Curious, I guess

R

Retina Mania

Guest
Yes, I'm curious about RF.forum users. I've lurked long enough and it is my impression that most users here are mainly Japanese RF oriented or Leica-ites. I don't see a lot about German RF cameras like the Certo Super Dollina, Agfa Karat 36, Welta Weltini or other quality German cameras. Lots of these 35 RFs are top notch with excellent lenses but sell cheaply. Sometimes I wonder if there are too many 35's for too few users. Personally, I dislike the Japanese RF cameras of the '60's - '70's. Minolta HiMatics, Full sized Canonets, Konica S2; all pretty much junk. Not that the lenses are not good but they all seem to have such a high failure rate. HiMatic's shutters malfunction at a high rate. Canonets, like the Canonet 19, jam often. And the Konica S series always need their shutters cleaned. I'm not saying German cameras are immune to these problems but it seems less so.

R.M.

:bang: (Hey, I'm not angry. I just love this little smilie).
 
Sure, you've lurked around here long enough to notice our leanings, but then not all of us have tried the RFs you mention, as the ones you deride are cheaper and easier to find.

Any suggestion about the virtues of the RFs you mentioned and where to find them will be welcome, I'm sure.
 
Retina Mania wrote:

"Personally, I dislike the Japanese RF cameras of the '60's - '70's ... all pretty much junk."

Sorry, but I disagree with your blanket condemnation of Japanese rangefinders. The reality is that Japanese cameras (both rangefinders and SLRs) were of sufficient quality to kill the German camera industry (Leica survives, but only barely as a cult camera for a tiny niche market). You seem to feel "German is best." That may have been true at one time ... mostly prior to World War II in my opinion.
 
for me, i don't really know much about the cameras you mentioned. but i'm always open to learn more.
i think that's what this forum is for, to teach, to learn and hopefully become better photographers in the long run.

joe
 
Oldprof said:
Sorry, but I disagree with your blanket condemnation of Japanese rangefinders. The reality is that Japanese cameras (both rangefinders and SLRs) were of sufficient quality to kill the German camera industry (Leica survives, but only barely as a cult camera for a tiny niche market). You seem to feel "German is best." That may have been true at one time ... mostly prior to World War II in my opinion.
Click to expand...

At the time they were made and marketed the Japanese RF cameras may have been superior and cheaper than German RF's but now, after 30 or 40 years, it is more a matter of what still functions without replacement parts or major service.

I guess I have a unique view on this as part of my background involved used camera sales and I used to hang out at a relative's workplace on Saturdays (he worked at a camera repair shop) so I got to handle a lot of these cameras.

I don't think that German is best. I seldom can find a Contax IIa or IIIa with a working shutter. There are quite a few German 35's that are junk, the Zeiss Symbolica or Tenax to mention a few. However, I've found that most only need a good shutter cleaning to get going again.

Based on personal experience, I concentrate on both Japanese and German 35 RF cameras from around 1956 to 1962. Anything with a standard pc flash connection but without any automation linked to the shutter or aperture function.

Now, if you really want a good Japanese 35 RF, try a Walz Envoy 35. It's a real "sleeper" nobody knows about but with a 7 element F1.9 Kominar lens that has some very nice characteristics.

R.M.
 
Now, if you really want a good Japanese 35 RF, try a Walz Envoy 35. It's a real "sleeper" nobody knows about but with a 7 element F1.9 Kominar lens that has some very nice characteristics

thanks for the tip, i'll keep my eyes open...

joe
 
I've been tempted by the Voigtlander Vitessa, and if I found a good one with the f/2 Skopar at a good price, I might succumb. It's unusual enough a design to be interesting, and I'm told the build quality is outstanding.

As it turns out I have two cameras made in 1958... One is a Leica M2 that I bought in 1967 and still use often. The other is an Asahi Pentax K, and I had both CLA'd this year. Both are very solidly made, very smooth in operation, both were very advanced designs for their day, both can fit lenses made decades later, and both are eminently usable even now.

That one is from Germany and the other from Japan is almost coincidental. Except for the sale prices that they can command!
 
Steve Gandy's website is full of lore (mostly his own) about rangefinder cameras of just about ANY ilk. It' worth going on there just to read some of his ideas. He's probably opinionated, but he has put a lot of time and thought into what he has to say.

www.cameraquest.com
 
Just stumbled on this thread. I have used the cameras listed that start off this thread. I own a few of them. They were excellent cameras in their day. The Agfa Karat 36 is one of my all time favorites. But, they suffered in the marketplace or in the customer service department. Ergonomics were not optimal. It is quite easy to destroy an Agfa Karat 36 if no instructions are available and Weltinis did not survive the partition of germany after WWII. The lenses are uncoated and they suffer from age without spare parts.

There were a lot of clunky Japanese cameras in the 1950's and some suffered from poor design, poor materials or poor workmanship, just like the German cameras did. Some like the Aires died because they were too good. Many were excellent and only got better. Lookwho survived in the marketplace.

I use the good ones, fix those that I can and put the rest on the shelf.

-Paul
 
I have 5 Retinas myself, 2 reflexes and three rangefinders. I think they are terrific cameras, but the bottom winders tend to be a little delicate because of their cocking racks. I've had my IIIc repaired twice to replace that part. It's gotten so that I'm afarid to use it for fear of breaking it again.

I think there is a limited utility to a camera that one is afraid to use. Leica owners seem tobe worried about theft or other losses too. The lens cap alone on my Leica would cost as much to replace as one of my complete Russian rangefinders or Yashicas.

At some point we start to look like those car owners who garage their cars and seldom drive them in order to protect their value. I hope I never go that far. (I hope I'm not that far along already, I'll have to start using that IIIc again).

-Paul
 
pshinkaw said:
It's gotten so that I'm afarid to use it for fear of breaking it again.

I think there is a limited utility to a camera that one is afraid to use. ...

At some point we start to look like those car owners who garage their cars and seldom drive them in order to protect their value.
Click to expand...

Yes, I'll only go part-way there... I seldom drive my BMW M3 in winter, as there's no tire clearance for chains, and it's also quite low to the ground.

And I'm wary about using the Olympus Pen FT for fear of rebreaking the wind mechanism. I had this fixed with new parts about 10 years ago, and was told this is a weak point in the design and these parts are scarce.

I agree there's a dilemma for sure... A broken unfixable camera has little value for any purpose, but not using it for fear of breakage is throwing away its usage value.
 
Now you tell me!

I didn't know about the Pen FT. I've been happily using mine for years. And all this time I've been protecting the Retina!

Real winter in Central Texas amounts to about 2 weeks in a cold year. I'm not sure my chains will fit any of my cars now. My father was in the hospital once for a coronary artery bypass. Due to his age he was hospitalized for almost 10 days. He completely missed winter that year, including both freezing spells we had.

-Paul
 
Paul, I'll have to do a little research on the Pen FT film transport issue. I'm pretty sure the technician told me this was a characteristic weakness and parts were scarce, but in reviewing my records, there's nothing about transport repairs on my camera, just cleaning.

This was longer ago than I remembered too, December 1984. And the body CLA was $75. :)

If there are weaknesses in the transport mechanism, I expect there's someplace on the internet that'll give the details.

The poor thing deserves a roll of film, I think!
 
Doug:

I picked up my Pen FT in a pawnshop back in 1976 in a package deal with a Pen D3 for $70.00 . Both had bad meters at the time. I had them repaired for less than $30.00 together. The FT had been battered. It came with a broken eyepiece frame and a bent top plate. The meter has since given out again, but it still takes great pictures. It seems to be a pretty tough camera.

-Paul
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom