aw614
Established
I went on a screw mount buying binge these last few fears (yay GAS!), and I agree with you on the Nicca or Leotax options over the Canons. I just prefer using the Leotax F or Nicca IIIS over the Canon IVS. Both seem very comparable in many ways to the Leica IIIC. I kind of like how the Leotax is a big Leica IIIC haha.
But I think the Canons are fine users especially up to the L1 (Also had an L2 but didnt need two). I'll complain about style, but after the VL/VT, the Canons got uglier. I really don't like the 7 and really need to sell it off. For as heavy and large as it is, it still feels cheap. I think the looks of it also seem to scare potential buyers, go figure, the L2 sold in days, and the 7 seems impossible to sell lol. And yeah I feel I can rant about the 7 all day too.
But I do plan on keeping my L1, and the IVS I bought on marketplace came with a parallax corrected Canon 50mm viewfinder that works with the cold shoe on my L1.
Coldkennels
Barnack-toting Brit.
I am *far* too blind for that, sadly. No in-built diopter or accessory one will do the job.
@Godfrey, I love the accessory finder on that Retina. I've never actually seen the Kodak accessory finders before - the "arm" to position them perfectly above the lens is a really nice touch. Although it does beg the question of why they didn't just put the accessory shoe in the right place to begin with!
Godfrey
somewhat colored
It's one of two different accessory finders that were made for the Retina II/III series cameras. This optical model has a parallax correction adjustment too, calibrated in both meters and feet, and flips between 35 and 80 mm to match the lenses. The "field finder" that was made covered 50 and 80 mm lenses and has a parallax correction scale in meters.
Of course, with any of the accessory lenses in place, you cannot close the lens door... which is why I tend to use the 50mm lens most of the time. But I'll stick a strap on it and one or another of the accessory lenses to go do some shooting soon. Using the accessory lenses gets a little complicated as you use the rangefinder to find the distance, and then have to transfer the distance setting to the appropriate scale on the camera... Here's Chris Sherlock's video on this fun exercise:
The rangefinder module underneath the center of the top cover probably presented a clearance issue for the accessory shoe bolts in terms of positioning it more centrally, but I didn't look specifically for that when I had the top cover off to verify my conjecture. I do know that it is pretty tight inside the top cover: there's little wasted space.
Fun, fun, fun... I really enjoy these cameras a lot!
G
Godfrey
somewhat colored
... The video I mentioned above made me realize that I didn't have the lens hood for the 80mm accessory lens. A few minutes hunting about on EBay turned up a complete bubble case with lens hood for it today, as well as a storage case for the 50mm lens component when you remove it from the camera to use one of the accessory lenses. And at very modest prices!
Amazing!
It's nice to have a complete set of these components. The Kodak Retina RF cameras and their accessories were a very clever, beautifully made and finished system that performs extremely well even today, 70 years later.
G
Amazing!
It's nice to have a complete set of these components. The Kodak Retina RF cameras and their accessories were a very clever, beautifully made and finished system that performs extremely well even today, 70 years later.
G
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I'm having too much fun re-learning and practicing use of the accessory lenses. I'll spend some time using them for real with my next roll through the Retina.
These Retina RF cameras really are superbly designed and finished, certainly on par with the Leica, Nikon, and Canon RFs of their day, and a great way to get into a rangefinder camera inexpensively. The Schneider or Rodenstock lenses make excellent photos. The biggest constraints are that you have only 35, 50, and 80 mm focal lengths to work with, and setting focus accurately for the 35 and 80 takes a little bit of thought and effort. Pluses and minuses, as always.
G
These Retina RF cameras really are superbly designed and finished, certainly on par with the Leica, Nikon, and Canon RFs of their day, and a great way to get into a rangefinder camera inexpensively. The Schneider or Rodenstock lenses make excellent photos. The biggest constraints are that you have only 35, 50, and 80 mm focal lengths to work with, and setting focus accurately for the 35 and 80 takes a little bit of thought and effort. Pluses and minuses, as always.
G
mlzplayer
Member
After thinking for a little bit longer, I've decided to cut a little more aggressively. Out of 15 cameras, I'm thinking of retaining a Nikon F, a D700 and my Kiev 4.
