Can you help out a newbie: Travel Camera

[daveozzz]

Hi there - new to RFs so apologies for the potentially stupid questions!
I'm about to go on a longish trip overseas and am wanting to get a good quality camera to take with me. I currently just have an Olympus XA which I like a lot for a always-to-hand pocket camera but I want something with better optics.

I don't have too much money to spend but could go up to 750 USD for camera+lens (although would love not to go that high!) so think I'm looking at the used market here. I'm having a HUGE problem settling on one camera and would love if some of you could give me a helping hand picking a great camera to travel with. What I think my want list is:-

1. Glass: First and foremost, great quality optics - all the rest is secondary to me.
2. Reliability: Has to be very reliable since I may be out of the reach of camera repair places for long stretches.
3. Size & Sound: Reasonably small and quiet since I'll be using it on the street a lot.
4. Something with the same level of automation at my XA is fine i.e. manual focus aperture priority (but AF would be fine if I can afford it). Want at least a built in light meter.

Things that have caught my eye so far:-
Konica Hexar AF - my fav, the stealth mode really appeals and sounds like a great lens - being quite oldfashioned the idea of AF worries me slightly tho.
Contax G1 (or G2) - G1 quite cheap used these days.
Bessa R (of some sort - still very confused by this range!).
Leica / Minolta CL (or CLE?)

Can someone help me choose out of these or any other's I haven't considered yet? I guess I want to know how these rank according to my (rather woolly) requirements.

Thank you in advance for helping end my torment!

 

[jdos2]

G2! Wait! Um... Mamiya Universal- Uh... Um, er Voigtlander Prominent?

(slightly inside joke, apologies)

Seriously- G2 is great. That's what I would do, unless you mind a slight bit more bulk of the Universal (Medium format, much better negatives) or want the true Vintage look of the Prominent.

 

[FrankS]

This would work and leave you with lots of cash left over for film:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=47729#post47729

 

[Huck Finn]

Dave, what is it that you don't like about the lens on the XA? Although I don't have one, I always thought that this was supposed to be a superb lens. If you want a faster lens than f/ 2.8, then your list offers all that.

I think that you've covered the spectrum with your list. All of them will give you great optics with f/2 lenses available or built in. The Hexar & Contax are basically AF cameras, the Hexar the quieter of the two & has a great 35 mm lens. If you prefer Contax, you're more likely to get a Contax G with a 45 mm lens than any other focal length at your price. With either of them, there will be a learning curve for the automation, but you're a bright guy & will master it quickly, right? 😉 If you want a true rangefinder, the CL/CLE choice is the quieter of the other 2 you listed & the 40/2 Summicron is a great optic. If you want the ultimate in speed, find a used Bessa R2 for $400, which shouldn't be too tough to do & add the new Voigtlander 40/1.4 Nokton & you'll have the ultimate low light shooter, but it won't be as quiet as your XA.

Given your preferences, I would think that the CL with a 40 summicron would be the way to go, but all are excellent cameras.


good luck.

 

[st3ph3nm]

You may find the Bessa a little large in that company. But the RF/VF is VERY bright and clear!

I'm surprised that you're not happy with XA glass, though...

Cheers,
Steve

 

[Kin Lau]

Good optics, small and quiet... sounds just like an XA. The XA is very well regarded, so getting a signicant improvement will not be easy, but I would personally go for the Contax.

 

[tedwhite]

I do a lot of commercial work on the side, using expensive stuff (can't mention the stuff on this forum). Picked up an Olympus XA on a lark and was amazed at the quality of the little Zuiko lens. I carry it around all the time and get great images with it. Talk about an unobtrusive stealth camera! Nobody's gonna steal that one from you. I've actually sold a few images made with it. Both were portraits, oddly enough.

Why not just go with what you've got? Plus the batteries last forever.

TEd

 

[DougK]

Gotta stick up for my XA here. The lens on mine is fabulous although the short baselength rangefinder can make it tricky to focus at times. I also found that the f/2.8 lens was fast enough for any conditions I'd actually care to shoot in. The only thing I don't like about the camera is that it's so small it can be hard to hold steady. However, I can't complain about that too much as that's what makes it a fabulous travel companion.

 

[DougK]

I will also add that if somebody was to toss a G1 or G2 my way, I wouldn't turn it down... 🙂

 

[daveozzz]

Wow! Thanks for all the replies.
OK sounds like at least I made a good move getting my XA... I'm not particularly unhappy with the lens but have just heard you can get better and I wouldn't mind something a tad faster. Also I find the XA a little too small and fiddly to focus at times - don't get me wrong I like it loads tho - fantastic take-anywhere camera!
So am I getting the impression that with my list of cameras I may not notice a significant improvement in sharpness as compared to my XA? You've got me wondering if I'm wasting my money upgrading. Note I always intended taking my XA with me - but wanted a "proper" camera to compliment it.

Liked the suggestion of the 1.4 lens on a bessa Huck - at least then I'd have something with optical charateristics significantly different from the XA.
But apart from that the G2's coming out looking good also.

Thanks again to everyone for replying - this is a great forum!

 

[rover]

The first thing that came to my mind when you mention a small kit for travel and your budget was a Bessa R. Underrated in my mind and, as Frank has offered, you can pick up a couple good lenses with a little smart shoping. The R is small and very light. It handles very well, 100% manual and new enough to not run into mechanical problems.

 

[daveozzz]

Have to say am very tempted by Frank's bessa R... have been doing some reading - can someone confirm... the bessa-R is a screw mount camera right? am I right in thinking the 40/1.4 Nokton mentioned earlier is only available as a M mount?

 

[jyl]

For a highly reliable, pocketable, discreet camera with excellent optics, to be used for street shooting on a long trip, it would be hard to beat . . . a pair of Olympus XAs. One as your primary, one as backup. Costs a princely $70 (since you already have one), leaves $680 for traveling and film. I don't think the f2.8 max aperture is too limiting for street shooting.

However, I can certainly see the desire for interchangeable lenses.

 

[pukupi]

am I right in thinking the 40/1.4 Nokton mentioned earlier is only available as a M mount?

Yes, it's an M mount wonder.

 

[Roman]

I also have an XA, and a Bessa R (as well as a bunch of other cameras) - here are some thoughts:
The XA is really compact and silent, and I agree that handling is a bit fiddly; also, the rangefinder is hard to focus in low light; the lens is pretty good, but you'll have to stop down to around f/5.6 so that the very definite vignetting (dark corners) disappears.
The Bessa R is not as compact, but is a pleasure to use, and you can get all kinds of excellent screw-mount lenses for it (I use the Voigtländer 25/4, 35/2.5 and 90/3.5 lenses, and an old Canon 50/1.8). For street shooting, a 35mm would be the best choice, I guess - the Color-Skopar 35/2.5 is really good & compact, and people also praise the 35/1.7 (a bit larger & more expensive) - a Bess R & 35mm combo will easily fit your price range. However, one thing has to be mentioned: the Bessa R is definitely NOT silent, it is about as loud as most mechanical SLRs; sneaky shots are out of the question, you definitely will be noticed by your subjects (as I had to experience again shooting at a busy market on Saturday...).

There are still a few other options, if you are satisfied with the 40-45mm focal lenght, and don't need interchangeable lenses: how about a fixed-lens rangefinder from the 1970s? You can get those for very little money, there are some with very good lenses, and since they have leaf-shutters, they are usually very quiet; the only problem is that most of those need mercury cell batteries, which aren't sold any longer, but there are ways around this - use a handheld meter (more accurate, anyway), or zinc-air batteries; some models that come to my mind are the Yashica Lynx, Konica Auto S2 or S3, Minolta HiMatic 7SII, Canonet, Olympus 35RC and RD, and many more.

If money is not the problem, I would go for the Minolta CLE option - I have no experience with that camera myseld, but from what I heard, it is very silent, handles well, takes exchangeable lenses, and is pretty compact.

Roman

 

[Graybeard]

If you don't require automatic exposure setting, the high end 35mm folding cameras are great for travel.

The late model Retina IIIc (small "c") comes equipped with a f2/50mm Xenon that is a fine, sharp lens. The Zeiss Contessa has the slightly slower f2.8 Tessar, also a fine optic. Both of the cameras typically sell for $100 to $150.

Both of these cameras have a built in, uncoupled meter. This often isn't working but evidently can often be restored by cleaning the photocell contacts.

 

[laptoprob]

The CLE is incredibly compact. With the 40mm it is as small as a last model Canonet. With all it's advantages in electronics and flash use.
I am taking it along always!

Rob.

 

[StuartR]

If sharpness and high performance of the lens are your greatest concern (more than size, interchangability of lenses etc), then the best choices would be the Hexar AF or the Contax with 45/2. Both of these lenses are bitingly sharp stopped down. The Hexar AF is great wide open, and I really think the lens is even better than my 35mm summilux ASPH for portraits (not that 35mm is an ideal portrait length). It is very, very hard to go wrong with a Hexar AF. The autofocus system is also fantastic and unobtrusive. I have never had it misfocus, and since it uses an IR beam and not visible light, it does not have problems tracking focus in low light. I have a whole writeup if you are interested.

http://www.uweb.ucsb.edu/~srichardson/hexar.htm

 

[jan normandale]

Hi Daveozz

I have two Olympus ; the XA and the XA2. The XA is original to me, so is the XA2. I bought the XA2 for something for my wife to fool around with. Go elsewhere to read up the differences , mainly it uses the old "stylized" distance metering using icons of people and mountains etc.

The XA2 is actually an amazing camera even in very low light. I once set it up on a railing of an apartment touched the release pad and waited a minute to hear the shutter close. The picture of the streets at night were amazing. Looks kind of amateurish but it is a formidable little camera that I use when I want to do things I can't with the XA.

Something to think about and confuse you even more.

good luck

Jan

 

[Roman]

.

The XA2 is actually an amazing camera even in very low light. I once set it up on a railing of an apartment touched the release pad and waited a minute to hear the shutter close. The picture of the streets at night were amazing. Looks kind of amateurish but it is a formidable little camera that I use when I want to do things I can't with the XA.

Jan

Jan,
but you could have done exactly the same thing with the XA, so inhowfar is the XA2 better?

Roman