Armoured
Well-known
I second the notion that a Leitz/Minolta CL in good condition fits your description; after that the CLEs and Bessas are also good choices.
I really enjoy my FSU cameras, and they are certainly not bank-breaking, but they do require more effort and possibly some repair to get to the point of dependability. If you just want to get shooting quickly, the CL is a great choice (and if you want to spend more money later, you can get whatever M you want and still enjoy the CL's small size).
You can get great FSU cameras and lenses for cheap, but you can get shooting quickly with little hassle and and low risk given the lens you already have. You'll need an adapter (cheap) and it will show 50mm framelines no problem.
David Hughes
David Hughes
Just in case anyone gets the impression that Leicas never break I'll add that my first one, 70's vintage, went back twice in the 80's. The first time for a minor problem with one of the lenses (repaired and cleaned while I waited and no charge) and the second time because something in the body broke and the camera seized up. I got it repaired; luckily the part was still available. It cost me a little over £120 in 1988... I still have it and use it frequently.
My second Leica was 1930's and was bought for the collection and appears to be working Ok.
My third Leica (1930's again) was bought for the collection and chosen very carefully. There was rust inside, a part (minor) had to be replaced and the lubrication had spread all over the place. The lens was dirty. It cost about £160 to clean and repair two or three years ago.
My fourth was a modern one and I just couldn't get on with it - although I'd nothing to complain about. So sold it.
My next one seemed OK but the service and overhaul cost a fortune (£330) and I'm still using it. I shall probably (or already have) retire No 1 and make this my main one.
The next one was a C3 and bought out of curiosity; a brilliant camera but a bit too big to carry around. Splendid, everything you'd expect from Leica lens but little control over the camera. It's a point & shoot in my book.
The SLR worked well, started playing up and after I saw the estimate for repairs I sold it at at huge loss as spares or repairs. It was an R5 and I miss it and the lens...
The last one was a model II for the collection, it's got a small light leak and will have to get a full service but can wait.
As for lenses, I've thrown a lot of money at one lens and gave up and sold it at a huge (£130 or so) loss "for display only" but its replacement was perfect. I've another I'm not happy with but can't say why. It's seldom used and I'll have to get Malcolm Taylor to look at it sooner or later.
I've had three Elmars (all 1930's) that had to have work done on them; two were simply and cheaply (£20 or £30) cleaned and reset and one had a lot of problems and cost me £140 by the time it was up and running properly. Two others from ebay (a Summar and a Summitar) were very good to brilliant from the day I got them.
What happened to the Digilux 2 was worrying but it seems OK now and Leica were very good about it.
I've gone into a lot of detail because there's a lot of people around who can see nothing wrong with Leica and everything wrong with FED and Zorki. I've had similar experiences with cameras from Canon, FED, Konica, Minolta, Nikon, Olympus, Pentax, Rollei, Yashica and Zorki. But nothing I'd complain too much about. I expect old camera to play up and wear a little. Most of it is due to the owners, I expect...
Regards, David
My second Leica was 1930's and was bought for the collection and appears to be working Ok.
My third Leica (1930's again) was bought for the collection and chosen very carefully. There was rust inside, a part (minor) had to be replaced and the lubrication had spread all over the place. The lens was dirty. It cost about £160 to clean and repair two or three years ago.
My fourth was a modern one and I just couldn't get on with it - although I'd nothing to complain about. So sold it.
My next one seemed OK but the service and overhaul cost a fortune (£330) and I'm still using it. I shall probably (or already have) retire No 1 and make this my main one.
The next one was a C3 and bought out of curiosity; a brilliant camera but a bit too big to carry around. Splendid, everything you'd expect from Leica lens but little control over the camera. It's a point & shoot in my book.
The SLR worked well, started playing up and after I saw the estimate for repairs I sold it at at huge loss as spares or repairs. It was an R5 and I miss it and the lens...
The last one was a model II for the collection, it's got a small light leak and will have to get a full service but can wait.
As for lenses, I've thrown a lot of money at one lens and gave up and sold it at a huge (£130 or so) loss "for display only" but its replacement was perfect. I've another I'm not happy with but can't say why. It's seldom used and I'll have to get Malcolm Taylor to look at it sooner or later.
I've had three Elmars (all 1930's) that had to have work done on them; two were simply and cheaply (£20 or £30) cleaned and reset and one had a lot of problems and cost me £140 by the time it was up and running properly. Two others from ebay (a Summar and a Summitar) were very good to brilliant from the day I got them.
What happened to the Digilux 2 was worrying but it seems OK now and Leica were very good about it.
I've gone into a lot of detail because there's a lot of people around who can see nothing wrong with Leica and everything wrong with FED and Zorki. I've had similar experiences with cameras from Canon, FED, Konica, Minolta, Nikon, Olympus, Pentax, Rollei, Yashica and Zorki. But nothing I'd complain too much about. I expect old camera to play up and wear a little. Most of it is due to the owners, I expect...
Regards, David
Last edited:
Valkir1987
Well-known
I used a Summar on a Zorki 4 without any problems. The cam indeed needed adjustment, but when it was properly adjusted at both 1m and infinity, the readings between where correct as well. Thats the main reason why the cam is adjustable. Best suggestion is to test it first!
Buying a digital camera saves time too. If you are not likely to adjust it yourself you may find another anthousiast to do it for you. But please do'nt say "save time and money". You invest time in your hobby because you like it. And make adjustments if neccesary. Thats the whole part of the story, thats why we still take pictures with old camera's. Don't give up easily.
That's what was good in the old day's. You could do much and have fun doing things yourself, instead of 'Saving time and Money' buying something else when it does not satisfy. Thats the whole thing!
With kind Regards,
Buying a digital camera saves time too. If you are not likely to adjust it yourself you may find another anthousiast to do it for you. But please do'nt say "save time and money". You invest time in your hobby because you like it. And make adjustments if neccesary. Thats the whole part of the story, thats why we still take pictures with old camera's. Don't give up easily.
That's what was good in the old day's. You could do much and have fun doing things yourself, instead of 'Saving time and Money' buying something else when it does not satisfy. Thats the whole thing!
With kind Regards,