Roger Hicks
Veteran
I borrowed it from a well-to-do and generous friend. Mechanically it was gorgeous but the lens was past its best: if it had been mine, it would have gone to Balham Optical. Now I think about it, I suspect that it wasn't actually Leica mount. But it was a long time ago and I've forgotten.
Cheers,
R.
Dralowid
Michael
Had a lovely Yashica once...
Judging by prices some of these things fetch, boring old real Leicas are a bargain...
Judging by prices some of these things fetch, boring old real Leicas are a bargain...
Greyscale
Veteran
My Canon IVF is certainly heavier than my Leica IIIc, but I don't know if I can say that it is better built. But the Canon is certainly built to a very high standard. Both are currently in the hands of Youxin Ye.
goamules
Well-known
I have sold several Leica IIIcs, but kept the Nicca 5L (lever wind, rear film door, other innovations above Leica) and a Canon IVSB (3 magnifications on the viewfinder, combined viewfinder/rangefinder window, and other innovations above Leica). The last Nicca 3 I had a few months ago I wish I'd kept, I ran a roll through it just to check it out, and they all came out perfect. That's not been the case with any Leica I've owned, they've all needed work.
puderse
Established
Jananese LTM
Jananese LTM
Sold my Minolta 35 that I had had for several years recently for good money to a TV production type.
It was way too fiddley for me; even though it gave good results. Kept my Contax IIa though. That's where the bargains are!
Jananese LTM
It was way too fiddley for me; even though it gave good results. Kept my Contax IIa though. That's where the bargains are!
Last edited:
John E Earley
Tuol Sleng S21-0174
ray*j*gun
Veteran
And the Canon has the 3 position finder lines switch which I feel is a better way to go than an external finder.
David Murphy
Veteran
I own a Tower 48 and it's a worthy and very practical camera that can be recommended. Keep in mind it is likely to require servicing before serious use.
I've owned and used many Canon's (my current Canon being an L1). There is no doubt that Canon, because of their increasing quality and innovation, was encroaching on Leica's rangefinder dominance through the 1950's, and I agree that the IVSB is certainly comparable to the Leica IIIf in both build quality and performance. As noted above though, the Leica IIIg, raised the bar for bottom loading rangefinders to a level that I don't think Canon ever quite equaled in a quality sense.
We are comparing very good cameras to great cameras. They all have their advantages and disadvantages depending on the intended application and budget of the shooter. I own and use a IIIg frequently these days and every time I do, I marvel at the fit and finish, the smoothness of the controls, and overall precision embodied by this machine. By the already high body standards of the late fifties it would have been to hard to imagine a manufacturer dramatically improving (in a quality sense) what was already a well-established design mostly by just making the already high quality standard even better, but that's what Leica did with the IIIg. I'd go so far as to say that really impresses me.
I've owned and used many Canon's (my current Canon being an L1). There is no doubt that Canon, because of their increasing quality and innovation, was encroaching on Leica's rangefinder dominance through the 1950's, and I agree that the IVSB is certainly comparable to the Leica IIIf in both build quality and performance. As noted above though, the Leica IIIg, raised the bar for bottom loading rangefinders to a level that I don't think Canon ever quite equaled in a quality sense.
We are comparing very good cameras to great cameras. They all have their advantages and disadvantages depending on the intended application and budget of the shooter. I own and use a IIIg frequently these days and every time I do, I marvel at the fit and finish, the smoothness of the controls, and overall precision embodied by this machine. By the already high body standards of the late fifties it would have been to hard to imagine a manufacturer dramatically improving (in a quality sense) what was already a well-established design mostly by just making the already high quality standard even better, but that's what Leica did with the IIIg. I'd go so far as to say that really impresses me.
John E Earley
Tuol Sleng S21-0174
Bingley
Veteran
Agree. My Canon IVSB2 has a quieter shutter than my IIIc, a better viewfinder, and is just as robust (if not more so). I still use an external finder on it, but being able to increase vf magnification is handy when fine focusing.
GaryLH
Veteran
In ltm --> canon P and 7/s
M mount --> Minolta CL and CLE, Konica rf.
Gary
M mount --> Minolta CL and CLE, Konica rf.
Gary
John E Earley
Tuol Sleng S21-0174
finarphin
Established
Yikes.
Happy to report I found my Tower 45 on eBay a few weeks back and will be teaming it up with my much-loved Japanese LTM lenses soon... One that got away...
I bought a Canon Serenar 85mm lens on 'bay. It had really ugly-looking photos posted by the seller, so I guess nobody else really wanted it. I took a chance on it. I received it and took some test shots with it and I couldn't believe how sharp it is. Easy to use, too. Very simple.
Dez
Bodger Extraordinaire
Here's an interesting one, the Yashica YF.
Yashica bought out Nicca, an innovative Leica-clone maker, and did them one better with this camera, which crammed a really impressive list of features into a largish LTM body. Unfortunately they did this in 1959, the year the Nikon F changed all the rules and marginalized the market for highly featured RF cameras.
It has lever wind inside the body instead of on top, which looks a bit odd but works very smoothly, and a hinged back flap just like the Leica M's. This has little ball bearing snaps at the bottom holding it in place; I understand the very earliest M3's had the same but eliminated it (I wonder why?) The combined VF/RF has true projected auto-parallax framelines for 50 and 100mm lenses, with the full field being right for 35's. The finder is extremely bright and clear, not quite M-level, but close. This camera is a real pleasure to use.
I don't know anything about the lens, a 50mm f1.8 Yashicor. It's a bit on the largish side, and takes 43mm filters. Everything is dead smooth, and it appears to be extremely well made. I'm going to have to run some film through the camera as soon as I can stop playing with it.
The one thing it unfortunately does not have is a single shutter speed dial, but a Barnackian rotating fast speed dial and a slow speed dial on the front. Also on the front is a chromed aluminum bezel around the VF/RF windows, which is, um, different. Note that the camera carries both the Yashica and Nicca brands: I would like to know the thinking behind that. The overall body size is almost identical with that of an M-Leica.
The build quality and finish seem better than other Niccas. Like other Niccas, it has the large brass slow speed escapement which looks to be bulletproof.
I was quite lucky with this camera, and picked it up on ebay in non-functional condition. It turned out that one of the shutter tapes had come unglued from the wind-side rollers. The camera is quite easy to service, and with the tape fixed and a general CLA done, I now have an extremely nice example of this rather rare camera.
Cheers,
Dez
Yashica bought out Nicca, an innovative Leica-clone maker, and did them one better with this camera, which crammed a really impressive list of features into a largish LTM body. Unfortunately they did this in 1959, the year the Nikon F changed all the rules and marginalized the market for highly featured RF cameras.
It has lever wind inside the body instead of on top, which looks a bit odd but works very smoothly, and a hinged back flap just like the Leica M's. This has little ball bearing snaps at the bottom holding it in place; I understand the very earliest M3's had the same but eliminated it (I wonder why?) The combined VF/RF has true projected auto-parallax framelines for 50 and 100mm lenses, with the full field being right for 35's. The finder is extremely bright and clear, not quite M-level, but close. This camera is a real pleasure to use.
I don't know anything about the lens, a 50mm f1.8 Yashicor. It's a bit on the largish side, and takes 43mm filters. Everything is dead smooth, and it appears to be extremely well made. I'm going to have to run some film through the camera as soon as I can stop playing with it.
The one thing it unfortunately does not have is a single shutter speed dial, but a Barnackian rotating fast speed dial and a slow speed dial on the front. Also on the front is a chromed aluminum bezel around the VF/RF windows, which is, um, different. Note that the camera carries both the Yashica and Nicca brands: I would like to know the thinking behind that. The overall body size is almost identical with that of an M-Leica.
The build quality and finish seem better than other Niccas. Like other Niccas, it has the large brass slow speed escapement which looks to be bulletproof.
I was quite lucky with this camera, and picked it up on ebay in non-functional condition. It turned out that one of the shutter tapes had come unglued from the wind-side rollers. The camera is quite easy to service, and with the tape fixed and a general CLA done, I now have an extremely nice example of this rather rare camera.
Cheers,
Dez
furcafe
Veteran
Nice. I just picked up my 2nd YF last week (from RFF classified). 1 small correction: The lens is a Yashinon, not Yashicor. My guess is that it's a Planar variant of some kind like almost all the other Japanese f/1.8, f/1.9 & f/2 50s of that time period.
As far as the camera being marked both "Yashica" & "Nicca", my guess on that is that it's a literal reflection of Yashica's acquisition of Nicca around that time.
As far as the camera being marked both "Yashica" & "Nicca", my guess on that is that it's a literal reflection of Yashica's acquisition of Nicca around that time.
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
Here's an interesting one, the Yashica YF.
Yashica bought out Nicca, an innovative Leica-clone maker, and did them one better with this camera, which crammed a really impressive list of features into a largish LTM body. Unfortunately they did this in 1959, the year the Nikon F changed all the rules and marginalized the market for highly featured RF cameras.
It has lever wind inside the body instead of on top, which looks a bit odd but works very smoothly, and a hinged back flap just like the Leica M's. This has little ball bearing snaps at the bottom holding it in place; I understand the very earliest M3's had the same but eliminated it (I wonder why?) The combined VF/RF has true projected auto-parallax framelines for 50 and 100mm lenses, with the full field being right for 35's. The finder is extremely bright and clear, not quite M-level, but close. This camera is a real pleasure to use.
I don't know anything about the lens, a 50mm f1.8 Yashicor. It's a bit on the largish side, and takes 43mm filters. Everything is dead smooth, and it appears to be extremely well made. I'm going to have to run some film through the camera as soon as I can stop playing with it.
The one thing it unfortunately does not have is a single shutter speed dial, but a Barnackian rotating fast speed dial and a slow speed dial on the front. Also on the front is a chromed aluminum bezel around the VF/RF windows, which is, um, different. Note that the camera carries both the Yashica and Nicca brands: I would like to know the thinking behind that. The overall body size is almost identical with that of an M-Leica.
The build quality and finish seem better than other Niccas. Like other Niccas, it has the large brass slow speed escapement which looks to be bulletproof.
I was quite lucky with this camera, and picked it up on ebay in non-functional condition. It turned out that one of the shutter tapes had come unglued from the wind-side rollers. The camera is quite easy to service, and with the tape fixed and a general CLA done, I now have an extremely nice example of this rather rare camera.
Cheers,
Dez
I still kick myself for not buying a mint YF with lens, all in the original box for 100 dollars in the late 1980s.
Brian Legge
Veteran
I'm a fan of the Yashinon. Well built and produces very nice results.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=119203
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=119203
Dez
Bodger Extraordinaire
Right you are; it's a Yashinon. Sometimes I find a disconnect between brain and typing fingers, a fairly common malady. So it's probably equivalent to the f1.8 Canon lens? it looks like one with everything a tiny bit bigger.
Cheers,
Dez
Takkun
Ian M.
All beauties. Back in March when I was in California, my M body died and I came very, very close to buying a Canon L1 in the meantime. I only had LTM lenses with me, but my heart knew one would probably never get used as much after I got a repair.
So I guess that's my one that got away...
So I guess that's my one that got away...
Brian Legge
Veteran
Dez, its close but based on this photographers test I think it is a bit better corrected and has less vignetting than the Canon:
At 1.8:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/77437968@N00/4567468117/in/set-72157623843596063/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/77437968@N00/4567504993/in/set-72157623843596063/
At 5.6:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/77437968@N00/4568105766/in/set-72157623843596063/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/77437968@N00/4568142768/in/set-72157623843596063/
Partially based on the side and more even lighting, it almost feels like it could have been a 1.4 which only opens up to 1.8. Now, I have nothing other than the size difference and the rendering I see to back me up there - I may be using it to justify picking the lens over the Canon.
At 1.8:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/77437968@N00/4567468117/in/set-72157623843596063/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/77437968@N00/4567504993/in/set-72157623843596063/
At 5.6:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/77437968@N00/4568105766/in/set-72157623843596063/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/77437968@N00/4568142768/in/set-72157623843596063/
Partially based on the side and more even lighting, it almost feels like it could have been a 1.4 which only opens up to 1.8. Now, I have nothing other than the size difference and the rendering I see to back me up there - I may be using it to justify picking the lens over the Canon.