vvilliam
Member
Hello all!
Long time digital shooter here pulled into the draw of rangefinders.
It all started with a used Sony Voigtlander lens, then a Minolta 35mm SLR, and now I want a compact rangefinder.
My "digital rangefinder" setup right now is Sony with Voigtlanders, but the EVF and massive size are drawbacks.
All signs point to M mount but I don't have the bank to spend on an Leica body.
So far my search has turned up these alternatives:
- Minolta CLE
- Leitz-Minolta CL
- Bessa R2-R4 series
I'd jump on a Bessa but the prices on ebay these days seem almost M-series.
I've heard the CLE has been known to go bad, and the CL is decent.
So some questions here:
- Recommendations for shops that have used rangefinders? I'd like to support a local shop that can ship.
- Are there other mount systems or fixed lens rangefinders I should consider? I want a body for 35mm film, with a lens anywhere from 20-50mm.
vvilliam
Member
In addition, I had a Fuji X100VI but returned it.
The magnetic manual focusing ring wasn't to my liking, and the lens wasn't matched in quality to the sensor.
The magnetic manual focusing ring wasn't to my liking, and the lens wasn't matched in quality to the sensor.
Which Voigtlander lenses do you have, M-Mount or LTM?
M-Mount- the Little Leica CL is a reasonable price these days, but check the Meter. If you do not need a TTL meter, probably get even cheaper.
If you have LTM lenses- Canon P and Canon 7 are both under $200.
And welcome aboard. We love telling people how to spend money on Rangefinder equipment.
M-Mount- the Little Leica CL is a reasonable price these days, but check the Meter. If you do not need a TTL meter, probably get even cheaper.
If you have LTM lenses- Canon P and Canon 7 are both under $200.
And welcome aboard. We love telling people how to spend money on Rangefinder equipment.
KoNickon
Nick Merritt
You mentioned fixed lens rangefinders as something you'd consider, and I would recommend starting there. Many excellent choices in that category, particularly if it's compactness you want -- Canonet G III QL17, Konica Auto S3, Olympus 35 RC, Kodak Retina IIIc come to mind immediately; all have excellent lenses and decent meters. Check out the profiles of Compact 35's here: Classic Camera Profiles
vvilliam
Member
I have a set of E Mount ones
Nothing in M mount right now but they don't look unreasonable in price (compared to leica glass).
I'd consider getting 1 or 2 in M-mount (non-screw, right?).
My concern with the LTM is there seems to be less support for modern lenses in that mount.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
In fact Leica is cheap and much more reliable, elegant and joy to use as anything in your list.
It is called as Barnack.
And if you never shoot on film, google S16.
Film exposures doesn't need electronics, which is aid for people who has no memory cells left.
And film doesn't need modern lenses. Yet, where are some labeled as .... Voigtlander
It is called as Barnack.
And if you never shoot on film, google S16.
Film exposures doesn't need electronics, which is aid for people who has no memory cells left.
And film doesn't need modern lenses. Yet, where are some labeled as .... Voigtlander
boojum
Ignoble Miscreant
Barnack bodies, or FSU copies can be good buys. Leica M bodies can be, are, expensive but lose little value. I have some digital bodies which have gone up in price so not only have I used them for free, I could make money selling them. So if you can look past the initial cost an M body might be a good purchase. You are heading in that direction anyway so why not just do it and be done with it?
As for lenses, those LTM's are all easily adaptable to M mount cameras. The adapters are cheap and on eBay. I have several and they all work just fine and the adapters pull up the correct RF lines. It's all good. Some adapters can be bought with the six small indents, too, for the six bit lens encoding so that the camera will know what you want it to believe you are shooting with.
As for lenses, those LTM's are all easily adaptable to M mount cameras. The adapters are cheap and on eBay. I have several and they all work just fine and the adapters pull up the correct RF lines. It's all good. Some adapters can be bought with the six small indents, too, for the six bit lens encoding so that the camera will know what you want it to believe you are shooting with.
wlewisiii
Just another hotel clerk
If you want to try a film rangefinder, the CL is an excellent way to do it. I used one for several years without a meter. I carried a handheld meter and that worked just fine and by doing so you can get one dirt cheap. Watch out for broken film spindles inside the camera though thanks to 3d printing this is not the killer it used to be.
A fun kit for a CL is to buy (relatively) inexpensive LTM lenses with M mount adapters. I used a Canon 28/3.5, a Leica 50/2 Summitar & a Leica 90/4 on mine to great success. Since I didn't have to worry about the meter, collapsing the lens was not a worry for me, how ever a fixed 50 remains a better choice with the body. Look for a good condition Canon 50/1.8, a Minolta/Chiyoko Super Rokkor 50/2 or Nikkor 50/2 instead.
It does not have a 28 frame line but I learned quickly that the whole finder worked a treat for me as the area for the Canon lens. Your mileage will vary but I found that to be a near perfect set as a result since I don't care for the 40mm that was designed for the camera being simultaneously neither wide enough and too wide.
The rangefinder base line is not long enough for a fast 90mm lens, really, but the older 90/4 Elmar, especially the LTM ones you can get for silly cheap that are lovely lenses, work perfectly on it and are the best possible portrait lens for it.
Whenever I get thinking about being masochistic enough to do still more film, I get nostalgic for my CL but right now my F4 is enough.
Hope these thoughts help.
A fun kit for a CL is to buy (relatively) inexpensive LTM lenses with M mount adapters. I used a Canon 28/3.5, a Leica 50/2 Summitar & a Leica 90/4 on mine to great success. Since I didn't have to worry about the meter, collapsing the lens was not a worry for me, how ever a fixed 50 remains a better choice with the body. Look for a good condition Canon 50/1.8, a Minolta/Chiyoko Super Rokkor 50/2 or Nikkor 50/2 instead.
It does not have a 28 frame line but I learned quickly that the whole finder worked a treat for me as the area for the Canon lens. Your mileage will vary but I found that to be a near perfect set as a result since I don't care for the 40mm that was designed for the camera being simultaneously neither wide enough and too wide.
The rangefinder base line is not long enough for a fast 90mm lens, really, but the older 90/4 Elmar, especially the LTM ones you can get for silly cheap that are lovely lenses, work perfectly on it and are the best possible portrait lens for it.
Whenever I get thinking about being masochistic enough to do still more film, I get nostalgic for my CL but right now my F4 is enough.
Hope these thoughts help.
bbutterfield
Bruce
Not sure why the Minolta CLE doesn’t get more love here — I use mine as my default snap shooter for all my m-mount lenses. Tiny, lightweight, great meter accuracy, amazing viewfinder for 28mm and 40mm lenses. What’s not to like?
KoNickon
Nick Merritt
I love mine but it has the dancing LEDs problem, which takes a while to sort out every time I use it. I haven't found a fix for this.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I too would say you should take a look at the Leica II/III series "Barnak" cameras. I bought my IIIc earlier this year ... it's in very nice operating shape, cost me without a lens $321. There are any number of good lens options for these cameras ... the natural choice is a Leitz Elmar 5.0cm f/3.5 (mine was $250 last January) and a Voigtländer Color-Skopar (in 28mm, 35mm, or 50mm focal lengths and the 39mm thread mount) tend to run between $300 and $450 if you look at second-hand offerings. A 50mm is a good match to the built in viewfinder.
The Leica CL is another delight, puts you into M-mount lenses. The meter in the CL is generally robust but I have had them fail on me from time to time. I personally would stay away from the Minolta CLE as its generation of electronic cameras tend to have more failures and be difficult to get serviced.
Another option in a compact RF camera is the Kodak Retina series from the 1950s. These are leaf shutter cameras with front element lens interchangability ... the standard lens is a 50mm, and both 35 and 85 focal lengths are available. I like these cameras a whole lot, they go for very reasonable money, and they are quite easy to get service for. I particularly like the Retina IIc as it is a bit more compact and simpler than the meter-equipped IIIc from the middle 1950s. The lenses are either Schneider or Rodenstock (mostly Schneider in the USA) and are very fine performers.
G
rfaspen
[insert pithy phrase here]
Hmmm. Or get a Canonet QL17 GIII, or a Minolta Hi-Matic 7 (or similar, there are several models ranging from 7-9 as well as E and F).
The idea here is to get a fixed-lens RF camera and see if you actually like it. The lenses on the QL or Hi-Matics are "stunning" for what they are. You would not be disappointed with sharpness or contrast.
But........after using the more inexpensive QL or Hi-Matic for a while, you may realize that you like using an RF. In which case, only one thing will satisfy you. That would be a Leica M. Nearly any film M would suffice at this point. I'm thinking that the money and time you save by trying out a QL or Hi-Matic will make the transition more efficient.
In other words. If you happen to really like RF, we will eventually be hearing about "your new Leica M something-or-other" within a year's time. Trust me on this. In fact, why don't you ask around here and see how many of us have followed this route?
The idea here is to get a fixed-lens RF camera and see if you actually like it. The lenses on the QL or Hi-Matics are "stunning" for what they are. You would not be disappointed with sharpness or contrast.
But........after using the more inexpensive QL or Hi-Matic for a while, you may realize that you like using an RF. In which case, only one thing will satisfy you. That would be a Leica M. Nearly any film M would suffice at this point. I'm thinking that the money and time you save by trying out a QL or Hi-Matic will make the transition more efficient.
In other words. If you happen to really like RF, we will eventually be hearing about "your new Leica M something-or-other" within a year's time. Trust me on this. In fact, why don't you ask around here and see how many of us have followed this route?
This is pretty easy. It's just oxidation on electrical contacts.
I have found CLEs to be very robust.
KoNickon
Nick Merritt
I know -- but which contacts? I previously removed the shutter and film speed dial and cleaned underneath the film speed disc, which worked for a while, but I think you have to go deeper (and I wasn't prepared to do that). I've never seen an explanation of how to do this properly.
wlewisiii
Just another hotel clerk
And all of that is why I bought a CL with a dead as a door nail meter and hand metered it. Works just fine that way.
And is MUCH MUCH MUCH cheaper too
Retro-Grouch
Veteran
Not to like: No metered manual or exposure lock. Wonderful camera that drove me crazy because of these issues, which were admittedly the norm at the time this camera was made.
Beyond that, some might take issue with the fact that it's electronically controlled. While I love the engineering genius that went into all-mechanical cameras, I've learned to embrace electronics for their accuracy and versatility. Longevity? Think about this: the Voyager I spacecraft, launched in 1977, is 15.4 billion miles away in deep space, and still kickin' butt. All without a CLA during those 47 years.
chuckroast
Well-known
Drive? Isn't that more like a short putt in your case? Bwhahahahaaaaa
DownUnder
Nikon Nomad
Slightly off-the-topic here. Here it comes.
A Contax G1 (the most affordable) or G2 (the best of the two) with two lenses, the 28/2.8 Biogon and the 90/2.8 Sonnar. Lens hoods, UVs, a table top tripod.
I would then travel the world with this kit, as I've done before. With a dozen rolls of film, ideally better quality color neg as it's good and cheap and can be easily processed almost anywhere, things have greatly changed for the better in the analog world in the last few years.
This kit would keep me as happy as a porker in you know what, and I could still carry it all in a backpack. Win-win.
(Added later) KoNickon #23 asked about batteries. CR2s, x2. I have a set in one of my two G1s, and I alternate them in whichever camera I'm using at the time. Bought in 2022 and still going strong.
(Added still later) Godfrey #11 recommended Leica LTMs. I have a big kit, and while I love it dearly, I've come to the reluctant conclusion that one has to be a special sort of masochist to want to work with one of these with lenses other than the '50. And the accessories cost the price of a kidney replacement. Keeping these points in mind, otherwise - as long as it works properly - it's an amazingly good camera...
A Contax G1 (the most affordable) or G2 (the best of the two) with two lenses, the 28/2.8 Biogon and the 90/2.8 Sonnar. Lens hoods, UVs, a table top tripod.
I would then travel the world with this kit, as I've done before. With a dozen rolls of film, ideally better quality color neg as it's good and cheap and can be easily processed almost anywhere, things have greatly changed for the better in the analog world in the last few years.
This kit would keep me as happy as a porker in you know what, and I could still carry it all in a backpack. Win-win.
(Added later) KoNickon #23 asked about batteries. CR2s, x2. I have a set in one of my two G1s, and I alternate them in whichever camera I'm using at the time. Bought in 2022 and still going strong.
(Added still later) Godfrey #11 recommended Leica LTMs. I have a big kit, and while I love it dearly, I've come to the reluctant conclusion that one has to be a special sort of masochist to want to work with one of these with lenses other than the '50. And the accessories cost the price of a kidney replacement. Keeping these points in mind, otherwise - as long as it works properly - it's an amazingly good camera...
Last edited:
DownUnder
Nikon Nomad
Longevity? Think about this: the Voyager I spacecraft, launched in 1977, is 15.4 billion miles away in deep space, and still kickin' butt. All without a CLA during those 47 years.
Obviously made by a certain camera factory in Weztlar...
kshapero
South Florida Man
I'm a CV Bessa R3M man, myself. Just a glorious rig. Mate to a CV 40mm of your choice and you are in Photog heaven. And don't forget the film of your choice.