Canon LTM New Ql17 Or Ql17g111

Canon M39 M39 screw mount bodies/lenses
iandg

iandg

Iggypops
Local time
1:29 PM
Joined
Oct 14, 2006
Messages
149
Hi all

Can anyone answer me the question why does the Canonet QLG111 17 sell for about three times more than the new Canonet QL17 as the only differance between the two is that the battery check button is in a differant location on the G111.After all the G just stands for grade up and the 111 is for third genaration.I just opted to buy the new QL17 and paid $24 for a lovely example .:eek:
 
Brian Sweeney said:
I prefer the QL17L ( "new"). I have had three of them now, the lenses were all very sharp when used wide-open. I've gone through 12 or so GIII's. Of those, two had lenses as sharp as the QL17L's. Anyway, that's my experience. Yours may differ.
Click to expand...


Was there not Japanese and Taiwanese manufactured models of the new QL-17L cameras?
 
Last edited:
It is (or rather was) just a well kept secret. ;) The same reason Pentax K1000 sell for more than the much better KMs and KXs - they are better known and have more "cult" status.

Kim
 
So Brian,
You are saying according to your experience, the QL wide open is sharper than most of GIII ?
Could you post a pic sample done with QL wide open ?, or refer me to gallery.

Thanks,
Ruben
 
Sorry Kim for letting the secret out the bag.Well it seems i made a good choice as what would you rather own a less expensive camera to buy made in Japan or a more expensive camera made in Taiwan as i am shure the cameras produse on par results. Oh that statment might set the cat amoungst the pigeons Thanks for the input guys im shure we are all happy canonet snappers what ever camera we own.I will pick the story tommorow.
 
would have jumped on a "new" QL17 if I had the chance, but the GIIIs are just easier to find, I think. Also, sometimes I have a hard time telling if the pic in ebay is the old or new QL17 (for the size).
 
Ql17l/ql17

Ql17l/ql17

Kat

Hi a good way to tell from a picture is that the new QL17orQL17L has the black plastic cover on the wind on leaver and the first QL17 does not.Another way of spotting the diff is the first Ql17 has a 45mm lens and the new QL17orQL17L have a 40mm lens.

Regards Ian.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the tip!!! I had no idea. Funny, I just ran into a QL17GIII in a used camera place today (it's quite rare to find any RF in our area), and since it seemed like in decent shape I grabbed it. I'll have to keep an eye on the one without the GIII.
 
Last edited:
I have both and they are identical except for the battery check (the new QL version is better if you use an adapter because it still works) and the rewind knob. Quality of the "new" QL is identical if not slightly better than the GIII. Lens quality is identical as far as I can determine. Everyone just assumes that the GIII is better because of the hype.
 
Brian Sweeney said:
.......... Wide-Open, the QL17L is as sharp as my Konica S2. I've had two GIII's that were as sharp....
Click to expand...

As you don't have scans by now, could you translate the difference into some kind of subjective percentage ?

Or let's say right on: a non good QL17 GIII (it reminds me the FSU forum), as you have had, will produce a crappy image at f/1.7 ?

sorry for bothering you again,
Ruben
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom