy-harder-easy-too-easy, wham! Feels funny, hard to explain.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
 
And reasonable good bokeh, too

And reasonable good bokeh, too

backalley photo said:
hey bill,
nice shot, looks like a great place for a walk.

i recently bought a 7s off ebay, only to find the meter not working.
just bought another with the promise of a working meter and now just sit waiting for it to arrive.

can i ask, what are your overall impressions of the 7s?

joe
Click to expand...

http://www.growlery.com/abq_fall/bokeh.jpg

I just put this one online. Please ignore all the scratches in the neg - I could murder the stupid, stupid, rat creature who developed my film today! Notice the foreground weeds in focus (f4.0 @1/500) and the nice bokeh in the background. I did enjoy that, almost reminds me of my Fujica G690!

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
 
ouch...those scratches are bad!
you should atleast get your money back - and in the future not even use that place!
 
bill,
thanks for the quick & through reply.
the 7s i have seems solid as a rock and is truly in mint condition, except for the meter. i should use it with my handheld or the sunny 16 but have not, so far.
i'm hoping my 'new' 7s is in similar shape but with the meter working.
i like the look of the scans you posted, so i'm guessing i will be pleased with the lens.
i'm mostly looking for a 'knock around' camera to carry with me.
i have a couple of mayima 6's also.
once again, thanks,
joe
 
rsilfverberg said:
ouch...those scratches are bad!
you should atleast get your money back - and in the future not even use that place!
Click to expand...

I agree, but I also have to chuckle. You see, I live in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Where I live, if your prints come out, then that's it - they've done their job. You can argue until you're blue in the face, it doesn't matter to these goons in the slightest. There is one pro lab in town - they often do good work, but they are not open on Saturdays, and I travel for a living - only home on Saturdays! Out here, we order our film from B&H and hope for the best when it comes to processing. There is no 'demand my money back' - they'd just laugh.

On the other hand, I'm going to be Kansas City next week, and there is a GREAT lab in Overland Park.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

PS - But how do you like that bokeh?
 
backalley photo said:
bill,
thanks for the quick & through reply.
the 7s i have seems solid as a rock and is truly in mint condition, except for the meter. i should use it with my handheld or the sunny 16 but have not, so far.
i'm hoping my 'new' 7s is in similar shape but with the meter working.
i like the look of the scans you posted, so i'm guessing i will be pleased with the lens.
i'm mostly looking for a 'knock around' camera to carry with me.
i have a couple of mayima 6's also.
once again, thanks,
joe
Click to expand...

Didn't mean to imply that the Minolta is not a 'solid' camera - it is! In fact, I am now holding both the Konica Auto S2 and the Minolta Hi-Matic 7S cameras, and the Minolta seems to weigh more and it *is* apparently slightly better-made. And I can't argue with the results I got today! Man, that is one razor-sharp lens!

But what I meant was that this rangefinder (and it appears, most of the rangefinders from the '70s), cannot be compared to the build quality of the rangefinders from the '40s - '60s. My Agfa Karat IV, even the Richo Five One Nine, both are like 'rocks' - much more so than the Minolta, to my way of thinking!

In terms of sheer build quality, though, nothing I have held in my hands compares to the Zeiss Continas. Ah, to wind them is bliss! The steel is so solid, so thick, yet it feels like butter in the hand, it is hard to explain! The quietest shutter - yet it *sounds* like a shutter. I dunno. After holding a Zeiss Contina and then picking up the Minolta, it just feels like a rattly piece of junk - but of course I know it is not that.

And in the end, it is the results that matter.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
 
I liked the bokeh but sort of hard to really tell in that photo.

Backlit, harsh contrast scenes where you can really tell how higlights are handled tells me, personal preference, much more about the bokeh (I look for circular. hexagonal, etc, shapes in these areas - but also for the less easy to 'quantify' 3d feel of the images.

The Minolta Hi-Matic 7s has a good reputation (I believe it's a 6 element lens in 5 groups) but is rumoured to be quite prone for flares.

Have you any experience with the Minolta Hi-Matic 9?
If I were go get any of the Hi-Matic cameras it would probably be that one - simply due to what seems to be an improved lens.
 
rsilfverberg said:
Have you any experience with the Minolta Hi-Matic 9?
If I were go get any of the Hi-Matic cameras it would probably be that one - simply due to what seems to be an improved lens.
Click to expand...

No, the only experience I have at all with Minolta rangefinders is what I gained today! Sorry!

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
 
once again, thanks bill.
afa film processing, you might wanna try some black & white and home development, or even transparancies where you could send them out. of course, it's not one hour photo...

joe
 
backalley photo said:
once again, thanks bill.
afa film processing, you might wanna try some black & white and home development, or even transparancies where you could send them out. of course, it's not one hour photo...

joe
Click to expand...

I have been doing my own home B&W - I don't have an enlarger (and no plans to get one, no room in this apartment), but I scan the negs after processing them. It is a bit hard for me, since I am only home 18 hours a week - I fly home on Saturday afternoons, leave again on Sunday mornings. In fact, I have to log off now to get on a plane to Kansas City.

And I believe I *am* going to have to start sending out my film, just as I currently send out my camera repair work and the antique wristwatches I also collect. Albuquerque is a nice city, but it lacks many things...

In the case of the shots I took yesterday, I was really not expecting my negs to be THAT scratched up, but I did expect that they'd have problems of some kind. But it was more in the nature of a comparison between some cameras, rather than the shots themselves, that I was interested in. And I learned a lot, some of it quite surprising! I never expected to get decent shots from my Aires Viscount, it's so cheap-n-cheesy. But it does OK!

Gotta go, thanks for all the responses!

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
 
Neat photos, bmattock! I liked the first more than the second, though the bokeh in this one was nice, not quite "creamy" but nice, and it did emphasize a 3D feel to the image.

You're a real handyman around cameras. I don't think I would have dared to take apart the wrecked Konica I had. I thought about it, but then, given my non-mechanical inclinations, I chose to sell it. Sorry to hear the "mint" cameras you bought weren't mint! Good luck! And you don't know how much I envy your ability to do B&W at home!
 
SolaresLarrave said:
Neat photos, bmattock! I liked the first more than the second, though the bokeh in this one was nice, not quite "creamy" but nice, and it did emphasize a 3D feel to the image.

You're a real handyman around cameras. I don't think I would have dared to take apart the wrecked Konica I had. I thought about it, but then, given my non-mechanical inclinations, I chose to sell it. Sorry to hear the "mint" cameras you bought weren't mint! Good luck! And you don't know how much I envy your ability to do B&W at home!
Click to expand...

Thanks for the kind words! Actually, I'm no handyman at all! I just got tired of buying 'mint' cameras that were not even working and then being frustrated and feeling cheated all the time. There are no decent camera repair facilities in Albuquerque where I live, so it is either send them out for repair or try to do it myself. The cost is quite high to have a camera professionally gone through, and for a $20 camera, why bother?

So, I got a set of jeweler's screwdrivers and a lens removal tool and started trying it myself. I ruined a few before I got the hang of it, and I'm still having trouble learning, but I'm slowly getting better. It's not so bad, if the problem is in the shutter or the aperture blades - often a drop of liquid lighter fluid will free up a stuck shutter, etc. The problem has been getting to them, and now I can do that quite often. I still have problems taking the tops of cameras without losing parts or being unable to reassemble them, so I can't clean the rangefinder bits yet - and they are often cloudy and need cleaning/readjustment.

As for developing B&W at home, hey, it's easy and cheap. If you scan your negs instead of printing them, all you have to do is get a couple of jugs to hold chemicals and a drum with a reel to hold the negs, along with a cheap thermometer, and you're in business! Takes 20 minutes and is worth it in terms of fun and non-scratched negs. I live in an apartment - I just use the bathroom to load the film on the reel (complete darkness) and then I use the kitchen sink to do the actual developing. You should look into it!

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
 
You make it sound easy, but years ago, I had a chance to try to learn how to put film into the little spools... Man, I was bad! We were supposed to hold the film without touching the flat surface, just the edges... if the film I tried to put in the spool had been exposed, you would have had fingerprints galore (and the body heat, I understand, can really ruin the stuff, not to mention the mess it causes).

I'm lucky enough to live in a house with a finished basement, and shortly after moving in I identified a spot that would be ideal for a darkroom. Maybe I won't get to "build" it (though my father-in-law, a retired carpenter, is really itching for that kind of project) until I get tenure (I teach at a midwestern university), but in the meanwhile, I really would like to try.

Maybe I should get myself a book about it. You do make it sound easy, Bill... :p
 
SolaresLarrave said:
You make it sound easy, but years ago, I had a chance to try to learn how to put film into the little spools... Man, I was bad! We were supposed to hold the film without touching the flat surface, just the edges... if the film I tried to put in the spool had been exposed, you would have had fingerprints galore (and the body heat, I understand, can really ruin the stuff, not to mention the mess it causes).
Click to expand...

Hehehe, I had the same problem with the metal spools. I guess it's an art! But I got the plastic spools, which have a nice little ratchet action to them. You just feed the end of the film in and twist the edge of the spool - it then 'sucks up' the film. Piece of cake! I don't even open the 35mm spool - I leave the tail out when I rewind (gotta feel for the end coming off the take-up reel in your camera).

Then, (in the light), I trim off the leading edge of the film tail until it is square. I take the spool and the film cannister into the bathroom with the (empty) tank and a pair of scissors. I arrange my stuff on the counter, turn off the light, put a towel against the bottom edge of the door, and wait for about 5 minutes for my eyes to adjust to the light. If, in five minutes, I can't see my hand in front of my face, I grasp the film cannister in my left hand, the spool in my right (I'm right-handed). I feed the squared-off edge into the beginning of the spool and begin cranking. I let it take up the film until I feel it reach the end of the roll. Then I very carefully use the scissors to cut off the end of the film from the cannister. I put the spool in the tank, put the cover on it, and then I'm done.

Now all I have to do is dump in the D76, swish it around according to the directions, dump it out, pour in fixer, swish it around, dump it out, pour in water, swish it around, and I'm done. This can all be done in daylight, the tank is light-tight.

Then I pour pho-flo into the tank, swish it around, drain the tank, take out the film, and run it through a film squeegee. Then I hang it up in the bathroom with a weight on the end to keep it from curling up. Cut it into strips of 6 frames each, and it's ready to scan!

Now, what I want to know is why the film processors cut your negatives into strips of 4, but the negative carriers on film scanners hold 6 frames each. Dude!

You have *got* to try this, it really is simple! Believe me, if *I* can do it, anyone can do it!

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
 
francisco,

i agree with bill. it's not too tough and the plastic reels make it much easier.
a bathroom and then the kitchen is all you need.
it's a small investment and the quality is miles ahead of all but a custom lab.
when i started to print i was amazed that my prints were so much better then the 'drugstore' i was paying to do it.
you really feel so much more a part of the whole process.

joe
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom