Nick
Established
I currently have a Yashica GSN, but am looking for something with a brighter viewfinder and within budget. After looking at a Bessa R2a/R3a (and deciding it was too expensive), I've been pointed towards a Canonet.
Anyone had experience with both and can compare the two (viewfinder brightness in particular)?
Cheers
Anyone had experience with both and can compare the two (viewfinder brightness in particular)?
Cheers
N
nwcanonman
Guest
VF brightness can also be a matter of age or how dirty it's become. I don't find my Q17 any brighter than my GSN, the GSN is just bigger.
For a great viewfinder (and a good price) you should look at the Bessa R. Used at under $200 and inexpensive Russian LTM lenses.
For a great viewfinder (and a good price) you should look at the Bessa R. Used at under $200 and inexpensive Russian LTM lenses.
Taipei-metro
Veteran
Nick,Nick said:
All Canonets do not have bright view finder, they are cheap cameras in 70s. Even now, A good condition G-III 17 is about $50. A chrome Voigtlander R body w bright finder alone is $190-$240, then you need a 35/2.5, which comes to $399 in CameraQuest.
The 40mm 1.7 on Canonet G-III and 45mm on your Yashica is also a MONSTER difference, a big 5 friggin mm difference in focal length. This 40mm 1.7, is a MASTERPIECE lens consider it's price when new back in 72, or now $50 Ebay. People like to point oue another masterpiece Olympus SP, very bad that it's a 42mm, BIG BIG differece than a 40mm.
Good hunting for your Canonet!
By the way, all Canonet G-III are made in Taiwan, Taichung to be exact. Maybe some very rare black ones are made in Japan, I've never seen a black one in person in my life.
Taipei-metro
Veteran
One more thing, if you have money for the Voigtlander R3A( $539), do not buy that Zeiss Sonnar 40mm 2.8($650, that's right, Six hundred and fifty big clams) with it, this Canonet's 40mm 1.7 from f2.8 and up, will, like the American saying, "Beat the crap out of that Zeiss...." 
Last edited:
F
Frank Granovski
Guest
The Canon is more or less a copy of the Yashica ELECTRO. In my opinion, the ELECTRO GSN looks and feels like a better camera than the Canon CANONET QL17 G111.
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
I have both. In fact i had two of both Used them both.
In short: the canonet feels more solid, better made, and considerably smaller (this can be good or bad for a user). It has full manual option, can be handy sometimes. However it is more limited - shorter ISO range (i loved that i can use neopan1600 at iso 1000 in the GSN), no long shutter speeds (the GSN goes up to 30 seconds!). And there's the battery problem...the GSN can use new batteries with some padding, the canonet needs tricks to have its meter exactly working with alkaline or silver batteries.
Some people who tested it accurately report that the Yashinon lens is better wide open than the canon. I did not notice any real life difference.
I've cleaned the vf/rf of the cameras, and there is NO difference in brightness or ease of focusing.
Used them both.In short: the canonet feels more solid, better made, and considerably smaller (this can be good or bad for a user). It has full manual option, can be handy sometimes. However it is more limited - shorter ISO range (i loved that i can use neopan1600 at iso 1000 in the GSN), no long shutter speeds (the GSN goes up to 30 seconds!). And there's the battery problem...the GSN can use new batteries with some padding, the canonet needs tricks to have its meter exactly working with alkaline or silver batteries.
Some people who tested it accurately report that the Yashinon lens is better wide open than the canon. I did not notice any real life difference.
I've cleaned the vf/rf of the cameras, and there is NO difference in brightness or ease of focusing.
R
Rob
Guest
I like the lens of the yashica better than Canonet, but like the viewfinder of the canonet better.
airds
Well-known
Copy !!?!??!
Copy !!?!??!
Frank
How can the Canon be a copy of the Yashica ? The GIII's (f1.7 & f1.9) were at the end of a series of 14 Canonet models starting from around 1961. If you check the Canon museum you can easily see the development and improvements in each model, as production and manufacturing techniques improved.
To me the Yashica - although a nice camera - is too big to be a compact; while there are better are more flexible larger rangefinder models from Leica, Nikon and Canon.
rdgs
Copy !!?!??!
Frank Granovski said:The Canon is more or less a copy of the Yashica ELECTRO. In my opinion, the ELECTRO GSN looks and feels like a better camera than the Canon CANONET QL17 G111.
Frank
How can the Canon be a copy of the Yashica ? The GIII's (f1.7 & f1.9) were at the end of a series of 14 Canonet models starting from around 1961. If you check the Canon museum you can easily see the development and improvements in each model, as production and manufacturing techniques improved.
To me the Yashica - although a nice camera - is too big to be a compact; while there are better are more flexible larger rangefinder models from Leica, Nikon and Canon.
rdgs
F
Frank Granovski
Guest
The ELECTRO shutter was implemented into the Canon under license from Yashica. How much more Electrofied do you want this Canon to be
The Canonet has an all mechanical shutter. The Yashica has an electronic shutter. The Yashica is aperture preferred automatic; the Canonet is shutter preferred automatic. The Yashica, as pointd out, has a 45mm lens and the Canonet has a 40mm lens. The Yashica is about the same size as an SLR; I used a Yashica J-5 case for one. The Canonet is much smaller. Both cameras use 1-2-2-1 formula lenses.
The Canonet will work on manual, you set both shutter speed and aperture. The meter turns off in this mode.
There are alternatives to both of these, the Minolta HiMatic is often overlooked. The Konica S2 is another full-sized camera with a very sharp lens and top notch viewfinder.
The Canonet will work on manual, you set both shutter speed and aperture. The meter turns off in this mode.
There are alternatives to both of these, the Minolta HiMatic is often overlooked. The Konica S2 is another full-sized camera with a very sharp lens and top notch viewfinder.
Last edited:
airds
Well-known
electro
electro
I don't want it electrofied at all ......
electro
Frank Granovski said:The ELECTRO shutter was implemented into the Canon under license from Yashica. How much more Electrofied do you want this Canon to be
I don't want it electrofied at all ......
flashover
John K
I have both the GSN and G-III. I find the viewfinder brighter on the Canon. The GSN has been cleaned so it's not dirty. The G-III is a little quicker to focus for me. The GSN is bigger, this can be a plus or neg depends on how you look at it. There are issuses with both cameras if your buying them from ebay or some one you don't know. The front element on the G-III can be a problem. Ask greyhoundman and he can give a run down on the things to watch out for. John
JoeFriday
Agent Provacateur
I also have both cameras.. I started with a GSN and picked up a Canonet before I really knew its legacy.. I immediately preferred the Canonet.. its smaller size makes it much more convenient.. the film loading is the best of any RF I've ever used (and I've used a dozen different kinds).. the lenses are of equal (superb) quality, but the Canonet focuses much faster
and as for the RF/VF.. my Canonet beats my 2 GSNs hands down.. I even modified the patch on one of my GSNs to convert it into a Leningrad-style to improve focusing
of the two, I would never hesitate to grab my Canonet.. my GSN mostly collects dust unless I'm in the mood for more contrasty images and know I'll have more time to set up a shot
and as for the RF/VF.. my Canonet beats my 2 GSNs hands down.. I even modified the patch on one of my GSNs to convert it into a Leningrad-style to improve focusing
of the two, I would never hesitate to grab my Canonet.. my GSN mostly collects dust unless I'm in the mood for more contrasty images and know I'll have more time to set up a shot
sbug
Acceptably Sharp
I have both and I agree with most of the previous posts. Here's my opinion, your mileage may vary...
Canonet advantages: Smaller, feels better built, ability to shoot full manual, 35mm film loading does not get any easier than this, you actually know your shutter speed and aperture, meter cell built into the lens ring
Yashica advantages: Aperture priority shooting, easily adapted to new batteries, generally less expensive, wider range of ISO settings
The viewfinder on my Yashica GS has been cleaned so it is marginally easier to focus. The other advantages these cameras and other fixed lens rangefinders have are relatively low prices, FAST glass, quiet operation and smooth leaf shutters that will allow for very slow speed handheld shots if you have a steady hand. The quietness is amazing. My Nikon S3 sounds slr like loud next to the Yashica or Canonet. My main negative to both is that they have very few aperture blades (5 on the Canonet and 6? on the Yashica) that tend to give you less than great bokeh. It's not a deal breaker with either camera though.
Having said all that, you could probably get both for ~$100 so why not do that and see for yourself.
Canonet advantages: Smaller, feels better built, ability to shoot full manual, 35mm film loading does not get any easier than this, you actually know your shutter speed and aperture, meter cell built into the lens ring
Yashica advantages: Aperture priority shooting, easily adapted to new batteries, generally less expensive, wider range of ISO settings
The viewfinder on my Yashica GS has been cleaned so it is marginally easier to focus. The other advantages these cameras and other fixed lens rangefinders have are relatively low prices, FAST glass, quiet operation and smooth leaf shutters that will allow for very slow speed handheld shots if you have a steady hand. The quietness is amazing. My Nikon S3 sounds slr like loud next to the Yashica or Canonet. My main negative to both is that they have very few aperture blades (5 on the Canonet and 6? on the Yashica) that tend to give you less than great bokeh. It's not a deal breaker with either camera though.
Having said all that, you could probably get both for ~$100 so why not do that and see for yourself.
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
Frank Granovski said:The Canon is more or less a copy of the Yashica ELECTRO. In my opinion, the ELECTRO GSN looks and feels like a better camera than the Canon CANONET QL17 G111.
This is the kind of rubbish that litters the 'net.
The Yashica Electro and Canonet QL17 GIII are very different cameras. Although both have a leaf shutter, 1/500s top speed, they are very different both in conception and size.
The Electro is decidedly bigger and heavier. The Canonet is smaller, but although lighter than the Electro, has a nice weight considering its size.
Film loading, although similar, the upload mechanism is different (QL stands for "quick load", and it has an interesting system for keeping the film flat).
The light sensor on the Yashica is on the rangefinder base, while on the Canonet is right above the lens, so that using filters you don't have to do any manual compensation.
The Yashica cannot be operated manually (only operates at 1/500 without batteries), while the Canonet is fully operational without batteries. The batteries on the Canonet are solely for coupling the light meter to the shutter.
So any claim that the Canonet is a copy of the Yashica is, frankly speaking...well...I guess I should censor myself.
flashover
John K
the gap widens over the best maker I think each model has it's use and advantages. That's why I have both. And They don't destroy the bank balance ( well not all the time ).
F
Frank Granovski
Guest
I read that on one of the major classic camera sites.
airds
Well-known
Copies
Copies
Copies
That explains it then.Frank Granovski said:
phototone
Well-known
I have both, as well as some other similar RFDR cameras. I prefer to shoot with the GSM for some reason.
phquest
Member
I have both, two GSNs and one Canonet QLIII.
I find that focusing is way faster with the Canonet. The viewfinder is brighter on one of the GSN, then, on 2nd place comes the GIII and my first-bought GSN comes third. All cameras had the viewfinders cleaned.
I have prints made from both cameras, and I must say that the pictures taken with the GSNs are a tad sharper (or maybe a little bit more contrasty), but then again, not by much.
The Canonet has a built quality generations above the GSN, it is smaller but very well made.
I find that I prefer the feeling of the GSN on my hands better, it feels more balanced, just like a real camera should feel (YMMV). That's one of the main reasons why the GSN is my favorite one. Don't get me wrong, I like both cameras, when I go on my picture-taking walks, I usually grab both. They both are amazing picture-taking jewels.
The GSN gets more night time shooting, because its shutter speed can go as low as 30 sec without any photog intervention. If you find something, worth having its picture taken, no matter how dark or dim the light levels are, with the GSN is only a matter of focusing, placing the camera on something steady and shooting away.
With the canonet you are limited to 1/4 of a sec or to use the bulb feature which is not very convenient unless you have a shutter release or the ability to turn into stone for however long the exposure is (providing you guess the exposure right).
One major thing in favor of the Canonet is that you can use the camera in manual mode giving you total control for creative shooting or for when a battery is not available.
On a side note, the last GSN I got from the Evil site, was in inmaculate condition, not a single scratch or dent anywhere on the body. As a matter of fact, the original POD was still on the camera, fully intact. Everything on the camera works, just like the day, it left the factory.
If I were you, I get the Canonet anyway (since you already own a GSN), use it for a while and if down the road you decide that it is not for you, you can sell it again with not loss whatsoever. It's a win-win situation.
I find that focusing is way faster with the Canonet. The viewfinder is brighter on one of the GSN, then, on 2nd place comes the GIII and my first-bought GSN comes third. All cameras had the viewfinders cleaned.
I have prints made from both cameras, and I must say that the pictures taken with the GSNs are a tad sharper (or maybe a little bit more contrasty), but then again, not by much.
The Canonet has a built quality generations above the GSN, it is smaller but very well made.
I find that I prefer the feeling of the GSN on my hands better, it feels more balanced, just like a real camera should feel (YMMV). That's one of the main reasons why the GSN is my favorite one. Don't get me wrong, I like both cameras, when I go on my picture-taking walks, I usually grab both. They both are amazing picture-taking jewels.
The GSN gets more night time shooting, because its shutter speed can go as low as 30 sec without any photog intervention. If you find something, worth having its picture taken, no matter how dark or dim the light levels are, with the GSN is only a matter of focusing, placing the camera on something steady and shooting away.
With the canonet you are limited to 1/4 of a sec or to use the bulb feature which is not very convenient unless you have a shutter release or the ability to turn into stone for however long the exposure is (providing you guess the exposure right).
One major thing in favor of the Canonet is that you can use the camera in manual mode giving you total control for creative shooting or for when a battery is not available.
On a side note, the last GSN I got from the Evil site, was in inmaculate condition, not a single scratch or dent anywhere on the body. As a matter of fact, the original POD was still on the camera, fully intact. Everything on the camera works, just like the day, it left the factory.
If I were you, I get the Canonet anyway (since you already own a GSN), use it for a while and if down the road you decide that it is not for you, you can sell it again with not loss whatsoever. It's a win-win situation.