Most Reliable Electronic Rangefinder Camera?

[styvone]

I've always read about how mechanical rangefinders are more serviceable in the long run vs. electronic ones. This makes sense to me, since electronic rangefinders (especially those that are now discontinued) have a finite amount of spare parts. This seems to suggest that mechanical cameras are often more reliable than electronic ones, but I'm sure it depends on the overall situation.

I love my M2, but sometimes it is nice to click away with a Bessa R2A in aperture priority. What I'm curious about is which electronic camera is the most reliable in terms of:

1.) Wide-spread repair support

2.) Spare parts availability

Many thanks in advance for your input!

 

[Miles.]

I wrote Zeiss not long ago and they still were servicing the Ikon ZM. Leica still services the M7. Both are likely the last factory supported electronic rangefinders (Bessa's, idk).

 

[kshapero]

What is an electronic rangefinder?

 

[styvone]

What is an electronic rangefinder?

Sorry, I should have worded this better. Electronic rangefinders are those that require a battery to operate (electronically-controlled shutter curtain). Mechanical ones are those that can work without one (uses the tension incurred by winding lever to power the shutter).

 

[Radost]

Minolta CLE by far. Easy to repair by people who know minolta.

 

[kshapero]

So a Nikon FM3a defies that description, yes?

 

[Godfrey]

I've always read about how mechanical rangefinders are more serviceable in the long run vs. electronic ones. This makes sense to me, since electronic rangefinders (especially those that are now discontinued) have a finite amount of spare parts. This seems to suggest that mechanical cameras are often more reliable than electronic ones, but I'm sure it depends on the overall situation.

I love my M2, but sometimes it is nice to click away with a Bessa R2A in aperture priority. What I'm curious about is which electronic camera is the most reliable in terms of:

1.) Wide-spread repair support

2.) Spare parts availability

Many thanks in advance for your input!

I find your assumptions to be questionable. In my experience, the reliability and durability of electronically timed cameras vs mechanically timed cameras is actually superior ... which makes sense, since there are fewer small, high stress parts to wear and need the renewal of lubrication, and so forth. What usually kills electronic cameras is a buildup of moisture and then corrosion in the electronics, and if they'd been apart as often as mechanical cameras need to be apart for cleaning and lubrication, such moisture and corrosion would likely not be an issue.

That said, I have quite a few old mechanical and electronic cameras, some mechanical dating back to the 1940s, some electronic dating back to the 1970s. By and large, every single one of the mechanical cameras has needed at the very least a cleaning and lubrication, where almost none of the electronic cameras has required anything service at all. And in the cases where the electronic cameras did need service, it had nothing to do with the electronics of the shutter timing or metering, it was almost always a film transport or similar issue, which are the same mechanisms in either type of camera.

Summing up, for the most durable, consistent, and reliable camera out there, keeping any decent camera clean, using it, and keeping moisture out of it is the way to go. If the camera never needs anything but an occasional CLA service to freshen up its mechanical bits, whatever parts are or aren't available becomes irrelevant.

G

 

[styvone]

So a Nikon FM3a defies that description, yes?

The Nikon FM3a is an SLR - I'm asking about rangefinders.

 

[styvone]

I find your assumptions to be questionable. In my experience, the reliability and durability of electronically timed cameras vs mechanically timed cameras is actually superior ... which makes sense, since there are fewer small, high stress parts to wear and need the renewal of lubrication, and so forth. What usually kills electronic cameras is a buildup of moisture and then corrosion in the electronics, and if they'd been apart as often as mechanical cameras need to be apart for cleaning and lubrication, such moisture and corrosion would likely not be an issue.

That said, I have quite a few old mechanical and electronic cameras, some mechanical dating back to the 1940s, some electronic dating back to the 1970s. By and large, every single one of the mechanical cameras has needed at the very least a cleaning and lubrication, where almost none of the electronic cameras has required anything service at all. And in the cases where the electronic cameras did need service, it had nothing to do with the electronics of the shutter timing or metering, it was almost always a film transport or similar issue, which are the same mechanisms in either type of camera.

Summing up, for the most durable, consistent, and reliable camera out there, keeping any decent camera clean, using it, and keeping moisture out of it is the way to go. If the camera never needs anything but an occasional CLA service to freshen up its mechanical bits, whatever parts are or aren't available becomes irrelevant.

G

I appreciate the anecdotal input. I admit that I don't have much experience with electronic cameras and am sure that there are plenty of reliable options. My assumptions are coming from an understanding that integrated circuit boards for some cameras are no longer manufactured anymore, so repair would be more difficult as opposed to replacing gears (which you can find easily) inside of a mechanical camera.

There are plenty of benefits of shooting electronic vs. mechanical: more accurate shutter speeds, less moving parts inside, batteries are a non-issue since spares are so easy to carry. What are some electronic rangefinders that you've enjoyed?

 

[keytarjunkie]

In 2021, the two most serviceable electronic-based rangefinder cameras are probably the Leica M7 and Mamiya 7 (Minolta CLE isn't so bad either). See Precision Camera Works regarding the Mamiya.

The electronic vs mechanical debate always bothered me. I happen to own only mechanical cameras now, but for example my Makina 670 is far less reliable than my Mamiya 7 ever was, despite the folder being mechanical vs the Mamiya's electronics. But that said, there are some cameras I would not buy for fear of instant death (like the Contax T3 at $1500, for instance).

 

[madNbad]

Interchangeable lens rangefinders with an electronic shutter are a very small niche product and have never been made in large numbers. Both the Zeiss Ikon and the Voigtlander's were made by Cosina which still may stock some parts. The Leica M7 was still being produced until 2018 so parts should be available for the near future. As Godfrey pointed out, it's not often the electronics fail. When they do, the cause is almost alway moisture. Users often worry about worst case scenarios with total failure of the electronics. It could happen but enough problems can arise with a mechanical camera too. There is a Zeiss Ikon for sale in the classifieds currently plus there are a number of M7s out there.

 

[Deleted member 65559]

Styvone....i think i understand what you're asking, but i think there's a big difference between 'reliable' and 'serviceable'. Like keytar, i only have mechanical cameras...
But at current prices i wouldn't buy the following:
Mamiya 6, Leica M7, Fuji GF670, Minolta CLE, & of course the exorbitant P&S.
All for fear of owning a brick because parts aren't available.
The Mamiya 6 was one of my favourite cameras & i never had any problems with it.
Keytar i've used the Plaubels for years and the only problem i had was with one bought from a hi-end dealer ...& it had pinholes in the bellows. I currently have a PM 670...(bought exactly because it has no electronic circuit boards). Yes, it requires careful handling but i don't think that makes it inherently unreliable.

 

[Godfrey]

I appreciate the anecdotal input. I admit that I don't have much experience with electronic cameras and am sure that there are plenty of reliable options. My assumptions are coming from an understanding that integrated circuit boards for some cameras are no longer manufactured anymore, so repair would be more difficult as opposed to replacing gears (which you can find easily) inside of a mechanical camera.

There are plenty of benefits of shooting electronic vs. mechanical: more accurate shutter speeds, less moving parts inside, batteries are a non-issue since spares are so easy to carry. What are some electronic rangefinders that you've enjoyed?

Jeez, I've probably owned/used 60 or 70 cameras over the past 25 years, but limiting that to just RF cameras, and just to electronically timed examples of same, cuts the number of "electronic" cameras down to just a few .. Leica M9, M-P 240, M-D 262, and Epson R-D1. I disliked the Epson and returned it within a week, the others worked without any problems other than the M9 which I traded away due to the infamous sensor corrosion issue. It was perfectly reparable, but I liked the typ 240 more.

I've owned and use a lot of 'other' electronically timed cameras ... Polaroid SX-70, Minox C, Minox 35GT-E, Minolta XD-11, Nikon FE2, Nikon F3/F3T, Fuji GA645, Minox EC, Contax G2, Contax SLR (can't remember the model), Leica R8, and of course all the various Canon, Pentax, Olympus, Nikon DSLRs, as well as various amusingly ancient things like Polaroid Land 220, 350, etc. And all the 2008 and later 'mirrorless' generation cameras. None of them, but one, have ever had a fatal event that could not be repaired. I pulled a Polaroid Land 220 out of a junk heap at a garage sale for a buck, it dates to 1967 I think, stuck a battery in it, and it works perfectly ... if I could get film for it. Can't say that about any of the old mechanical cameras that sat in similar circumstances: the *all*, every one, needed at least a cleaning and lubrication, and a couple I junked because while I could get the parts, it wasn't interesting enough or worth the time and effort.

An old Pentax SLR a friend gave me proved to be dead with a bad circuit board and I junked it, and the same thing happened to one of my mechanical Nikon FMs ... I didn't junk it, but the flex board required to allow me to use the flash sync was no longer available and it wasn't really worth the money to have the board repaired by a specialist.

So ... As I said before, buy any decent camera that doesn't already have a known history of being a likely short timer, buy it in good condition, and keep it that way ... It will out last you and likely never need parts if you just keep it serviced and maintained.

G

 

[Deleted member 65559]

couple I junked because while I could get the parts, it wasn't interesting enough or worth the time and effort.

G

Godfrey, you've pretty much repeated your previous post. Personally i'm not into spending $2k+ (Mamiya 6, GF 670, Hasselblad Xpan..& of course Leica digital 😛) on a camera for which there are no spare parts/ or service. There i've repeated myself too 😉

 

[KenR]

As was noted above, many of the electronic cameras have reliability issues due not to the electronics, but rather to the film transport mechanisms. Spare parts are often said to be “unavailable”. I have been wondering why this is so - we live in the era of 3-D printing. If a gear goes on my Mamiya6 winder mechanism, why can’t someone make a new gear. Pardon my naivety on this as I have no experience with camera repair or 3-D printing.

 

[Phil_F_NM]

It doesn't have rangefinder focusing per-se, but the Nikonos V is probably the most reliable (and quietest, besides the original Hexar) electronic non-SLR ever made. Either get a string with some knots in it at specified distances, or get a small measuring tape for really close focus shots, or just learn to accurately estimate distance and you're good to go.

Phil Forrest

 

[Pál_K]

…If a gear goes on my Mamiya6 winder mechanism, why can’t someone make a new gear...

Someone could, if only they knew they needed to make it.

There needs to be a savvy 3D manufacturer of camera parts, an entrepreneur, who knows which items there would be a demand for and which would be worthwhile to make. Ideally there would be a list. I can think of two items immediately:

1. The flat leaf spring for the Retina IIa exposure counter (spares have sold for over 100€)

2. The aperture stop-down ring mechanism behind the mount of Maxxum 7 cameras. There is a plastic tab on this ring which will eventually fail due to repeated hits as the aperture is stopped down. After this happens, lenses can no longer be stopped down. This has killed many Maxxum 7’s, as replacement mechanisms are no longer available (and still have the flaw).

 

[Godfrey]

Godfrey, you've pretty much repeated your previous post. Personally i'm not into spending $2k+ (Mamiya 6, GF 670, Hasselblad Xpan..& of course Leica digital 😛) on a camera for which there are no spare parts/ or service. There i've repeated myself too 😉

Well, since you say I repeated myself, perhaps you got the gist: If you purchase a good camera that doesn't have some 'well-known by now' mechanical fallibility, and you keep it well, it will most likely just work and never need impossible to find parts.

NONE of my "electronic cameras" have ever broken or needed parts for those electronic parts. What has malfunctioned, occasionally, across all the many cameras I've owned, are mechanical bits which are just as unavailable for mechanically timed cameras as electronically timed cameras.

EG: The Mamiya 6 has a poor reputation for durability/reliability, but the part that has a poor reputation is the film transport mechanism ... nothing to do with the camera's electronics.

Whether you want to take the risk on a particular camera because it has some particularly attractive advantage for you is completely up to you. My Light L16 is like that. It is/was a $2000 camera. It is long past any kind of support and there are no parts available. Yet it still works brilliantly and I've devised a way to keep its long past due software running for a while. At some point it will become a display piece, but for the moment I occasionally take it out for a session and it always returns excellent results. So I'll use it until I cannot anymore.

G

 

[Deleted member 65559]

G, I was lucky and had no issues with my Mamiya 6, & yes it's true, some film transport failures occurred. I also think there is a difference between using cameras you have until they fail, and considering buying certain cameras at today's high prices (Leica M7, Hasselblad Xpan, Fuji GF670).
Reliability is important to me. If i'm going for a walk outside my home in the Rockies, i'm not concerned, but if i pay $1k+ to travel to a foreign country, or take an expensive helicopter ride or walk for 3 days to get to a remote mountain valley, then i want reliability and often taking spare bodies is not in the equation, so mechanical cameras have proven to be a better bet for me.

 

[Godfrey]

G, I was lucky and had no issues with my Mamiya 6, & yes it's true, some film transport failures occurred. I also think there is a difference between using cameras you have until they fail, and considering buying certain cameras at today's high prices (Leica M7, Hasselblad Xpan, Fuji GF670).
Reliability is important to me. If i'm going for a walk outside my home in the Rockies, i'm not concerned, but if i pay $1k+ to travel to a foreign country, or take an expensive helicopter ride or walk for 3 days to get to a remote mountain valley, then i want reliability and often taking spare bodies is not in the equation, so mechanical cameras have proven to be a better bet for me.

Sounds like your mind is made up and there's no point in further discussion.

I would point out, however, that all of the cameras you mentioned (Leica M7, Hasselblad Xpan, Fuji GF670) were *always* expensive cameras—don't understand the "at today's high prices" comment—and none of them have any particular history of either mechanical or electronic failures. And all three of them are still repairable today, supported by their manufacturers' service, or at least the M7 and the XPan are.

G