Canonet QL19 G-III vs Olympus 35RC

[raynokk]

Hello,
I’ve got an opportunity to buy one of theese cameras for a really good price:

Canonet QL19 G-III
or
Olympus 35RC

I pretty much know what kind of cameras are these. There's faster lens on
Canonet - f/1.9 over f/2.8 on Olympus. If I'm not mistaken both cameras are
shutter-priority. 35RC is quite smaller compared to Canonet which I take as an
advantage but to this day my only RF I've been shooting with is Kiev 4 which
is way too larger. Canonet’s got also normal filter size unlike RC (58mm over 43.5mm).
So, what are guys your thoughtd on these cameras?
Wich do you think will better perform?

Best regards,
raynokk

 

[Dwig]

My experience is with the QL17-GIII as the 19 variant is rather rare in the US.


The 35RC is excellent, but the slightly larger QL17-GIII has a distinctly better VF with very good parallax correction. I seem to remember (but memory is poor) that the economies in the QL19 included a simpler VF.

 

[twvancamp]

You would be happy with either I'm sure! I've had both, and kept the Olympus. The images are fantastic.

I will say, if you plan to use the Olympus in manual mode, the aperture ring is very small and difficult to access. I ended up 3d printing a ring with a tab to make it practical.

 

[benlees]

I've had the QL17-GIII and the 35RC. My preference was definitely the 35RC. Keep in mind my opinions are based on using just 2 cameras may not reflect what you find or even value.

The lens in Oly was clearly sharper and I found its smaller size to be an advantage. The Canon QL's seem bigger than they are, but not as big and heavy as some of the Yashicas! On my particular camera the lens was not mounted tightly at all; this is very common for that eras fixed lens RF's. I don't think I ever had one where the lens barrel was completely snug! This got annoying because you change shutter speeds on the lens barrel- it felt like it might come apart.

The 35RC's advance lever is in an odd place so with the camera to your eye (I'm a left eye shooter) it sort of gouges into your forehead!

For me, the lens and the smaller size of the 35RC were the deciders. The Canon should have been better than it was; you wanted it to be better but it couldn't quite deliver.

Build quality was roughly equal between them, with an edge toward the Canon. Try them both if you can.

 

[Jeremy Z]

Welcome to RFF!

I've had them both. I prefer the 35 RC. Its lens is sharper and more contrasty, to me. It is is also smaller, but despite being smaller, the controls are less fiddly, since the shutter speed is on top instead of yet another ring around the lens.

For low ambient light work, the Canon will obviously be better. I don't recall what all is shown in the viewfinder of the Canon, but the Olympus shows both the aperture and shutter speed, as well as sending the needle into the red and forbidding a photo to be taken in A mode, if it will be over or under-exposed.

The loading on the Canon is quite a bit faster and easier. On the Olympus, it is a little more fiddly than even a typical SLR, because the take-up spool turns in the atypical direction. Winds it over the far side, instead of near side, as on SLRs.

Go for the Olympus. I have several small fixed lens cameras, and I think the 35 RC might be my favorite.

See if you can get a warranty for 30 days while you run a roll of film through it to check for metering accuracy, rangefinder focusing accuracy and light leaks. Those are all common problems with any fixed lens rangefinder.

 

[ronnies]

My QL-17 GIII takes 48mm filters not 58mm and I suspect the QL-19 is the same.

Ronnie

 

[dourbalistar]

The OP is talking about the QL19, which I think has a different lens than the QL17. The former is f/1.9 and the latter is f/1.7. This site has the QL19 filter size at 55mm:
http://mattsclassiccameras.com/rangefinders-compacts/canon-canonet-ql19/

 

[ronnies]

The OP is talking about the QL19, which I think has a different lens than the QL17. The former is f/1.9 and the latter is f/1.7. This site has the QL19 filter size at 55mm:
http://mattsclassiccameras.com/rangefinders-compacts/canon-canonet-ql19/

He's talking about the QL-19 G-III which looks to have the same lens body as the QL-17 G-III. That's smaller than the plain QL-19 and QL-17.

Ronnie

 

[dourbalistar]

He's talking about the QL-19 G-III which looks to have the same lens body as the QL-17 G-III. That's smaller than the plain QL-19 and QL-17.

Ronnie

Ah yes, you're correct. There are so many variants! Nevertheless, those two cameras have different lens designs.
QL-19 G-III - 45mm f/1.9 (5 elements in 4 groups)
QL-17 G-III - 40mm f/1.7 (6 elements in 4 groups)

That said, I have no idea about the filter thread size anymore, even the Canon Camera Museum doesn't list it:
https://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/film85.html
https://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/film84.html

 

[raynokk]

Thank you very much guys.
I’m choosing RC due to its lower price, better mounted lens and 14 days warranty, too.

 

[stevierose]

Good choice. I own the QL17 and the RC and I like the RC better. I have a collection of these 70's era fixed lens rangefinders, they were/are very nice cameras. The camera you buy will very likely need new seals. Also, after nearly 50 years, the viewfinder/rangefinder tends become dull and hard to see because of a build up of grime over the decades. The viewfinder on these is not well sealed. So, if you get a great price on the camera, it is worth paying someone to clean and adjust the camera to bring it back to "like new" specs. Once that is done, the viewfinder/rangefinder will be bright and clear.

 

[Austintatious]

I also have had both cameras. Sold the Canon, will not sell the RC.

+1 Good choice.