Every-Day-Carry RF (again)

I'll second (or third) the choice of the Canonet. I have two of them, one I got for $10. at the flea market, and the other from ebay for $20. I do a lot of low light shooting in bars, and the Canonet is more than capable. The meter only works up to ISO 800, and only in the shutter priority mode, but if you are using another meter that isn't an issue. I usually take a few reading at 800, do the math for 3200, shoot in manual mode, and guess on a few exposures.
 
Damn right. TX at 3200, f1.7, 1/8 sec.

(Sorry for the bad scan.)

CleverName said:
I do a lot of low light shooting in bars, and the Canonet is more than capable.
Click to expand...
 
Retina IIa, sharp 50/2 Xenon lens, fully manual, no meter, also a leaf shutter and folds down as small as my Oly XA. It's also a solid metal shell, so I can put it in my back pocket and forget about it.
 
Opting for small size for a EDC brings its share of disadvantages; I've tried half-frame and 110 cameras, too... But, giving up covert carry, these days I just sling over my shoulder whatever rig I'm currently using and carry it everywhere. Tucked under my elbow, it's pretty inconspicuous. Just one body, one lens, only rarely an extra roll of film, no bag.

The Minolta CLE is a great one for this. But just now I returned from a walk to pick up the mail a couple blocks away but diverted a few extra blocks to pass by some local photo targets... with a Bronica RF645 over one shoulder. Easy, and certainly my most common choice to have along, anywhere.

Oh, yeah, and I have to say I did try the small route this past year with an APS-film Canon ELPH Jr, even picking the fixed non-zoom 26mm f/2.8 lens for its speed and in hopes of better optical quality. I got the Canon leather belt pouch for it, and this sure makes a handy little package. As it turns out, I'm just not satisfied with the quality of its output. And so I just have little respect when using it. Too bad...
 
Last edited:
Isn't it funny what some people regard as requirements for an everyday camera, and others don't.

I'm the biggest XA fan, but after playing with the QL17 "pass the camera", it seems like the perfect choice for your need. I'd suggest a seperate meter, though.

Cheers,
Steve
 
Yeah, it's nice to have the good stuff on one's person, but it's just not practical for me. I carry too much stuff, have to wear too much clothing (lots of the time) and need soemthing that fits in my shoulder bag easily, doesn't way too much, and that I don't have to care much about.

The Retina IIa might just do, we'll see.



Doug said:
Opting for small size for a EDC brings its share of disadvantages; I've tried half-frame and 110 cameras, too... But, giving up covert carry, these days I just sling over my shoulder whatever rig I'm currently using and carry it everywhere. Tucked under my elbow, it's pretty inconspicuous. Just one body, one lens, only rarely an extra roll of film, no bag.

The Minolta CLE is a great one for this. But just now I returned from a walk to pick up the mail a couple blocks away but diverted a few extra blocks to pass by some local photo targets... with a Bronica RF645 over one shoulder. Easy, and certainly my most common choice to have along, anywhere.

Oh, yeah, and I have to say I did try the small route this past year with an APS-film Canon ELPH Jr, even picking the fixed non-zoom 26mm f/2.8 lens for its speed and in hopes of better optical quality. I got the Canon leather belt pouch for it, and this sure makes a handy little package. As it turns out, I'm just not satisfied with the quality of its output. And so I just have little respect when using it. Too bad...
Click to expand...
 
Yeah, that's what makes this sort of thread such fun.

I may end up carrying the Canonet, indeed. And a new meter, the L-508 being a bit of space-hog, too.


st3ph3nm said:
Isn't it funny what some people regard as requirements for an everyday camera, and others don't.

I'm the biggest XA fan, but after playing with the QL17 "pass the camera", it seems like the perfect choice for your need. I'd suggest a seperate meter, though.

Cheers,
Steve
Click to expand...
 
The Retina IIa has weak cocking rack and a squinty viewfinder.

Seriously, I'd prefer to have cock the shutter manually the Retina II and use a Leitz 5cm brightline finder than spending the rest of my days making that careful full stroke film advance with the IIa's winding lever.

The IIc, IIC, IIIc and IIIC don't have this problem, but they are not exactly compact and have the dreaded LVS interlock on their shutters.

It took one roll of film with a Leica screw mount to get me to sell my Retinas.
 
Solinar said:
The Retina IIa has weak cocking rack and a squinty viewfinder.

Seriously, I'd prefer to have cock the shutter manually the Retina II and use a Leitz 5cm brightline finder than spending the rest of my days making that careful full stroke film advance with the IIa's winding lever.
Click to expand...

Okay... I'll bite. How do you manually cock the shutter in a IIa? I'm looking at it right now, and unless you have a screwdriver for a finger (sorry about that gman), that's really hard to do.
 
Look at my quote and you'll see that I'm referring to the II, not the IIa.

A bit of easy Retina trivia: Which came first the II with a Compur Rapid or the IIa with a Compur Synchro?
 
For low light shooting you want a bright finder. If you do not mind the money for a CL or CLE, it is the way to go. With the 40 Summicron, Canon 50mm F1.5, it is quite compact. Smaller than the Canonet. Also about 10x as expensive. Both have been to the Playground.

The Minolta 7s-II is a terrific little camera, but the finder on the Canonet is better.
 
Solinar said:
Look at my quote and you'll see that I'm referring to the II, not the IIa.
Click to expand...

Aha... I wondered if that was a typo. I thought maybe you stuck an allen-key in the slot or some other workaround.
 
Awwww, this is turning into one of those real-life, "you get what you pay for" situations. I want a ridiculously under-valued, perfectly-performing compact camera!

But as reality sets in, I'm thinking strongly about a CL/CLE, but I don't want to get sucked into some eBay battle. If I could find one around here for a good price (and I like my stuff with a good amount of wear on it) I'd be thrilled. It'd be pretty small with a Summitar on it.

Ah, I see, no collapsible lenses on the CL. OK, the Canon 50/1.8 and 35/1.8 would be fine.


Brian Sweeney said:
For low light shooting you want a bright finder. If you do not mind the money for a CL or CLE, it is the way to go. With the 40 Summicron, Canon 50mm F1.5, it is quite compact. Smaller than the Canonet. Also about 10x as expensive. Both have been to the Playground.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Double heresy

Double heresy

Hello:

I realize you specified cost as a factor (111f+digisix+collapsible summicron or 35mm you have), but if I may commit a double heresy, is the the new ZI not a current version of the CL/CLE?

yours
Frank
 
Last edited:
Just too much cash. Though I may sell my M2 (which I really only bought to use with a 35mm lens) if I get a CL/CLE, Id be interested in having some money left over.

FPjohn said:
Hello:

I realize you specified cost as a factor (111f+digisix+collapsible summicron or 35mm you have), but if I may commit a double heresy, is the the new ZI not a current version of the CL/CLE?

yours
Frank
Click to expand...
 
merciful said:
Awwww, this is turning into one of those real-life, "you get what you pay for" situations. I want a ridiculously under-valued, perfectly-performing compact camera!
Click to expand...

A box camera with the lens removed and a pin hole aperture installed fits this description.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom