Canonet Lineup

[alt4852]

Quick question for the Canon crowd here, but does anyone have any clear preferences or reservations about the different Canonet lenses? Are there ones to stay away from or are they all roughly the same only with slightly different focal lengths and apertures?

As a followup if anyone cares to answer, do all of them behave similarly wide open? I like shooting in low light conditions but due to pricing I might end up with a f/2.5 or f/2.8 Canonet since they seem to run slightly cheaper than the f/1.7 or f/1.9 models in certain cases. Would a f/1.7 stopped down to f/2.5 have a significant difference to a f/2.5 wide open model or would it be a marginal and barely perceptable increase in performance?

Thanks in advance to anyone who can offer their advice! 🙂

 

[dmr]

I like the 40mm on the GIII due to its slightly wider angle.

There's a thread with some examples of shooting this wide open with some of the aberrations it does have. I'll find that and link it here.

Edit: Here ya go! 🙂

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=62022

 

[Argenticien]

If you want the speed of the 1.7 but are concerned about price, consider the QL17 non-G-III (pre-G-III) models, namely the "new QL17" and the "new QL17-L". These are the same optics as the G-III and differ only in minor features. (I have the former; it lacks a battery-check light; so what?) They may sell for less as there is a hype premium charged for having "G-III" emblazoned on the camera.
--Dave

 

[hks3sgte]

I'll add to Argenticien's post...

The original QL17 (1965) has the excellent 45mm f/1.7 lens (6 elements in 5 groups). Much better build than the newer Canonets. And much more elegant looking.

Take a look on ebay, you can find them for under $40.

http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/...65_ql17.html?lang=us&categ=crn&page=1956-1965

 

[Lauri_y]

One should always remember, that the cost of initial purchase is much smaller than cost of ownership. I just bought a $30 G III QL17 from eBay, and there's quite a lot of things to do with it until it's back in factory specifications. Shutter and aperture mechanism need cleaning, focus helicoid cleaning and lubing, battery voltage has to be changed, shutter linkages need to be adjusted as well as aperture setting from light meter. I guess all that is more than $100 if you send it to a decent camera repair shop. I'm doing it myself, but it takes easily dozens of hours. And I still think I have pretty good copy, these cameras just happen to be over 30 years old.
In short: After a $100 overhaul it doesn't matter much you paid for just the camera. And on the other hand, camera tinkering is fun!

 

[Ronald_H]

You must really be short on cash to consider a 'lesser' Canonet!

My top of the line, last of the line, near mint Canonet QL17 GIII, WITH battery, in perfect operating condition was all of 20 Euros... bought on a camera fair no less!

Not to be rude or anything, but it needs film in there... how many rolls of Tri-X does 20 Euros or Dollars buy? If you go for the Arista variant a grand total of 10... sans processing or printing!

Anyway, it is a great little camera, see below. Abberations or not, this was a premium camera with a premium lens and price tag. Look below. Shot taken with my Canonet. Wide open at f1.7, Ilford HP5+ in Diafine, rated @800.

 

[alt4852]

update: i ended up purchasing a canonet QL25 from a forum member. it should be arriving any day now and i'm pretty excited. 🙂

as for the people who were commenting on my budget, i'm making this purchase to dip my feet in rangefinder photography and most of my camera-budget is actually geared towards my SLR (insert evil music here). i just wanted a decent performing starter to see whether or not i would like the platform.

i'm currently an undergraduate student in college and money really isn't something that i have a lot of freedom with so i'm trying my very best to moderate myself. if i like the canonet enough, i think i'm going to try to save up some money over the next few months and grab a canon p. 😉

 

[hks3sgte]

Enjoy shooting. You'll love the rangefinders.

 

[dmr]

update: i ended up purchasing a canonet QL25 from a forum member. it should be arriving any day now and i'm pretty excited. 🙂

Years ago, when my dad retired, we got him a QL25 (hmmmm, might have been a QL28, actually). This was a guy who did MF folders all his life, kinda lost interest and hadn't shot anything in years, and always swore he "would never go 35". After a few years he finally admitted that it was his favorite camera ever, and he used it for the rest of his life.

When I wanted to get back into a rangefinder, one option I thought of was to ask my stepmom if the camera was still around, but I really wanted a faster lens, since my main reason for going back to a rangefinder was for low-light and available-light work, so, under the recommendation of the gang here, I picked up a QL17 GIII.

 

[Ronald_H]

as for the people who were commenting on my budget, i'm making this purchase to dip my feet in rangefinder photography and most of my camera-budget is actually geared towards my SLR (insert evil music here). i just wanted a decent performing starter to see whether or not i would like the platform.
😉

Well, then I just have to warn that one month after my first rangefinder (the Canonet, bought for the same reason as you) I bought a Leica M2 with a CV 35mm. And a month later a DR Summicron... should I go on? 😀

 

[airds]

Doomed, doomed :-(

 

[alt4852]

hahaha, all of your cautions are duly noted. thanks for the warnings and words of support from everyone. 🙂