Olmypus 35 RD/SP vs. Canonet ql17 vs. Hi-matix 7sII vs. Konica auto s3 vs. Revue 400s

gavinlg said:
The Olympus RC has quite a bit of pincushion distortion - can't stand it.
Click to expand...

Me too! This is what had made me put it back to its box.
Now my little Minolta 7sii is my favorite. Only complain that tiny aperture ring tab that my fingers cannot easily reach.
 
fixed lens RF

fixed lens RF

NeeZee said:
The Revue 400SE aka Vivitar 35ES is not a bad camera (I've got both). Only difference is that the Vivitar has a better finder - the one in the Revue distorts quite a bit. Really good lenses on these cameras but all in all the built quality is not up there with the Canon or Olympus models. I have a soft spot for these 70s fixed lens RFs and owned quite a few of them but at the end of the day I don't think there are worth what they are selling for on ebay at the moment. Personally I wouldn't spend more than 30€ on any of those cameras (except the SP maybe). Here in Germany you always get good deals on this type of camera on flea markets etc. - don't know about your place. If you have to go the ebay route you might consider a model with a f2.8 lens as they're going for next to nothing compared to the f1.7/f1.8 ones.
Click to expand...

I agree. Ebay prices are unreasonable right now. I'm a happy XA user
 
I have a 35RD that I paid to have serviced - there are flea market finds on all these camera but any of them may need servicing if not looked after. One consideration is the relative size of each...a 35SP is very nice but a significantly bigger machine than an RC, or even RD. Kinda like the difference between a M3 and a CL. For me, one goes on a strap around my neck and the other in a jacket pocket etc. XA in a pants pocket.

I do agree prices are running high for these in the used market, but feel a higher price may be appropriate for a camera that has been well-cared for and serviced. Problem is too many sellers apply these prices to cameras that are not fully functional or ready for use, and claim ignorance as to their condition. 40 years down the road, we all need a little looking after if we are to still be of some use!
 
Olympus 35 SP has a fantastic lens -- sharp, very low distortion, outstanding rendering. Also like the GN manual flash operation -- input your flash's guide number, focus and shoot -- the camera adjusts the aperture mechanically to render perfect flash exposure of subject regardless of background, subject reflectivity, etc.
The 35SP's built in optional spot metering also is very useful. IMHO, it overall is the best 35mm fixed lens rangefinder out there.
 
I had a Canonet QL19 (late model, same body as QL17 and GIII) - nice camera, very nice finder, and the quick loading system works really well, but somehow never really managed to keep me interested in spite of good results whenever I used it (in B&W or color).

I still have my Olympus 35 SP. Even though it's pretty similar to the Canonet, I find myself gravitating toward it in a way that I never did with the Canon. It is loud and fairly large, but the lens is just spectacular. Everything else is solid and works well, but knowing that I'm shooting through that lens really makes the difference to me.
 
If you are looking for an Automatic, with no manual control, a Konica C-35 could be the ticket. I liked the results I got with it, but don't use it much because of the AE. Which is odd, because I also shoot a bunch of P&S cams, but mainly for their zooms.

I really like my Oly RC, because the shutter is not dependent on the meter, so you're always shooting in manual mode. Not enough shutter speeds, though usually that's not an issue for me. The SPn I still haven't gotten to bonding with yet. Had an original QL17, before they shrunk it, and it's got a nice lens. You could try a Yashica GX, it's aperture priority only, but has a sweet performing 40mm. And it looks good, too. It's smaller than the original G series, but larger than the CC with it's 35mm.

Sometimes it just comes down to trying a lot of cameras until you find what fits your photo taking style.

PF
 
Of the cameras mentioned, the SP is the best. It is a very well made camera, with a great performing lens. The quality of materials is also good, especially the glass. The weakest point of the Canonet QL17 is the low quality of the glass and coatings, which are very susceptible to fungus, and haze. I am always on the lookout for good Canonets in Japan, but only about one in five that I find has a decent lens.

If you don't mind a more vintage style rangefinder camera. the Konica IIIA, Olympus 35S, and others are full manual options, with great lenses, and no need for batteries.
 
Frontman said:
Of the cameras mentioned, the SP is the best. It is a very well made camera, with a great performing lens. The quality of materials is also good, especially the glass. The weakest point of the Canonet QL17 is the low quality of the glass and coatings, which are very susceptible to fungus, and haze. I am always on the lookout for good Canonets in Japan, but only about one in five that I find has a decent lens.

If you don't mind a more vintage style rangefinder camera. the Konica IIIA, Olympus 35S, and others are full manual options, with great lenses, and no need for batteries.
Click to expand...


The Konica iiia is amazing. Really a gem. I have one I that greg Weber has completely overhauled.
For some reason I don't get on with it though. Maybe a few more rolls will smooth things out.

I think Canonets in Japan see(saw) much more use than the ones here in the US.
I had several over the years including 2 now. The Glass is always perfect.
Most were drawer queens is my guess.

Cheers
 
Frontman said:
The weakest point of the Canonet QL17 is the low quality of the glass and coatings....
Click to expand...

This is true, and the coating can be scratched very easily. I have a new old stock GIII and with a light graze of a filter and it took off quite a bit of coating. If you can get one in good condition and don't mind being a bit more careful than I am it's still a decent choice.

Like the others say a lot of fixed lens RFs are getting really expensive, often at least as expensive as decent ILC cameras like the Canon P.
 
My size comparison camera for a 35mm camera is an 80 year old Leica II with a collapsible Elmar. It's a compact 35mm and even though it is 80 years old - it is still serviceable.

With the Konica S2 and Olympus 35 SP you definitely get what are hands down simply superb lenses.

You also get a camera that is similar in size and heft to a more modern, compact SLR, like a Pentax MX. The Pentax MX may even be a bit smaller.

The QL 17 GIII, 7S II and the troublesome 35RD from the 1975 era are definitely more compact - but if you are buying a fixed-lens 35mm RF from the 1970'ies over the internet - it will be like buying a lotto ticket. There will probably be issues.

Bottom line: the build quality on most fixed-lens, 35mm RF cameras from the mid to late 1970'ies is not as robust as an SLR from the same decade. With the plethora of used film SLR's currently for sale - a compact SLR may be the better buy in the long run.

Just a thought from the owner and user of a recently serviced Olympus 35RD.
 
Solinar said:
My size comparison camera for a 35mm camera is an 80 year old Leica II with a collapsible Elmar. It's a compact 35mm and even though it is 80 years old - it is still serviceable.

With the Konica S2 and Olympus 35 SP you definitely get what are hands down simply superb lenses.

You also get a camera that is similar in size and heft to a more modern, compact SLR, like a Pentax MX. The Pentax MX may even be a bit smaller.

The QL 17 GIII, 7S II and the troublesome 35RD from the 1975 era are definitely more compact - but if you are buying a fixed-lens 35mm RF from the 1970'ies over the internet - it will be like buying a lotto ticket. There will probably be issues.

Bottom line: the build quality on most fixed-lens, 35mm RF cameras from the mid to late 1970'ies is not as robust as an SLR from the same decade. With the plethora of used film SLR's currently for sale - a compact SLR may be the better buy in the long run.

Just a thought from the owner and user of a recently serviced Olympus 35RD.
Click to expand...


On the other hand: Most of the 1970s compact RFs cost a fraction of a CLA on the Leica III. So if one the ebay scores turns out to be a dud, there's not too much lost.
I got my Revue for €15, and paid something like €25-35 including shipping for each of my 7sII's. All of them work fine with a fresh battery.
 
johny said:
THank you! In this tutorial they use 1.5mm, 2mm and 3mm thick sealing. But i have found only 1mm, 2mm and 3mm thick sealing selling from japan, special for camera sealing. There is no 1.5mm.
Click to expand...

Those are Jon Goodman's instructions. Oh - do I wish that his kits were still available.

If you already have 2mm foam - try using it for the hinge end - rather than the 1.5 mm foam specified by Jon Goodman.

Best Regards,
 
Thank you for the help to find a good RF for me! I have ordered a Canonet!

But now I want to buy a secon RF, now its important to be small. And the lens can be slower, f2.8.
I only know the Olympus 35 RC wich is good. Which ones are good and small?
 
The Canonet is relatively small. The RC is slightly smaller but the difference may not be as great as you hope. I'd consider something like an XA, Contax T or Rollei 35 if you want something significantly smaller than the Canonet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
  • Article Article
Compact Fast Lensed Rangefinder 35mm Cameras
2
Replies
22
Views
8K
Jason Schneider
J
J
  • Article Article
BURNING FILM! The Nikon vs. Canon Motor Drive Wars, Part 1
2
Replies
26
Views
4K
1936ContaxII
1936ContaxII
raynokk
Canonet QL19 G-III vs Olympus 35RC
Replies
11
Views
2K
Austintatious
Austintatious
C
MR-44 adapter, for my Konica Auto S3 - problems
Replies
6
Views
2K
Cortexturizer
C
L
Focus help with Minolta Himatic 7sii
Replies
9
Views
3K
LMNOP
L
Back
Top Bottom