Oympus 35 RD vs. Minolta Hi Matic 7 SII

[PerregrinTuk]

Hello floks,

this will be my first opened thread after a lot of reading here. Awesome page I just could say until now! Please don't blame me because of my bad english, I'm out of Germany.

My interest lays in the mid 70s RF's. I own a Minolta Hi Matic 7 SII and I'm pretty happy with it. The lens is very sharp and comparing it to my bigger Contax IIa with a Sonnar Opton 1.5/50 it is in optical aspects not too far behind, the bokeh is a little bit more unexclusive, the sharpness a little lower and the finder itself is better at the Contax. The feeling and in sense of practise the Minolta is for sure better, because it is smaller, faster and more easy.

The Minolta is pretty simillar, or better said, the same like the Konica S3, the Revue 400 SE and the Vivitar 35. The only thing I could say is that the Minolta and the Konica have the better lenses. The finder of the Konica is the best, the brightest, but there is no manual function, which is the killswitch for this one. So the Minolta is the winner for me. I also tested the Canon Canonet QL17 GIII, but this one was far the weakest in optical properties. Bad lense.

Now I stumbled over the Olympus 35 RD, which is told to be on of the best RF in that size. If I compare it to my Minolta the Olympus has to slower times more, thats it. The rest seems pretty the same.

But whats the thread about:

Has anyone compared the optical properties of those two little beasts?

Which one has the better lense?

The better finder?

Thanks a lot!

 

[Trius]

I can't answer your question regarding comparison, but no one has ever bashed the RD lens, at least that I've heard. The RD also has two stops more range on the slow shutter speed end. The 7Sii slowest speed is 1/8, with RD going to 1/2 second.

The RD typically has a sticky shutter due to lubrication creep unless it has been properly serviced. It's one of the Olympus RFs I don't have, but would like to acquire.

 

[Mablo]

I have a Oly RD but unfortunately I cannot compare it to Hi Matic 7SII. I have a gut feeling that the difference of lens quality between the two cams is not significant. Both of them are very good.

 

[serpia]

You may have found this-

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=40228&highlight=35rd

an old post of mine with three images from the same negative, you can compare to your minolta.

I also have a minolta 7s, not sure if it is the 7SII or not. It was an Ebay purchase. It seemed to be working fine. I decided to run it through its paces one last time before testing it with film, and during that final test it jammed up. I never had it fixed, never produced a single exposure. So I cannot compare the two cameras directly.

Good luck with your comparison, I suspect you'll be wanting an RD.

 

[Trius]

The 7s is not the same as the 7s-II. The 7s is significantly larger. From what I have read, the lens isn't quite as good as the 7s-II, but it's no slouch. I had a 7s and sold it because I thought the VF was too large ...sounds funny, but that's how it felt. I.e., my eye had to hunt for the composition. Spot on exposures, though.

 

[neosniffron]

I have both the 7SII and the Olympus 35RD. I would say they are about the same in terms of sharpness. The only difference in my opinion is the 7SII has more saturated colours, but that could be the photolab. I like them both, but the Oly has been into surgery 2 times now and once to fix the dreaded sticky shutter. The 7SII (I have 2 of them) have been trouble free.

 

[Mablo]

This one might give you an idea of how sharp RD lens is. It's taken with f:8 or so and at minimum range. My Yashica G cannot compete with it.

 

[neosniffron]

Yup, I'm getting the same results too. Very sharp lens on the RD (and same with the 7SII). I like the RD viewfinder better tho'.

 

[Trius]

Mablo: I really wish you hadn't done that ...

 

[conradyiu]

I have both at the same time, same as the above both lens are excellent