With the considerably large chunk of change generated, ultimately I think investing into barnacks seems like the right play. Shooting a Nicca has reminded me of how much I adore the design. Their simplicity and reliability appeals to me greately.
I already own a Serenar 1.9 and a Tokyo Optical Plant 3.5, so all I'd need is a 35 and two barnack bodies. To cover 28mm Ill probably end up getting something for the F.
With the considerably large chunk of change generated, ultimately I think investing into barnacks seems like the right play. Shooting a Nicca has reminded me of how much I adore the design. Their simplicity and reliability appeals to me greately.
I already own a Serenar 1.9 and a Tokyo Optical Plant 3.5, so all I'd need is a 35 and two barnack bodies. To cover 28mm Ill probably end up getting something for the F.
Coldkennels
Barnack-toting Brit.
I think this is a pretty solid plan... but... I'd argue that you've got the wides the wrong way round.
I think a 50/28 kit on Barnacks works a treat, esp. as you can scale or zone focus a 28mm that bit easier than you can a 35mm. Then you can throw a 35mm on the Nikon F for a one-lens-almost-does-it-all setup.
Also, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to have both 50mm and 35mm in your bag for the same mount. They're so close to each other that there's no real need for both at the same time, I think.
Plus - and this might just be me - I've always found 28mm lenses a bit of a pain to focus on an SLR. I find myself going backwards and forwards, unsure where the focus actually is. No such issues on rangefinders!
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I tend to agree ... the wider lens on the RF and the longer lens on the SLR is usually a good rule of thumb.
As to whether 35 is different enough from 50 to carry both: eh? Matter of personal preference.
G
CMur12
Veteran
For me, it makes no difference the way I focus a wide-angle (28mm) lens on an RF or an SLR.
With a wide-angle lens, I don't focus on an object; I focus on an area. So, I focus such a lens with the DOF scale, not with the camera's focusing aid.
Edit: This is a problem with modern lenses that don't have DOF scales!
- Murray
Last edited:
wlewisiii
Just another hotel clerk
I'll just simply say that if you have a Nikon F, you want a Nikkor-O 35/2
mlzplayer
Member
As to whether 35 is different enough from 50 to carry both: eh? Matter of personal preference.
I feel as if the 35 is the 50 indoors and the 50 the 35 outdoors. Personally, I use 35 for "scene" shooting and the 50 for "slice" shooting. Most of my work is on a 50mm, but indoors it is really is tight.
Hmm. I think you make a very strong point. I also struggle with nailing 28mm focus on an SLR. A 28/50 setup is really strong. I feel constantly torn between wanting a 28/50/105 kit and a 35/85/135. I never can quite balance the bodies/lenses. For example, I have a 35/50/135 on my Kiev, but would rather have a 28/50.
In that case, the collection would ideally look like:
Leica IIIA/F + Canon 28mm f/2.8
Leica IIIA/F + Tokyo 50mm f/3.5. + Serenar 50 f/1.9
Nikon F + 35mm f/2.
Can't argue with that. That right there is a killer kit. This would also allow me to later swap the F for an F2, which I've been interested in for a while. If the GAS hit me again I could buy more pre-ai lenses.
Last edited:
Godfrey
somewhat colored
With a Nikon F SLR, the focusing screen you're using is key to quick, consistent focus.
- For lenses longer than 35mm, I like the plain matte fresnel screen with a scribed grid (type E)
- For lenses up to 35 mm, the focus screen comprised of matte fresnel focusing surface with split image rangefinder focus aid (type A) nets much faster and more consistent focus accuracy.
I still have an early, plain-prism Nikon F, with both of those screens, a 28/2, and a 55/3.5 macro (and M-tube for 1:1). It's a marvelous, minimal SLR kit ... It kinda begs for an 85 or 105 mm lens as well.
G
- For lenses longer than 35mm, I like the plain matte fresnel screen with a scribed grid (type E)
- For lenses up to 35 mm, the focus screen comprised of matte fresnel focusing surface with split image rangefinder focus aid (type A) nets much faster and more consistent focus accuracy.
