Japanese 35mm film rangefinders & lens'

Moto-Uno

Moto-Uno

Moto-Uno
Local time
10:25 AM
Joined
Jan 3, 2011
Messages
1,930
I'm curious about these rangefinders and whether or not any of them were made with interchangeable lens? Something around about a 50mm & a 90mm . I prefer the rangefinder view in my Yashica GSN and Minolta Hi-Matic E over my Retina and I'm looking for something that I can stick in my pocket while out motorcycling. My Mamiya 7 and Medalist just don't fit and I don't like weight around my neck when I'm out biking. Anything Leica is way past my pocketbook now! Any suggestions ?
Regards,Peter
 
Dear Peter,

Alas, most old, good-quality non-Leica interchangeable lens RFs now command (collector) prices way above their realistic values as picture taking machines as compared with the price of an M2. I've owned quite a few of 'em and I can't think of a single one I'd buy again against an M2, not even a Canon 7-series. A screw-mount or even M-mount Leica is a more realistic investment (and I speak as a fellow motorcyclist since 1966).

Cheers,

R.
 
Not quite sure what you're asking -- Canon and Nikon made interchangeable lens rangefinder cameras. The earlier Canon rangefinders that look like Leica screw mount clones (load by removing the bottom, like the Barnack Leicas) are of excellent quality, as are the lenses, and they are pretty affordable. There are a few others that are Leica clones -- Tower, Tanack, Yashica come to mind -- but they're rather hard to come by.
 
Best value for the money is a canon p with 50 and 100mm. Lenses are very small, camera very robust.

I ride about 100km per day.
 
Thanks all for your replies, seems Roger may gotten it right. A quick searching on the 'bay
showed pretty well every Nikon to be for the idle rich(and no lenses) or the Canon P with crumpled shutters and only "a bit of fungus"! This is enough to make me consider a FED-2.
So thanks again everyone,Peter
 
Honestly, you can do a lot worse than a decent Canon LTM rangefinder. I'd take one over a FSU camera in equal condition as the Canons seem to hold up very well on average.

If you want a compact kit specifically (and can get away with shooting primarily 50s) I'd look at a a bottom loading Canon, potentially with an Elmar or other collapsible. It would be a nice contrast to the larger cameras.
 
I noticed a Nikon S2 at KEH for under $400 yesterday. Add the standard 50mm f/1.4 also available there or eBay for $200 or less and an 85/2 for maybe $300 and you'd be set for $800-900? I can't imagine that being "for the idle rich" or maybe I'm not sure what the budget is realistically.

My first RF was the S2 and I fell in love immediately!
 
With my original inquiry I'd mentioned a couple of Japanese rangefinders that have rather nice ,clear viewfinder come rangefinder windows (along with being pocket-able). That's kinda important as one steps into their 60's.Minor cleaning and lubing (and light leak cures) I'm rather comfortable with. My intention was to have something available for those opportune moments. So spending $700 to $800 plus dollars is a no go for 35mm. Remembering that I
have a Mamiya 7 (and a Medalist) for when I plan to go out and take pictures! The small rf's that I have are quite good (and cheap) and that's what set me to looking at them in the first place,but if any of the previous suggestions are otherwise (squinty viewfinders,that too is a no go along with the higher pricing) then I should reconsider. Hope this rambling clarifies things a bit!! Thanks again for your input
Regards Peter
 
I second the motion of the Voigtlander. My R4M was sold last week on the bay... Someone snatched it for $355 and it was in great condition. The R4 has the widest viewfinder of any RF camera (21mm) and is incredibly bright. I paired it with a 21mm zeiss lens and it was a blast... Missing it already!

You can pick up an R2 for maybe 200$. My motto has always been to spend less on the body to save up for the glass.
 
Moto-Uno said:
With my original inquiry I'd mentioned a couple of Japanese rangefinders that have rather nice ,clear viewfinder come rangefinder windows (along with being pocket-able). That's kinda important as one steps into their 60's.Minor cleaning and lubing (and light leak cures) I'm rather comfortable with. My intention was to have something available for those opportune moments. So spending $700 to $800 plus dollars is a no go for 35mm. Remembering that I
have a Mamiya 7 (and a Medalist) for when I plan to go out and take pictures! The small rf's that I have are quite good (and cheap) and that's what set me to looking at them in the first place,but if any of the previous suggestions are otherwise (squinty viewfinders,that too is a no go along with the higher pricing) then I should reconsider. Hope this rambling clarifies things a bit!! Thanks again for your input
Regards Peter
Click to expand...

Try something like the Olympus 35RC. You can pick them up fairly cheap and they are small and reasonably rugged so you can have one available at all times.
http://kenrockwell.com/olympus/35rc.htm
 
I own both Leica and Nikon RF, the choice of which one depends on what you are trying to achieve. Both are great cameras. The Leica M mount is still current and that means you can buy old or new lenses, Leica or others. The Nikon is well built and the shutters tend to function well with little/no maintenance even after 60 years. if you get a Nikon SP with a titanium shutter - you don't have to worry about burning holes in it like you can with cloth shutters on other RF's. You can get some modern lenses for the Nikon S mount. These are but a small handful compare to what's available for Leica.

you don't need many lenses in the RF world to have a complete functioning set - the wide-normal-tele triumvirate is about all you need.

These aren't really pocketable unless you wear cargo pants and suspenders.

the screw mount Leicas are a little smaller perhaps.

in terms of picture taking - there are a lot of threads here about the beauty of film and of the process aspect. again it depends on what you want out of it, the satisfaction of mastering a number of manual steps (film, developing, printing or scanning) and getting the film "look" and experience.

just my 2 cents...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom