apostasiometritis
Established
Bessas are as reliable as any modern camera.
What can go wrong with them is rangefinder alignment, they seem to be more prone to this than Leicas. That said, I've had 3 of them and never had an issue - just don't bang them around and you'll be fine.
Other than that, the viewfinder is just as good if not better than the cheaper Leicas.
But, if you're willing to go meterless, go straight to an m2,m4-2/P etc.
I still remember the first time I shot my Zorki without a meter - freedom!
All sound advice, you can't go wrong with any of them.
With regards to FSU cameras, one notable exception:
If you can get a Zorki 6 in guaranteed working condition, go for it. It will be a lot cheaper than any of the above and it is a modern camera in many respects with a great VF.
What can go wrong with them is rangefinder alignment, they seem to be more prone to this than Leicas. That said, I've had 3 of them and never had an issue - just don't bang them around and you'll be fine.
Other than that, the viewfinder is just as good if not better than the cheaper Leicas.
But, if you're willing to go meterless, go straight to an m2,m4-2/P etc.
I still remember the first time I shot my Zorki without a meter - freedom!
All sound advice, you can't go wrong with any of them.
With regards to FSU cameras, one notable exception:
If you can get a Zorki 6 in guaranteed working condition, go for it. It will be a lot cheaper than any of the above and it is a modern camera in many respects with a great VF.
Jehovazilla
Newbie
Just bought a Bessa R3A from a member here (Katie)... So I suppose I made up my mind. Or at least my animal brain did (I did ask my SO if cameras were making me stupid again, they do seem to short-circuit the impulse control center of my brain).
I'm generally nice to my stuff, so I don't see too much of a problem.
The FSU thing is what started this thing.. I was looking into buying a cheap M42 Jupiter 9 for my DSLR, which led me to sovietcams.com, which led me to researching RF cameras, and the history of "modern" cameras.
I find it amusing that there are basically two makers of cameras (Contax and Leica) that pretty much everything after seems to be based on (at least in RF, and even SLR land). I'm a nerd.
Which led me to buying that Jena Werra III...
I'm very sad about that... That camera is one of the most beautiful things I've seen. If not beautiful, most interesting. Someday I'm going to see if I can fix it, since there pretty much is only one thing that could be wrong with it (RF works, shutter works thanks to some lighter fluid, glass is clean, but film advance doesn't... something slipped a cog), and I know exactly where to look. Oddly, under the case it says "CLA Jun 2013"...
Anyways... Thanks for all the help. I'll post more when I can actually officially consider myself as "fitting in" here.
Last edited:
apostasiometritis
Established
The bessa R3A is a fine machine.
With a Nokton 40, they are a match made in heaven.
One of the all time classic combos imo.
As for the FSUs, one is running a lot of risk buying one from that place, but of all the FSUs I had I cant remember not being able to bring one back from the dead.
It seems that they are simple machines built to be easily repairable with a bit of patience and basic tools.
In contrast, Leicas are awfully complicated, even the more basic CL. I would never try and do any work on one.
With a Nokton 40, they are a match made in heaven.
One of the all time classic combos imo.
As for the FSUs, one is running a lot of risk buying one from that place, but of all the FSUs I had I cant remember not being able to bring one back from the dead.
It seems that they are simple machines built to be easily repairable with a bit of patience and basic tools.
In contrast, Leicas are awfully complicated, even the more basic CL. I would never try and do any work on one.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Even though you've already made your choice -- and I use Voigtländers too -- for future reference you might care to take a look at "Leicaphilia", http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/leicaphilia.html
Cheers,
R.
Cheers,
R.
Frontman
Well-known
If you get a Canon P or Canon 7 that works, it will probably continue working. I have had many pass through my hands, and it is rare to find one which doesn't work properly.
With FSU cameras, the situation is the opposite, I have never bought an FSU camera which has worked properly. If you would like a good FSU camera, buy one from Oleg, his cameras are properly serviced, and are actually better than new.
I have never used a Voigtlander Bessa camera, though their lenses which I have owned have been very good.
A fixed-lens rangefinder is a very good choice, and is also the most economical. I like the Olymus 35 SP. It has a great lens, good styling, and is fully mechanical. It had automatic or manual operation, as well as having an EV scale on the lens, it is a great camera for fundamental photography.
With FSU cameras, the situation is the opposite, I have never bought an FSU camera which has worked properly. If you would like a good FSU camera, buy one from Oleg, his cameras are properly serviced, and are actually better than new.
I have never used a Voigtlander Bessa camera, though their lenses which I have owned have been very good.
A fixed-lens rangefinder is a very good choice, and is also the most economical. I like the Olymus 35 SP. It has a great lens, good styling, and is fully mechanical. It had automatic or manual operation, as well as having an EV scale on the lens, it is a great camera for fundamental photography.
leicapixie
Well-known
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=136911
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=136911
I applaud your long questionnaire and added comments.
A few things not yet answered.
Film.
It is not the magic potion to get you disciplined and shoot less.That must be you. A an old timer, this belief that film folk shot less, is a total myth. I shot what i could afford in time, material and costs. I shot professionally and heaps went thru the camera. Not quite as much as digital, but lots! One evening at a Fashion show i zipped thru 20 rolls of Tri-x. The limiting factor was the re-cycle times of the flash.
Film needs processing.Unless you do it yourself it becomes very expensive. Black and white is easy. Add tank, reels,opener,jars,bottles, funnels,negative bags, chemicals,Thermometer.
Scanning? I now shoot some color negative c-41, that goes to a 1-Hour lab for development and scan.
I scan my B/W self from a discarded Canonscan.
Cameras. I loved the way you dismissed the Nikon F2, the Spotmatic and a Minolta. In their time they were a major force in a new way of seeing! The SLR brought millions into photography. The Pentax Spotmatic was my pro camera.
The Nikon F2 is a way more reliable and stronger camera than any Leica M. I own Nikon and Leica.
My Spotmatic has never needed a service.
My M3 most repaired camera.
They are same age..
Lenses. Yes Leitz and Leica lenses are special.
So are the cost factor. Leica glass is "softer"
and easier damaged. My Tele-Elmarit was busy
killing itself with the vapors of the lubricant..
I saw a demo how hard Nikkor/Nikon lenses and coating
were able to withstand terrible misuse.
Leica-M esp the older ones do have a special feel.
A built in meter a-la M6 is way nicer to use.
I would first use: expose and develop film and feel the way.
When you've done about 50 rolls, you can then move forward.
Using a Leica-M usually takes a year or more to feel it's yours..
There are no short cuts if one is serious.
Good Luck. The adventure awaits..
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=136911
I applaud your long questionnaire and added comments.
A few things not yet answered.
Film.
It is not the magic potion to get you disciplined and shoot less.That must be you. A an old timer, this belief that film folk shot less, is a total myth. I shot what i could afford in time, material and costs. I shot professionally and heaps went thru the camera. Not quite as much as digital, but lots! One evening at a Fashion show i zipped thru 20 rolls of Tri-x. The limiting factor was the re-cycle times of the flash.
Film needs processing.Unless you do it yourself it becomes very expensive. Black and white is easy. Add tank, reels,opener,jars,bottles, funnels,negative bags, chemicals,Thermometer.
Scanning? I now shoot some color negative c-41, that goes to a 1-Hour lab for development and scan.
I scan my B/W self from a discarded Canonscan.
Cameras. I loved the way you dismissed the Nikon F2, the Spotmatic and a Minolta. In their time they were a major force in a new way of seeing! The SLR brought millions into photography. The Pentax Spotmatic was my pro camera.
The Nikon F2 is a way more reliable and stronger camera than any Leica M. I own Nikon and Leica.
My Spotmatic has never needed a service.
My M3 most repaired camera.
They are same age..
Lenses. Yes Leitz and Leica lenses are special.
So are the cost factor. Leica glass is "softer"
and easier damaged. My Tele-Elmarit was busy
killing itself with the vapors of the lubricant..
I saw a demo how hard Nikkor/Nikon lenses and coating
were able to withstand terrible misuse.
Leica-M esp the older ones do have a special feel.
A built in meter a-la M6 is way nicer to use.
I would first use: expose and develop film and feel the way.
When you've done about 50 rolls, you can then move forward.
Using a Leica-M usually takes a year or more to feel it's yours..
There are no short cuts if one is serious.
Good Luck. The adventure awaits..
Major Tom
Established
Hi zilla. If you take a look at some of my threads through my profile you might find some good input relevant to you as we have a similar situation as far as rangefinders go. Overall RFF has been a civil (sometimes cranky) and helpful place.
I was very strongly considering the Contax G series and the Canon P as well, but my heart was set on that beautiful viewfinder and aperture priority metering, along with all the other modern conveniences. It's a very well thought out camera and I'm guessing we're both going to love it.
You made a very good choice in getting Katie's Bessa at a steal price. I just got my R3A for $450 shipped (with no lens!) just a day before, so I was kicking myself. The Minolta CLE/Leica CL don't make much sense to me when the Bessas can be had for similar prices.
Some people ***-*** on "cachet" or "mystique" for the main valid point that it does nothing for your photography, but I play tennis for instance and I'm fully aware it has no effect on my play, but there's something about having the same racquet as Roger Federer that feels great and makes me want to play more and better. It works as a bit of motivation. The same way a friend of mine owns the same camera as Stanley Kubrick:
Once I have my R3A I imagine I won't shoot my Canon IVSB very much due to the practicalities, but I'm never getting rid of it. It represents a height of industrial design from it's era. It probably belonged to a soldier during the Korean War. It was my first rangefinder camera. If life takes a strange turn and I have children, I would bequeath it to them or a nephew. Like the photographs they took, these cameras have a historical and cultural significance.
I look forward to sharing our experiences with the Bessa. Happy shooting.
EDIT: lol at p00-p00 being censored.
I was very strongly considering the Contax G series and the Canon P as well, but my heart was set on that beautiful viewfinder and aperture priority metering, along with all the other modern conveniences. It's a very well thought out camera and I'm guessing we're both going to love it.
You made a very good choice in getting Katie's Bessa at a steal price. I just got my R3A for $450 shipped (with no lens!) just a day before, so I was kicking myself. The Minolta CLE/Leica CL don't make much sense to me when the Bessas can be had for similar prices.
Some people ***-*** on "cachet" or "mystique" for the main valid point that it does nothing for your photography, but I play tennis for instance and I'm fully aware it has no effect on my play, but there's something about having the same racquet as Roger Federer that feels great and makes me want to play more and better. It works as a bit of motivation. The same way a friend of mine owns the same camera as Stanley Kubrick:
Once I have my R3A I imagine I won't shoot my Canon IVSB very much due to the practicalities, but I'm never getting rid of it. It represents a height of industrial design from it's era. It probably belonged to a soldier during the Korean War. It was my first rangefinder camera. If life takes a strange turn and I have children, I would bequeath it to them or a nephew. Like the photographs they took, these cameras have a historical and cultural significance.
I look forward to sharing our experiences with the Bessa. Happy shooting.
EDIT: lol at p00-p00 being censored.
hausen
Well-known
Canon P is a great camera and the 50/1.8 and/or 1.4 are superb lenses. Wish I hadn't sold mine. Still have my 50/1.4 which I use a lot on my M6 even though I have a Summicron 50.
Frank Petronio
Well-known
The $100 already CLA Canonet QL17 does everything well except allow you to waste money on mediocre lenses. Just shoot 20 rolls with one and see where you stand when the Dektol settles.
Bargain Leicas usually cost you more than nice Leicas in the end. Save up and do things right, but in the meantime a Canonet provides high quality images, a decent rangefinder, good reliability.
Unless you know the seller well then older screw mount cameras, especially the less expensive ones, can be totally messed up garbage or cost hundreds tho put right. Some people are luckier than others but why take that risk if money is tight? But if you must get an old user Leica, talk to Youxin Ye.
Bargain Leicas usually cost you more than nice Leicas in the end. Save up and do things right, but in the meantime a Canonet provides high quality images, a decent rangefinder, good reliability.
Unless you know the seller well then older screw mount cameras, especially the less expensive ones, can be totally messed up garbage or cost hundreds tho put right. Some people are luckier than others but why take that risk if money is tight? But if you must get an old user Leica, talk to Youxin Ye.
Jehovazilla
Newbie
I didn't mean to sound like I wash bashing any of those SLRs. I think they are awesome cameras... I mean that literally, as a kid I was in awe of my parents cameras. Sadly the Minolta and F2 are currently unusable, and in dire needs of servicing, thanks to 15 years in a closet or Phoenix garage unused. The Pentax is missing in action, its in someones storage shed, or attic, junk room. If these were available a year ago, I might have never bugged the kind people of this forum.
I am curious about rangefinder glass... The names are so interesting, and most of them stretch back into the history of photography, somewhat unchanged.
I'm not even going to start thinking about what to do with film for awhile... Costco is going to have to be good enough...
Major Tom... You might have nailed some of that intangible mystique there. The idea that an object has a history, a story, and in some odd way is part of something bigger. It isn't just a camera, at that point. When I picked up that broken camera, I was almost more excited to hear the story behind it, than actually own it... How did this strange East German camera, made by one of the most famous lens makers end up in the American desert, on Craigslist... There had to be something fascinating there... Sadly, there wasn't ("I was a dealer"). But generally this is one reason I LOVE buying old camera stuff, especially in person, you always get a good story.
Frank Petronio: If its cheap enough, I'm always a fan of bad glass, as long as its spectacularly bad. I love my $10 plastic Holga lens, its fun for snapshots of my friends, or their kids. Point taken though... I'm not too worried though, if this is like my last two cameras, I'll make do for a year, learn about the system and what it feels like it "wants to have", then I'll worry about glass (though the shots I've seen of the Nokton 40mm 1.4...)
Frank Petronio
Well-known
The 40mm in the Canonet is hardly "bad glass", many people will compare it to the Leica and VC 40mm lenses. The same goes for the other quality Japanese fixed lens rangefinders ~ they were very high quality. So for about the same price as a cheap, beater lens... you can get a decent CLA'd Canonet OL17, Olympus SP, Konica, etc. and none of them are slouches.
The rest is brand loyalty, peer pressure, and marketing.... I've had most of them, from Holgas to M6s....
There is a clean Olympus SP35 in the classifieds right now, I have no connection with the seller, just saying that those are a good deal and you'd have to move pretty far up the food chain before you felt a quality difference. I'd doubt you could ever see a quality difference in your photos.
The rest is brand loyalty, peer pressure, and marketing.... I've had most of them, from Holgas to M6s....
There is a clean Olympus SP35 in the classifieds right now, I have no connection with the seller, just saying that those are a good deal and you'd have to move pretty far up the food chain before you felt a quality difference. I'd doubt you could ever see a quality difference in your photos.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Frank,
Assuming, of course, that you can be bothered to shoot 20 rolls with it. From my point of view, even the nicest fixed-lens RFs (and I have had several, naming Yashica, Canon, Minolta, Konica among the best) are just not very nice to use. Except perhaps for some Konicas. Contrariwise, most interchangeable-lens cameras I've tried have been much nicer (Leica, Canon, Voigtländer, Zeiss Ikon, Hensoldt, Robot...). Well, not Paxette, obviously...
Cheers,
R.
Frank Petronio
Well-known
OK I agree that he should get a nice MP kit like yours Roger ;-p
Given his budget though, I much rather be using a nicer Canonet or similar than a buggered up old bargain basement Leica on it's last legs, with a hazy, wobbling lens. Short of charity gifting him a proper outfit, a $100 to $150 RF to see whether he can even tolerate rangefinder focusing makes sense to me but, of course, I will always defer to your Alpahighness ;-p
Given his budget though, I much rather be using a nicer Canonet or similar than a buggered up old bargain basement Leica on it's last legs, with a hazy, wobbling lens. Short of charity gifting him a proper outfit, a $100 to $150 RF to see whether he can even tolerate rangefinder focusing makes sense to me but, of course, I will always defer to your Alpahighness ;-p
Major Tom
Established
I think someone who likes photography and doesn't have money to try everything under the sun will be, and should be, willing to put 20 rolls through whatever they get their hands on...
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
If you just want to use film, then borrow your mum's camera. I guess she still has it from a comment you made...
As for CRF's, there are two main problems (apart from what people post on the internet) and they are the people who sell them and the age of the camera.
The people who sell them often are trying to get rid of them because they are, imo, nbg and - worse still - they have tried and failed to repair them at home. Luckily there are still repair shops around and a mechanical camera that has failed and even been handed a lot of abuse can be repaired. Electronic ones are harder to get repaired and a lot of repairers won't touch them. So my advice is to stick to dealers and get the camera with a guarantee - that will cost you but I don't know of an alternative apart from being lucky. (It knocks the CLE off the list, as I see it as it is purely electronic but the CL is OK.)
The age of the camera will also contribute to your problems, lubricants dry, migrate and worse. So the thing either needs work done to replace the lubricants or - worse still - lubricants and parts will need replacing as parts wear out faster without lubrication. Alas, they wear slowly and people don't realise. Check people's comments about the changes in the camera after work has been done on it to confirm this.
As for your budget, I've bought range-finders for a few pennies over two pounds (second hand shop) and about ten US dollars (ebay) and have been delighted with them as found and even more delighted after work was done on them (30 pounds worth in all).
Roger has mentioned the Konica RF's, I've a C35 and really like it but it's small-ish.
I've also a FED 2 and would recommend one with the Jupiter-8 lens or Industar to anyone looking for experience of RF's but it must be from a dealer or you must be prepared for the worst (curable, see Oleg and comments about his work).
Leica's cameras are very nice but expensive, repairs are expensive too and the lenses are expensive. (Try working out the cost of a M camera and 2 or 3 lenses and a meter for it... ) The M3 you mentioned doesn't suit people on a budget who like mild wide angle lenses.
I can't comment further as I've not owned and used the others you mention, I think, but wonder what you have against the Olympus RF's.
BTW, you often read negative comments about cameras on forums but that's because no one posts to say they've no problems with their camera.
Regards, David
If you just want to use film, then borrow your mum's camera. I guess she still has it from a comment you made...
As for CRF's, there are two main problems (apart from what people post on the internet) and they are the people who sell them and the age of the camera.
The people who sell them often are trying to get rid of them because they are, imo, nbg and - worse still - they have tried and failed to repair them at home. Luckily there are still repair shops around and a mechanical camera that has failed and even been handed a lot of abuse can be repaired. Electronic ones are harder to get repaired and a lot of repairers won't touch them. So my advice is to stick to dealers and get the camera with a guarantee - that will cost you but I don't know of an alternative apart from being lucky. (It knocks the CLE off the list, as I see it as it is purely electronic but the CL is OK.)
The age of the camera will also contribute to your problems, lubricants dry, migrate and worse. So the thing either needs work done to replace the lubricants or - worse still - lubricants and parts will need replacing as parts wear out faster without lubrication. Alas, they wear slowly and people don't realise. Check people's comments about the changes in the camera after work has been done on it to confirm this.
As for your budget, I've bought range-finders for a few pennies over two pounds (second hand shop) and about ten US dollars (ebay) and have been delighted with them as found and even more delighted after work was done on them (30 pounds worth in all).
Roger has mentioned the Konica RF's, I've a C35 and really like it but it's small-ish.
I've also a FED 2 and would recommend one with the Jupiter-8 lens or Industar to anyone looking for experience of RF's but it must be from a dealer or you must be prepared for the worst (curable, see Oleg and comments about his work).
Leica's cameras are very nice but expensive, repairs are expensive too and the lenses are expensive. (Try working out the cost of a M camera and 2 or 3 lenses and a meter for it... ) The M3 you mentioned doesn't suit people on a budget who like mild wide angle lenses.
I can't comment further as I've not owned and used the others you mention, I think, but wonder what you have against the Olympus RF's.
BTW, you often read negative comments about cameras on forums but that's because no one posts to say they've no problems with their camera.
Regards, David
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Congrats! Good choice.
Katie
Established
Jehovazilla
Newbie
I didn't mean that... I was commenting on your "wasting money on mediocre lenses" statement. During my research the Canonet featured rather highly, and I would have considered one, but I want to share lenses (even bad ones) with my other camera.
Getting the cheapest possible camera wasn't really that important, I had a few extra bucks sitting around. I have a camera fund, which is only for cameras, and I'm pretty much done with my other two systems, acquisition wise (though there is a 70mm that keeps taunting me, but I don't really need it).
Though if someone wants to gift me a new Leica, I'd be eternally grateful. I kind of doubt that this is ever going to happen, so I'll make do.
David Hughes: Sadly the one I lust after, the Spotmatic, is missing. And the other two old SLRs floating around my family need repair. Buying online was one of my concerns (especially with my new $60 paperweight), so when I made my chart, color-coded of course, I stuck to reputable sources like KEH, and Collectible Cameras (which is local, and had a very very tempting ugly M2). If it is completely borked, I have more resources at my disposal than some random ebay listing.
I really wish we had better places to find random "junk" cameras around where I live. I've searched, and pretty much only turned up about 6,000 broken Brownies and a few battered Argus brick-things. And a full Pentax 110 system, which I'm still kicking myself for not buying.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
No. I've "got my hands on" (often for nothing) LOTS of old cameras that weren't worth putting even one film through, let alone twenty. Some cameras are a pleasure to use. Some aren't. HERESY ALERT: I'd rather use an SLR than most fixed-lens RFs: an old Pentax, Nikon, Nikkormat, even Exakta. The only exception I can think of among fixed-lens RFs is folding Retinas, because they are so wonderfully compact.
I fully take Frank's point that it is foolish in the extreme to buy a clapped-out Leica with a lousy lens, but my suggestion is that if you want to use film, and can't afford a decent RF, there are plenty of better film cameras than fixed-lens RFs. Just about anything half decent in medium format, for a start. Or a good scale-focus camera.
Cheers,
R.
cosmonaut
Well-known
You can pretty much bet you can get back what you paid for if you get a Leica. You can resell it and maybe be out the shipping. They hold their value. You might even make a little. I found a deal on a Mamiya 7. I shot it for a year and sold it for more than I had in it film and all.