If he knew that, he'd already have found it.
:angel:
:angel:
ferider
Veteran
Leica or Minolta CL + 40mm/2 Rokkor. If you shop carefully, < $500 should be possible. You said you don't mind if the meter doesn't work. Outstanding lens. Get a 90/2.8 Tele Elmarit later.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
I REALLY don't agree. To me, this is like saying, "To find out if you like T-bone steak, try a hamburger first." Admittedly the first RF camera I ever tried was my girlfriend's Leica II, but I've had lots of fixed lens RFs since and even the best of them, the Konica SIII, didn't really compare with the majority of interchangeable-lens RFs I've used (Zorkii, Kiev, Leica, Nicca, Yashica, Robot, Canon, Reid, Foca and more). Buying a fixed-lens RF a great way to waste a lot of time buying and selling the damn' thing when it's not what you really want at all (and the OP wants interchangeable lenses). Personally I'd rather buy a scale-focus camera or an MF camera.
Sure, fixed-lens RFs may work for some people, but for others, this is really poor advice.
Cheers,
R.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Bessa R. Get it for 220-230 USD. (Available on e-bay) Get Jupiter-8 50 f2 for 60 USD, Jupiter-12 35 2.8 for another 60 USD and Elmar 90 f4 for 90USD. It is under 500 USD.
Bessa R will works without batteries, but batteries are most common ones and lasts for long time. Jupiter-12 will block light meter cell, but it isn't big deal after all mechanical MF and LF (meterless).
Bessa R is light, neat camera. It has plastic and rubber exterior - very easy to hold and it feels warm.
Depending on how it is used, eventually paint on plastic will fail off from the corners on top plate and rubber on the door will be scratched, but camera will continue to work.
I have R for year and half as everyday camera, I purchased it for $250 with Jupiter-8 and sold it without lens for 100+ USD. So, I paid 100+ USD for everyday camera for one and half year.
I've had two Jupiter-8 on Bessa R and they were fine. Jupiter-12 is OK lens for first 35mm RF lens. And Elmarit 90 f4 is Leitz (Leica) by all means. Sharp, with lovely bokeh, very small and light.
Now you know why RF isn't popular as SLR. It isn't dirt cheap.
Just for fun I recommend Smena-8m, which costs next to nothing. It is scale focus camera, light (250g) and completely mechanical. Operates similar to MF and LF cameras. Has fixed lens (sharp and contrasty). Viewfinder doesn't have framelines, but it is extra-wide. Very easy for scale focus camera.
Bessa R will works without batteries, but batteries are most common ones and lasts for long time. Jupiter-12 will block light meter cell, but it isn't big deal after all mechanical MF and LF (meterless).
Bessa R is light, neat camera. It has plastic and rubber exterior - very easy to hold and it feels warm.
Depending on how it is used, eventually paint on plastic will fail off from the corners on top plate and rubber on the door will be scratched, but camera will continue to work.
I have R for year and half as everyday camera, I purchased it for $250 with Jupiter-8 and sold it without lens for 100+ USD. So, I paid 100+ USD for everyday camera for one and half year.
I've had two Jupiter-8 on Bessa R and they were fine. Jupiter-12 is OK lens for first 35mm RF lens. And Elmarit 90 f4 is Leitz (Leica) by all means. Sharp, with lovely bokeh, very small and light.
Now you know why RF isn't popular as SLR. It isn't dirt cheap.
Just for fun I recommend Smena-8m, which costs next to nothing. It is scale focus camera, light (250g) and completely mechanical. Operates similar to MF and LF cameras. Has fixed lens (sharp and contrasty). Viewfinder doesn't have framelines, but it is extra-wide. Very easy for scale focus camera.
I suggested this because his budget is not realistic. A few rolls of film and development will soon overwhelm the cost of a cheap RF, so it's not much of an investment.
People buy and sell gear all the time, it's part of the process. Russian lenses are far more of a crap shoot.
The user experience of a fixed lens RF is exactly the same as an interchangeable, without the added weight, size, and expense.
People buy and sell gear all the time, it's part of the process. Russian lenses are far more of a crap shoot.
The user experience of a fixed lens RF is exactly the same as an interchangeable, without the added weight, size, and expense.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
For you, maybe. Not for everyone. Not for me, for a start. I have tried a LOT of fixed- and interchangeable-lens RF cameras. As Ko.Fe. points out, this budget is not unrealistic for an R or even an R2, and most Jupiter-8 lenses are surprisingly good. Not so sure about the Jupiter-12.
Cheers,
R.
Of course, silly me. What a crazy idea, suggesting to try a 35mm RF on for size first, rather than breaking the budget. My bad.
KansanTim
Established
I second the idea of a Voigtlander Bessa R, or R2 if you can spend a little more. I don't think the Russian lenses are really necessary unless you are dead set on getting a full range of lenses under your budget suggestions of < $300 / < $500.
My first rangefinder was the Bessa R, and for the first year or two I only had one lens, a Nikkor 50/f2. I got both 10 or 12 years ago for a total of about $310, and both were exceptionally reliable: the camera was like new, and the lens in very good condition but of course several decades old, so not like new. I have no complaints except that the rubbery material on the back of the Bessa has something off about it as it has aged. However, that was only after years of regular use, and it still functions perfectly, although I've moved on from that body and it hasn't gotten much use the last five years. I wouldn't be surprised if the R2 has better materials going into it, and thus would be less likely to have the same issue, but I can't speak from firsthand experience.
Rather than fiddling about with Russian lenses, personally I'd spend more for the modern Cosina Voigtlander lenses, which are not overly expensive and are common on the used market. I'd take fewer lenses that I like better over a wider range I like less. Certainly the body + one lens combo can still be had for less than $500 that way. Even though I own and like a couple of fixed-lens rangefinders I got later than the Bessa R, I'd definitely go for an interchangeable lens camera first. All just my personal preferences and experiences, of course. Your mileage may vary.
My first rangefinder was the Bessa R, and for the first year or two I only had one lens, a Nikkor 50/f2. I got both 10 or 12 years ago for a total of about $310, and both were exceptionally reliable: the camera was like new, and the lens in very good condition but of course several decades old, so not like new. I have no complaints except that the rubbery material on the back of the Bessa has something off about it as it has aged. However, that was only after years of regular use, and it still functions perfectly, although I've moved on from that body and it hasn't gotten much use the last five years. I wouldn't be surprised if the R2 has better materials going into it, and thus would be less likely to have the same issue, but I can't speak from firsthand experience.
Rather than fiddling about with Russian lenses, personally I'd spend more for the modern Cosina Voigtlander lenses, which are not overly expensive and are common on the used market. I'd take fewer lenses that I like better over a wider range I like less. Certainly the body + one lens combo can still be had for less than $500 that way. Even though I own and like a couple of fixed-lens rangefinders I got later than the Bessa R, I'd definitely go for an interchangeable lens camera first. All just my personal preferences and experiences, of course. Your mileage may vary.
jamin-b
Well-known
I think the Nikkor 50/f2 is a real sleeper lens. Excellent "vintage" performance, even close focusing beyond the rangefinder limit as scale focus, compact without the fuss of collapsible lenses... and can be had for quite reasonable prices if you are patient.
I just used mine over the weekend, for those that are interested in some samples...
https://www.flickr.com/search/?user...date-taken-desc&text=nikkor f2 ltm&view_all=1
I just used mine over the weekend, for those that are interested in some samples...
https://www.flickr.com/search/?user...date-taken-desc&text=nikkor f2 ltm&view_all=1
KansanTim
Established
I certainly liked it quite a bit. However, I haven't used the scale-focus close focusing more than two or three times, ever. I guess I needed something for my SLR to be better at! For me, the switch to rangefinders was like a revelation--I got on with the cameras (I now have several) so much more than the SLR I was using, and I took more than an order of magnitude more photographs as a result. The only reason I even kept the SLR was for the close focusing.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Well, my suggestion is probably a better idea than suggesting something that simply doesn't fit his stated requirements. Why didn't you suggest a TLR while you were at it?Of course, silly me. What a crazy idea, suggesting to try a 35mm RF on for size first, rather than breaking the budget. My bad.
Cheers,
R.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
mpaniagua
Newby photographer
Try to resist the russian lenses lure, unless you can try them before you buy them. Even though I love my Jupiter 12 and 8, their quality control is quite lax, so it could spell frustration and disappointment.
If you can get one from Oleg or any other reliable dealer, they are great lenses at a bargain price. But if you buy them from ebay, you are playing russian roulette, pun intended
If you can get one from Oleg or any other reliable dealer, they are great lenses at a bargain price. But if you buy them from ebay, you are playing russian roulette, pun intended
Maybe trying out a fixed lens RF is something that never crossed his mind before. It's just a suggestion, which may just be rejected, which is quite alright, unlike absurd TLR commentary.
Indeed, trying to fit into this budget with the haphazard nature of Russian glass just might work, but it just might turn the OP completely off to the RF experience.
Indeed, trying to fit into this budget with the haphazard nature of Russian glass just might work, but it just might turn the OP completely off to the RF experience.
Archlich
Well-known
A haze-free Canon 50/1.8 can be ideal: plenty, cheap, well built and optically superb. With this around, I see no reason to get into the J-8 gamble.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
I have purchased on eBay J-12 three times, J-8 twice, I-50, I-22, I-10, I-61 l/d.
None of them had significant issues. Some required relube. So does any old and not so lens.
I have purchased Color Skopar twice and one has to be serviced due to absence of thread locks.
I purchased made in Japan by small maker used 28 3.5. It came with stiff focus and not correct distance marks.
I went through almost all Leitz 50 old Ltm lenses and they were more problematic comparing to FSU made.
I prefer J-3 rendering to any 50 1.4, 1.5 lens.
None of them had significant issues. Some required relube. So does any old and not so lens.
I have purchased Color Skopar twice and one has to be serviced due to absence of thread locks.
I purchased made in Japan by small maker used 28 3.5. It came with stiff focus and not correct distance marks.
I went through almost all Leitz 50 old Ltm lenses and they were more problematic comparing to FSU made.
I prefer J-3 rendering to any 50 1.4, 1.5 lens.
Yes. All the more reason why this budget is on the edge. Buying from known, reliable sellers to get good quality (used) gear will cost more than taking a chance buying through other sales outlets, which can work out wonderfully, but don't always.
Huss
Veteran
Minolta CLE.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
He might not have considered a TLR either. Just how stupid do you think he is, given his detailed specifications?
Cheers,
R.
Your comment is not worthy of reply.
Tashi Delek.
Tashi Delek.