Help me choose a film RF

[Sumarongi]

Yeah, but that's fancy territory. You might as well buy a Leica at that point!

Fancy, perhaps yes, but the Leica-comparison is lopsided -- the Blik is inexpensive, see:

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Lomo-Bli...511253?hash=item48b394af95:g:gL0AAOSwPR9brdDm

 

[Out to Lunch]

An interesting review of the Zeiss-Ikon ZI: http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/zeiss-.html

 

[David Hughes]

The idea of a Smena or Cosmic Symbol is an interesting one as the lenses are good enough for most people and no batteries required for exposing etc. Add a BLIK RF and a small Zenit flash and you'll be shocked how cheap the camera and flash will be and how dear (x9 or x10) the RF will be.

The f/4 40mm triplet on the camera is OK, I've a re-mounted one that I've used on the M9 but focussing was by drawing up a list after testing at various ranges. Here's a sample 1:1 from the test shots I did with the M9 to sort out the focussing scale.

Taken at 1/180th second at f/5.6 at 1.5 m range.



Regards, David

 

[Tom R]

After viewing many hundreds of photos taken with film in 2006-2010, I've decided I want a film camera again.

Really don't care about name or brand that much, but a small RF would be great. I like the M6s, but hate the reliability, always had to pay a few hundred for repairs. Is an M4-P or M4 the way to go?

Where's a good place to get a used one with warranty, KEH?

You realize that this question will likely open a fire hydrant of responses ...

That being said, I've always found that sticking with one good camera/lens combination freed me to concentrate on the more important task---making photographs.

For twenty-five years I used only a Leica M2 (cosmetically bad, internally excellent) and a Leitz 35mm (pre-ASPH) lens. The only time that this lens came off of the camera body was for CLA---every five years or so.

About fifteen years ago, I picked up two M4-P bodies to allow me to use an Elmarit 28mm without hassling with a viewfinder; these bodies also facilitated the use of more modern flash units. (I purchased two bodies so that I could pass the original M2 over to a young family member as a gift, leaving one body for the 35, the other for the 28.)

If you can afford to simplify your life, then you might be able to get back to the more serious business of making photographs that say what it is you're trying to say.

Just my opinion ...

Tom R

 

[jawarden]

An interesting review of the Zeiss-Ikon ZI: http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/zeiss-.html

That article influenced my purchase and it's fun to reread it. The Contax G2 in the article was the camera I was looking to replace, and the ZI was a good fit for me.

For what it's worth the ZI is the only camera I have that would be replaced immediately if I lost or ruined it somehow. It's a joy to use, small and light compared to everything else I have. I see ebay average selling price in the US is $1300, same as the msrp in 2006. Still worth it, I think.

 

[ampguy]

I went with an M4, and Canon ltm 50/1.4. Both are new to me, though I've had M4ps, and M6s previously, along with M8, RD1s, etc. The ZI would be interesting if I hadn't found an M4.

 

[RObert Budding]

Nikon Rangefinders are quite simply more trouble free than Leica film rangefinders.

Take a good look at the Nikon S2 Black dial. Great with a 50, and you always have the option of other lenses.

Stephen

I'll weigh Stephen's advice far more heavily because he actually has a camera repair businesses, so his sample volume is far higher than consumers who have had only a few cameras.

I recently opted for a Nikon SP for myself.