Pivoting my rangefinding

M

mlzplayer

Member
Local time
7:18 PM
Joined
Jan 24, 2025
Messages
21
Hey all!

Long time lurker - first time poster.

I am currently at a photographic crossroads: considering selling all of my camera equipment and starting anew, but don't know which direction to invest in.

What I'm looking for: 2 rangefinder bodies, any system, which can support 35 and 28mm lenses. Preferably they could shoot these lenses within their viewfinder, and would be mostly mechanical.

With these requirements in mind, I've narrowed my possible options down to three systems. Firstly, I could go for L39 kit, which would probably look like canon rangefinders. Downside is there wouldn't be any in camera 28mm frame lines. Secondly, I could go for Nikon cameras (which I adore), such as an S3 and SP. Downside is finding a good SP is absurdly hard. Finally, I could start investing in a Leica kit, which is very expensive but technically best fulfills my requirements. The m5/m4 and m4-p look like the best cameras for this job.

Is anyone here running a similar kit? What do ya'll think? For a little more context, I'll be shooting indoors for the next few years, hence my requirements.

- max
 
Leica really revolutionized the rangefinder camera with the introduction of the M system with it's multiple frame indicators. But I'd regard most of them as 35/50 mm specialists, and even if your camera has 28 mm frame indicators, they may be hard to see unless you squeeze your eye close to the viewfinder eyepiece. So don't rule out external viewfinders, especially now that Chinese-made ones can be had at reasonable cost (save the pretty vintage metal finders for the collector's showcase; lightweight plastic ones are better users)
 
mdarnton said:
Given your parameters, I'd get an M4-P, which is a really fine camera.
Or a Nikon SP.
Click to expand...
My only concern here is that buying two Leicas would be somewhere around $4000, whereas two SP's might be $2600. I'm very familiar with Nikon cameras, especially the S2. Does the Leica price tag come with an equal step up in quality?
 
Welcome to the club. Some of us have been pondering exactly this for a long time. Me for one.

I've thought of downsizing, selling out entirely, culling to the basics (= downsizing by another name), and at times giving the gear away or even bundling it off to the recycling depot (joking here of course). Inevitably I feel totally overwhelmed by it all, and I give up thinking about it. Or I go out and buy yet another camera to compensate my ego for all that mind-bending, as I did recently, not with film gear but with digital (a Fuji Xpro2, for the record).

I thought I had got out of film many years ago, but a fast look at my kit at home and I find -
Two Nikkormat FT2s and four Nikon F lenses.
Two Nikon F65s with the kit G zooms and battery packs (at least these take supermarket batteries and all my Nikon D lenses, so it's a saver).
Two Contax G1s with four Zeiss G lenses. Meh cameras, super good lenses.
One Leica LTM with three Leitz lenses.

I know we are talking about rangefinders here. My Leica kit was acquired on a modest budget, by careful buying of secondhand LTM gear entirely from private sellers. It must be noted that I paid more to have my iif serviced to Almost As New condition than I had for the camera in the first place.

The Contax kit I put together years ago when those were new on the market, so I paid top $$. The G1s are so-so, but the Zeiss G lenses, wow! worth keeping this kit going purely for the glass, altho' when those G1s eventually break down, for me it will be a conundrum between buying new used cameras, dumping the entire kit, or trying to get a suitable repair. None of these tree appeal, hence the term conundrum.

As zillions here will happily agree, Leica is wonderful but nowadays prices for usable gear are through the roof. An LTM system is still affordable but my eyesight won' let me work with my iif at a pace I consider acceptable. Too much fiddling around for an old guy. Previously I had an M2 and an M3, both sold, and if I could afford these I would buy either today, but at current Australian prices ($2500+ with emphasis on the +) it would be economically ruinous for me. So I make do with my 1950s LTM.

I know, I know. I should cull. But it would be like dumping the kittens in the local park...
 
Last edited:
What ii think , since you asked.

Old film RF gear is not an investissement.
It is a money trap.

Film for indoors....
Since we don't know you.
Are you aware of fast 35, 28 been not cheap and it might require pushing or flash which is not always nice looking on results , especially on scans.

Have you ever used RF before? Some can't use it at all. And parallax is the issue especially with primitive Nikons

28mm was never really done right with RF cameras. Once you'll get 28 frame lines Leuca , your 35 becomes inaccurate . And entire frames are mess.

So, assuming you have RF experience, get M4, M2 from DAG or Igor Cameta, if you are in USA, which is marked as serviced by DAG.
For 28 use entire VF.

Sorry for some really checks .
 
In somewhat agreement with Ko.Fe, I'm curious what your age and prior experiences are? Is there a specific reason you are inclined towards the masochism of film over digital?

Frankly, a new Nikon Z body with an appropriate adaptor will allow the use of all the classic lenses much more easily than any old Leica or Nikon RF body.

But hey, I'm a loon who's off on a Pentax APS-C DSLR jag of late so what do I know? :cool:
 
wlewisiii said:
In somewhat agreement with Ko.Fe, I'm curious what your age and prior experiences are? Is there a specific reason you are inclined towards the masochism of film over digital?

Frankly, a new Nikon Z body with an appropriate adaptor will allow the use of all the classic lenses much more easily than any old Leica or Nikon RF body.

But hey, I'm a loon who's off on a Pentax APS-C DSLR jag of late so what do I know? :cool:
Click to expand...

Ive been taking pictures for about 5 years, and shooting film for almost 3. I feel no connection to my digital photos, but have been known to take them from time to time. The reason for the pivot is that I recently moved from a city in which the 50mm felt perfect to a relative nowhere where nothing happens outside. Whereas 35/50 was my bread and butter, I'm really being forced to shoot more 28/35.


Ko.Fe. said:
What ii think , since you asked.

Old film RF gear is not an investissement.
It is a money trap.

Film for indoors....
Since we don't know you.
Are you aware of fast 35, 28 been not cheap and it might require pushing or flash which is not always nice looking on results , especially on scans.

Have you ever used RF before? Some can't use it at all. And parallax is the issue especially with primitive Nikons

28mm was never really done right with RF cameras. Once you'll get 28 frame lines Leuca , your 35 becomes inaccurate . And entire frames are mess.

So, assuming you have RF experience, get M4, M2 from DAG or Igor Cameta, if you are in USA, which is marked as serviced by DAG.
For 28 use entire VF.

Sorry for some really checks .
Click to expand...

I am very familiar with rangefinder cameras. Started with FSU cameras, moved to canon and Nikons. For me really the 35mm rangefinder is the only enjoyable way to take photos. If you can tell me why I find it so compelling, I would like to be the first to know. Cant shoot any other way.

I am aware of the difficulty of pushing film. Ill definitely keep the m2 in mind.
 
If you want to shoot film- the Nikon SP with the built in second finder for 28mm is unique. The SP main finder does not flare like the S3 finder.
The lenses: less to choose from in S-Mount, but the 2.8cm F3.5 and 3.5cm F2.5 are excellent optical performers, and not too much money. I have these in LTM and S-Mount.
Are they fast enough for you? If not- then you are looking at Leica.
If you want wider- the 21mm F4.5 Biogon will work. The S-Mount 2.1cm F4 in S-Mount is "almost unobtainium"
 
mlzplayer said:
Ive been taking pictures for about 5 years, and shooting film for almost 3. I feel no connection to my digital photos, but have been known to take them from time to time. The reason for the pivot is that I recently moved from a city in which the 50mm felt perfect to a relative nowhere where nothing happens outside. Whereas 35/50 was my bread and butter, I'm really being forced to shoot more 28/35.




I am very familiar with rangefinder cameras. Started with FSU cameras, moved to canon and Nikons. For me really the 35mm rangefinder is the only enjoyable way to take photos. If you can tell me why I find it so compelling, I would like to be the first to know. Cant shoot any other way.

I am aware of the difficulty of pushing film. Ill definitely keep the m2 in mind.
Click to expand...
Given that, I'll simply mention that my favorite film Leica setup was a CL with a Canon 28/3.5, a Leica 50/2 Summitar & a Leica 90/3.5 Elmar. There wasn't an actual frame line for 28 on it but I used the whole of the finder and it worked well for me for the 28. I always preferred either 28 or 50 to 35 so YMWV.

That said, I far prefer my digital M 240 to any of the film Leica's I ever owned. $4000 and you can find out :devilish:
 
mlzplayer said:
My only concern here is that buying two Leicas would be somewhere around $4000, whereas two SP's might be $2600. I'm very familiar with Nikon cameras, especially the S2. Does the Leica price tag come with an equal step up in quality?
Click to expand...
Yes, but rangefinder cameras with built-in 28 mm frame indicators were pretty elite stuff, so yours is not a trivial ask! Another possibility for 28 mm might be the fixed-lens Kowa SW, which is scale-focused.
 
Minolta CLE has 28mm frame lines, that's probably the least expensive route to an M mount camera with those frames built-in. Konica Hexar RF is another possibility, or Zeiss Ikon ZM. Both are generally cheaper than metered Leica M bodies, although there are always pricing outliers.
 
I had a Nikon S2 briefly many years ago, like it, but never bonded with it. Never had Canon RF gear. I tried a modern Cosina/Voigtländer at one point ... kept it a week and moved on.

Leica has done me very well over many years. Avoiding a big long treatise and history, the M5 is the only model I haven't had and haven't wanted. They've always felt big and awkward in my hands.

Sticking with an M-bayonet body means you can easily use both M-bayonet and LTM lenses with a relatively inexpensive adapter. I never could see the 28mm frame lines in the M6TTL or M4-P easily, so I bought an M6TTL with 0.85x viewfinder and an M4-2, and use an accessory finder for 28 and shorter lenses. I have both M10-R and M10 Monochrom for digital.

And in small fit of nostalgia, I bought a IIIc last year. I already had the LTM Voigtländer 28/3.5 and 50/2.5 that fit it, and I added a 35/2.5. It's a slower, different shooting experience from the Ms .. I like it just as much. From the same era (early-mid 1950s), I have a little collection of Kodak Retina RF cameras and their two accessory lenses (35mm and 85mm) as well.

So. I have a surplus of lovely cameras and lenses, and I try to use them all with reasonable frequency. But I have to say, the M10 Monochrom is the one I grab most of the time for digital, and the Retina IIIcx (my customized IIIc sans meter and fitted with a IIc top cover) for film.

What suits you best might not be apparent until you buy something and use it a while. A Leica M4-P or M6 has the 28/35/50/75/90/135 mm frame lines and is probably where I'd start, knowing what I know now, and there are PLENTY of lenses available to choose from, used and new, Leica and other...

G
 
mlzplayer said:
My only concern here is that buying two Leicas would be somewhere around $4000, whereas two SP's might be $2600. I'm very familiar with Nikon cameras, especially the S2. Does the Leica price tag come with an equal step up in quality?
Click to expand...
I make my decisions based more on lens availability than anything about the body--good brand bodies are all pretty good. If you want the lenses for the Nikon RF system that are easily available and cheap, great. I love SPs. but can't live with the limited lens and accessory situation.

For the same reason, my SLR/DSLR solution is Nikon: a nearly infinite number of really great lenses against limited demand for non-AF stuff these days means old SLR Nikon lenses are cheap as dirt. My main film SLRs are Nikon FGs, a great body, really--no need to spend a lot for something bigger and heavier with no particular advantages for my use. So I'm not committed to spending a lot on a body. . . . . if only there were a M Leica body that cost $50 like FG bodies do!
 
splitimageview said:
Minolta CLE has 28mm frame lines, that's probably the least expensive route to an M mount camera with those frames built-in. Konica Hexar RF is another possibility, or Zeiss Ikon ZM. Both are generally cheaper than metered Leica M bodies, although there are always pricing outliers.
Click to expand...
The CLE has it's own ... problems. Not the least is if it has no power. I accept that these days with DSLR's - OTOH my CL had no working meter so I used a hand held and it MECHANICALLY worked fine. Six of one, half a dozen of the other.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom