JeremyLangford
I'd really Leica Leica
I just found a Minolta Hi-Matic 9 on craigslist for $28. Would this be a good first rangefinder for me? I'm ready for something more quiet than my Minolta SRT-101.
btgc
Veteran
If it's working then why not? Somewhere here were thread on "Hi-Matic 9 vs Canonet", main issue is with EV indication in VF.
Time ago I did read material by RFF'er on HM9 - this gave some idea what this things is about. Don't have one only because I have enough.
Time ago I did read material by RFF'er on HM9 - this gave some idea what this things is about. Don't have one only because I have enough.
Brichma
Member
RE: Minolta H--matic 9
RE: Minolta H--matic 9
Hello Jeremy,
Very good camera to start with: From the same period as the Minolta SLR and the top of the Minolta RF cameras. Compare for instance the CLC lightmeasuring and you can use most of your 55 mm screw-in auxilliaries. See them as twin brothers! Enjoy! Brichma.
------------------------------------------------
"Time flies... And you? You fly along...!"
RE: Minolta H--matic 9
Hello Jeremy,
Very good camera to start with: From the same period as the Minolta SLR and the top of the Minolta RF cameras. Compare for instance the CLC lightmeasuring and you can use most of your 55 mm screw-in auxilliaries. See them as twin brothers! Enjoy! Brichma.
------------------------------------------------
"Time flies... And you? You fly along...!"
pekuekfir
Member
I bought a Hi-matic 7 and a Hi-matic 9 recently off ebay, each for $10 + shipping ($20 total cost each). These were my introductions to rangefinders. I love the H-M 9, I'm on my second roll with it. It had a light seal problem (ie none left) so I did a reseal with Jon's kit.
great camera and cheap.
great camera and cheap.
camera.bear
Well-known
Jeremy,
The Hi-Matic 9 is a great camera. I really enjoy using mine. Check out this recent thread:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=63286
The Hi-Matic 9 is a great camera. I really enjoy using mine. Check out this recent thread:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=63286
JeremyLangford
I'd really Leica Leica
Is your Canonet G-III QL17 smaller than your Hi-Matic 9?
besk
Well-known
The Himatic 9 wias my first "serious" camera and the second camera I had ever owned.
It had a very good lens and I have quite a few images to prove it. Just wish I had kept the camera!
It had a very good lens and I have quite a few images to prove it. Just wish I had kept the camera!
camera.bear
Well-known
Jeremy,
Here is a pic from my Flickr site showing the relative sizes of these cameras.
Here is a pic from my Flickr site showing the relative sizes of these cameras.
Last edited:
JeremyLangford
I'd really Leica Leica
Jeremy,
Here is a pic from my Flickr site showing the relative sizes of these cameras.
hmm. That makes me think that If I can get the Hi-Matic 9 Im probably gonna want a Canonet too for the smaller size. I have no idea if I would prefer the 45mm Minolta lens or the 40mm Canon lens. I know that it should be pretty zoomed in for street photography and not too wide.
Sonny Boy Havidson
Established
Jeremy,
Having a long addiction to the SRT, I bought recently an Hi-Matic 7s and found out that it is really the range finder counter part of the SRT. I actually owned many other ranger finders before (Olympus 35 RC and XA, Canon A35F, Revue 400 SE and Vivitar 35 ES) and want I enjoyed the most with it is the metered manual mode. It means for me abilty to shot without fighting with priority modes and so. One other thing I enjoy about it: you can meter in low light more easily than with the SRT.
Otherwise, the auto mode can be usefull (and pointing) in situation in which speed matters. Last point: the Hi-Matic 9 offers a flashmatic mode - the system that makes flash useable and accurate - and a battery check.
Do I also have to say that the lens is great and that the light cell works great and that there is a exposure memory?
Having a long addiction to the SRT, I bought recently an Hi-Matic 7s and found out that it is really the range finder counter part of the SRT. I actually owned many other ranger finders before (Olympus 35 RC and XA, Canon A35F, Revue 400 SE and Vivitar 35 ES) and want I enjoyed the most with it is the metered manual mode. It means for me abilty to shot without fighting with priority modes and so. One other thing I enjoy about it: you can meter in low light more easily than with the SRT.
Otherwise, the auto mode can be usefull (and pointing) in situation in which speed matters. Last point: the Hi-Matic 9 offers a flashmatic mode - the system that makes flash useable and accurate - and a battery check.
Do I also have to say that the lens is great and that the light cell works great and that there is a exposure memory?
JeremyLangford
I'd really Leica Leica
Crap. The guy on craigslist just called me back and said he already sold the Hi-Matic 9.
I really want something that is small, quiet and has metered manual or at least aperture priority. I hate full auto because Its can be so hard to change the film speed for exposure compensation when your taking a quick shot.
I really want something that is small, quiet and has metered manual or at least aperture priority. I hate full auto because Its can be so hard to change the film speed for exposure compensation when your taking a quick shot.
Last edited:
R
ruben
Guest
Hi Jeremy,
In some sense the thread our friend Camera Bear is pointing to, is misleading: At that thread the initial poster asked if to pick the Minolta Hi Matic or the Canonet, but in fact he was comparing apples and oranges.
This doesn't mean that no one can have a preference for apples or oranges, but let me try to introduce some VERY gross order in the mess.
The Hi Matic 9 belongs to a branch of rather big cameras manufactured by the 60s', and the Canonet QL GIII (there is a version for 40mm lens and another for 45mm lens - both the same size) is of latter and more evolved features.
Our friend camera bear was right at that thread to point to the strongest advantage of the Hi Matic vs the Canonet: the lens. Nevertheless there are other cameras considered to have similar or even better lens (here we are walking over eggs), like the Konica Auto S2, or the Yashica Lynx series.
Since the Yashica Lynx cameras differ, and are a story by themselves, let's say that I personally would pick the Konica Auto S2, for giving me better info at the viewfinder, although its max ISO is 400.
So far for biggie cameras of the 60s, being sold at the most convenient prices, and offering both auto and fully manual controls of aperture, speed and range finding metering. By average these cameras weight 750 grams, their shutters are quiet, and I find them very comfortable to my hand.
If you are looking for a bit less manual control, same high quality lens, you have the Yashica Electro series, who will ensure the most contrasty yellow patch from all.
Now we arrive to the 70's and the manufacturers step into the ring with their most compact possible models, giving us two size cathegories: compact cameras and ultra-compact.
The Canonet QL GIII (40 or 45mm) are compact cameras, perhaps the most featured of all, but which for my hand are a bit too compact, i,e, a bit uneasy to grip. There is a modern Yasica Electro of the size alike the Canonet, called Yashica GX.
Other models, whose price is between $100 and 350, belong to the ultra compact cathegory, like the Konica Auto S3, the Minolta 7sII, and the smallest of all, the Olympus 35RC. Here the lenses are 40mm or wider. All of these offer the auto+manual combination in the smallest size.
BTW, Olympus rangefinders include, from small to big, besides the RC, the Olympus 35RD and "the queen": the 35SP. These are among the most expensive of all fixed lens rangefinders.
I am sure I have left many holes, besides some mistakes, that other friends may like to correct. You also can "search" the fixed lens subforum or other dedicated ones.
One thing I would like to leave clear. Big size is not necessarily a disadvantage. It is very personal.
Cheers,
Ruben
Last edited by a moderator:
caperunner
Established
There are a lot of good compact RF fixed lens cams available for purchase. Ruben has mentioned the Minolta 7sII. Olympus RC, Konica C35 and var. Canon Canonets QL17 and QL17 GIII, Some of these are not pricey. All are good performers.
camera.bear
Well-known
Hi All,
I agree that the Minolta 7sII is a very good choice for a fixed lens RF. I really enjoy shooting with mine when I get the chance. It is a deceptively quiet camera. When I first used mine, I didn't think that it was working. Fortunately, I was mistaken. The 7sII is a very nice grab and go camera. However, it is quite a bit more pricey than most of the cameras mentioned. It easily goes for 100.00 up to 175.00 USD on ebay depending on condition and interest. The Hi-Matic 9 is still a great camera for 1/2 or less the cost.
BTW, I only pointed out the other thread because there is additional info on the Hi-Matic 9, which Jeremy is interested in. It is never my goal to lead anyone down the garden path, unless there are great photo ops.
I agree that the Minolta 7sII is a very good choice for a fixed lens RF. I really enjoy shooting with mine when I get the chance. It is a deceptively quiet camera. When I first used mine, I didn't think that it was working. Fortunately, I was mistaken. The 7sII is a very nice grab and go camera. However, it is quite a bit more pricey than most of the cameras mentioned. It easily goes for 100.00 up to 175.00 USD on ebay depending on condition and interest. The Hi-Matic 9 is still a great camera for 1/2 or less the cost.
BTW, I only pointed out the other thread because there is additional info on the Hi-Matic 9, which Jeremy is interested in. It is never my goal to lead anyone down the garden path, unless there are great photo ops.
btgc
Veteran
Comrade Ruben did very well!
So I can just add my personal impression - automated cameras like Yashica Electro may leave you wanting full manual control over camera. Not because they are performing bad, just because people diving into this area of photographic tools, just want to keep hands on controls over exposure.
Once I got Electro and any from fully manual RF's, I could stop looking for "what's around that corner?" and just take pictures. All that lenses are good, cameras differ mostly by placement of controls. Once you get over first feeling of "wtf here?", it goes on smoothly.
So word of warning - hanging on boards after purchase of first RF can lead to, let's say, small collection of them Sure, there's another joy, though this is completely different kind of enjoyment than one camera concept.
So I can just add my personal impression - automated cameras like Yashica Electro may leave you wanting full manual control over camera. Not because they are performing bad, just because people diving into this area of photographic tools, just want to keep hands on controls over exposure.
Once I got Electro and any from fully manual RF's, I could stop looking for "what's around that corner?" and just take pictures. All that lenses are good, cameras differ mostly by placement of controls. Once you get over first feeling of "wtf here?", it goes on smoothly.
So word of warning - hanging on boards after purchase of first RF can lead to, let's say, small collection of them
Sure, there's another joy, though this is completely different kind of enjoyment than one camera concept.Sonny Boy Havidson
Established
Another good compact first rangefinder would be the Ricoh 500 G/GX/ME/RF serie. Features: compact and robust, manual metered (rare in this category) mode and shutter priority mode and cheap to buy. The possible only bad point is the maximum aperture - f/2.8 - but it is really sufficient is most of the cases and the lens is surprisingly good.