IIIa or IIf -- I still can't decide which to keep

[cmedin]

I've decided to part with either my IIIa (CLA'd by Youxin, max 1/500 shutter) or IIf RD (no CLA but in very nice shape and with the 1/1000 top speed, no slow speeds though obviously). I like them both a lot.

Which would you keep? I figure a single Barnack + the excellent Summar (uncoated!) I have would really be all I need, and the rest can go...

 

[xayraa33]

Keep the III, it has the slow shutter speeds and it would be the proper vintage to match it with your Summar lens.

 

[cmedin]

I suppose I could just slap a filter on when it gets too sunny and the 1/500 gets to be a problem. 🙂 ( I actually have a hood, filter adapter and set of filters for the Summar... Ednalite brand I believe)

 

[xayraa33]

I cannot remember the last time I used 1/1000 of a sec. in real life other than to test a newly acquired camera that has it.

 

[FrankS]

Since you have both, which camera feels better to you? Go with that.

Also, which RF patch is better, and which viewfinder is clearer?

I'd go with the IIf because it's newer, with improved shutter, more robust construction, and it's the slow speeds that mess up first. If you need a slow speed, you need a tripod anyway, so with the IIf, use a smaller aperture and a longer shutter speed that you can time manually with B.

 

[Ron (Netherlands)]

Since you have both, which camera feels better to you? Go with that.

Also, which RF patch is better, and which viewfinder is clearer?

I'd go with the IIf because it's newer, with improved shutter, more robust construction, and it's the slow speeds that mess up first. If you need a slow speed, you need a tripod anyway, so with the IIf, use a smaller aperture and a longer shutter speed that you can time manually with B.

I fully agree, since you are a user (not collector) go for the one with the newest shutter type.....and better RF

 

[OldNick]

Listen to FrankS. I have both a III that was converted to a IIIa, and a IIIf RD. The slow speeds on the IIIa need to be exercised to keep them happy. I would choose the IIf for the same reasons that FrankS gave. It should be more reliable. Forget about matching "period pieces", choose the lens and body combination that works for you.

Jim N.

 

[xayraa33]

A mid 1930s camera and an early 1950s camera are both old cameras.
I would keep the one that just had a recent proper CLA.

I disagree about the slow speeds, I have used 1/8 of a sec. and 1/4 of a sec. in a pinch, hand held but braced as well as could be under the circumstance.

 

[cmedin]

Thanks for the input, guys. It looks like I'll hold on to the IIf -- took them both out and while they are equally nice the IIf just feels a little better somehow. I'll have to live with the 1/25 slowest speed. 🙂

Will probably be putting up the III and a 90/4 Elmar with finder FS here briefly... (and maybe the J-12 too)

 

[jarski]

this post is a bit late, but I would keep both of those bodies (if you cannot decide from which one to part from). just avoid of fell in love with third one 😉

 

[tajart]

both

both

i agree, i'd say keep them both.
one of my all time favorites was my former IIf.