I still have an early, plain-prism Nikon F, with both of those screens, a 28/2, and a 55/3.5 macro (and M-tube for 1:1). It's a marvelous, minimal SLR kit ... It kinda begs for an 85 or 105 mm lens as well.
G
Garden Maniac
Newbie
if you're willing to use external VF's / barnack form factor you could consider a voigtlander bessa T - Voigtlander Bessa T info on our generous sponsor's site
this way you could retain the ability to use m-mount lenses while keeping a similar price to a cla'd barnack - if you are shooting color sometimes there's a good chance you may want the option for m-mount lenses down the road for potentially newer coatings / more modern rendition
this way you could retain the ability to use m-mount lenses while keeping a similar price to a cla'd barnack - if you are shooting color sometimes there's a good chance you may want the option for m-mount lenses down the road for potentially newer coatings / more modern rendition
Coldkennels
Barnack-toting Brit.
This is an absolute banger of a kit, to be honest. Couple of extra considerations that might seal the deal:
- 28mm on a well-serviced Leica with slow speeds means you can hand-hold a lot lower than you think; you'd be able to take that Canon 28/2.8 into much lower light than you would with a 28mm on the Nikon F. Looking through my Lightroom library, I've got a couple of shots at 1/8th of a second handheld at 28mm that you'd swear involved a tripod.
- Definitely make one of those Leica IIIs an -f model. You might not use flash often, but having that option is very useful. A IIIf, a CTOOM flash bracket, and either an auto-thyristor electronic flash or an old-style flash gun with bulbs opens up a lot of creative possibilities, especially if you find yourself getting into more old-style/traditional and/or super-slow and fine-grain films at some point.
- You mentioned finding 50mm indoors quite "tight". There are options to make 50mm indoors work quite well on any Leica III before the IIIg; a NOOKY & 50mm f/3.5 Elmar, SOOKY and 50mm Summicron, or NOOKY-HESUM and Summar or Summitar gives you full rangefinder focusing and parallax-adjusted framing between 50mm and 1m. Very handy for indoor use, and small enough to keep in the kit bag at all times.
mlzplayer
Member
By the way, where is the best place to CLA barnacks nowadays? I've used Oleg for a handful of things, but I dont think he offers beam splitter replacements. Seems every individual repair tech I read about has negative reviews. YYE, DAG, Sherry etc.
Last edited:
Godfrey
somewhat colored
hmm...? Seems to me I can use any LTM screw-mount lens or accessory on M-mount with a simple 1mm thick adapter, but I cannot use M-mount lenses or accessories on a LTM camera: you cannot get an adapter for M-mount lenses onto LTM bodies that achieve infinity focus because the flange distance is 1mm too great... ??
G
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I've done business with DAG for many years, he's serviced Leica and Minox gear for me. I've never had any issues with his service work at all.
I've been using Advance Camera Repair in Portland, OR to have various and sundry other cameras serviced (Kodak Retina RF, Rollei 35, Voigtländer Vito II and Vitessa, others ...) and they've done excellent work for me. I'm pretty sure they'll work on Leica Barnack cameras as well.
G
Coldkennels
Barnack-toting Brit.
...I wasn't talking about lens options, more "widget" options. Whatever situation you're in, there's usually a gadget, gizmo, or widget to make a Leica III do the job; the pre-M Leicas were a real "system" camera in a way that the Ms never quite matched. That said, both of them are still much more "widgetable" than something like the Bessas, for example.
In an ideal world, there'd be a IIIf with an M-mount, so you can get the best of all the options. If I ever had Musk money, I'd buy controlling shares in Leica to get that made instead of taking over a social media platform and running it into the ground. I'd probably lose just as much in the process, but at least the end result would be something worthwhile!
wlewisiii
Just another hotel clerk
I only use DAG.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Well, Leica made a lot of widgets for the M as well. And many of the Barnack widgets are easy to adapt to the M.
The thing is: the SLR pretty much obsoleted the need for a lot of those widgets. I love finding and using all the fascinating widgets that were made for the Kodak Retina RF cameras to enable them to do macro, photocroscopy, etc, but I laugh at it because I know I can pick up any of my SLR or EVF cameras I can get the job done in 10 seconds...
G