Wimpler
Established
pentaxes
pentaxes
I share your feelings about the older pentaxes. I have 3 SV's, 2 s1a's, and then some of the later spotmatic models.
I too, as another forum member mentioned before, love praktina's. Unfortunately I've only managed to find one camera and one lens so far. The back comes of completely (unhinged), which makes loading film a bit awkward in a way people who enjoy bottom loading will recognize
Th real surprise for me was the removable finder. Most cameras with this feature are larger. The camera is generally of high quality, but you can recognize a few parts they tried to save money on. For example, the film gate is rather flimsy.
Another alternative for rangefinder people who want to use an SLR styled similar to what they are familiar to is the leafshutter SLRS (voigtlander bessamtic, agfaflex, contaflex, ...). These things are solid metal and chrome, just like rangefinder cameras of the era. Most of them however are not so reliable (because they are highly complex) and hard to get repaired. Personally, I don't have much experience with these. i always try to resist buying them.
pentaxes
I share your feelings about the older pentaxes. I have 3 SV's, 2 s1a's, and then some of the later spotmatic models.
I too, as another forum member mentioned before, love praktina's. Unfortunately I've only managed to find one camera and one lens so far. The back comes of completely (unhinged), which makes loading film a bit awkward in a way people who enjoy bottom loading will recognize
Th real surprise for me was the removable finder. Most cameras with this feature are larger. The camera is generally of high quality, but you can recognize a few parts they tried to save money on. For example, the film gate is rather flimsy.Another alternative for rangefinder people who want to use an SLR styled similar to what they are familiar to is the leafshutter SLRS (voigtlander bessamtic, agfaflex, contaflex, ...). These things are solid metal and chrome, just like rangefinder cameras of the era. Most of them however are not so reliable (because they are highly complex) and hard to get repaired. Personally, I don't have much experience with these. i always try to resist buying them.
Wimpler
Established
About the size difference between spotmatic models and earlier S and K models: The spotmatics are simply taller. They need to fit an exposure meter underneath the top plate. The cameras will in fact fit into the same case (more or less, because the flash contacts, meter switch and other little differences will prevent comfortable use).
The difference in size is quite surprising, and to me, does make a difference.
The difference in size is quite surprising, and to me, does make a difference.
btgc
Veteran
When I think about RF, I count bright VF with area around parallax marks on left side of body (from back), silent leaf shutter, buttersmooth release button (read - unmetered), DOF scale on lens (better than on body as Konica Auto S and S2 have), metal body and specific smell
That said, I can't get feeling of RF when using SLR. Shutter sound and VF blackout alone make then different for me. Not that one is better than other, they just don't mix well for me. Just like white and red wines, none of them is beer, though they aren't same.
That said, I can't get feeling of RF when using SLR. Shutter sound and VF blackout alone make then different for me. Not that one is better than other, they just don't mix well for me. Just like white and red wines, none of them is beer, though they aren't same.
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
So, any Olympuses, Pentaxes or Nikons mentioned above with cloth shutters?
parsec1
parsec1
Quite the opposite but I had a couple of Zeiss Contarex bullseye cameras and a few lenses and a motor drive on one of the things. Nearly fell through the floorboards of my home and had to be very very fit to 'run with them' esp carrying a Metz 502 as well...anybody remember them ? .
Anyway dumped the lot for OMs ASAP and what a relief !
Anyway dumped the lot for OMs ASAP and what a relief !
Spider67
Well-known
Why does nobody mention the Zenit C (or S)?
It is a LTM derived bottomloader SLR which would be great if its 3,5/50 Industar would have had click stops! Now that's RF feeling
here a pic with a comparison. Once I read of it as the SLR Leica should have built:
http://www.g-st.ch/privat/kameras/zenit.html
It is a LTM derived bottomloader SLR which would be great if its 3,5/50 Industar would have had click stops! Now that's RF feeling
here a pic with a comparison. Once I read of it as the SLR Leica should have built:
http://www.g-st.ch/privat/kameras/zenit.html
Wimpler
Established
Pentaxes (m42) have rubberized cloth shutters. Zenits have cloth shutters. Olympuses have cloth shutters.
Don't know about the others mentioned. In general, cameras of this era had cloth shutters. The copal square metal shutters came later.
Don't know about the others mentioned. In general, cameras of this era had cloth shutters. The copal square metal shutters came later.
Wimpler
Established
I don't think those early zenits had instant return mirrors, did they? My zenit 3's mirror doesn't return automatically, only when film is advanced (and shutter cocked).
They are however solidly constructed and very compact. The lack of information in the viewfinder prevents you to get distracted by all sorts of bells and whistles new (digital) cameras have. Quite a pleasing experience!
They are however solidly constructed and very compact. The lack of information in the viewfinder prevents you to get distracted by all sorts of bells and whistles new (digital) cameras have. Quite a pleasing experience!
Spider67
Well-known
No the early Zenits did not have instant return mirrors....so you had to be ready all the time or screw off the lenses and be quite astonished that the mirror was held by tiny threads.
......and the FSU RF lenses make fine macro lenses!
......and the FSU RF lenses make fine macro lenses!
HuubL
hunter-gatherer
Nothing wrong with threads, they still hold up very well in my Zenith S. Also Olympus put threads in their OM-1 and 2 cameras (perhaps also in the later OMs). They transfer the shutter and aperture settings from the mount to the innards.
kshapero
South Florida Man
Johan - As mentioned all M42 mount Pentaxes had cloth shutters. The first Pentax with a metal shutter was the K2 (and K2DMD) model of the mid-1970s. Other K models (K1000, KX, KM) continued with cloth shutters, even the MX had a cloth shutter, while the LX shutter was titanium.
V
varjag
Guest
I looked hard but found no RF-like SLR..
ZeissFan
Veteran
I've always enjoyed using the Nikon FE, although I've missed shots through the years because of the need to keep the film advance at the "standoff" position.
The Pentax MX was my second SLR. Great camera -- but maybe too small?
I've never felt an SLR was comparable to a rangefinder. At least, not for me. That's neither good nor bad -- just my experience.
The Pentax MX was my second SLR. Great camera -- but maybe too small?
I've never felt an SLR was comparable to a rangefinder. At least, not for me. That's neither good nor bad -- just my experience.
A rangefinder allows you to see the subject as it exposes the image.
Like the Canon Pellix.
Like the Canon Pellix.
Dave Wilkinson
Veteran
One that nobody seems to mention is my current favourite - a black Konica FT1, not much bigger than a 'M' handles beautifully, & with those superb Hex. lenses!
Dave.
Dave.
Wimpler
Established
Let me stress again that the praktinas have 2 viewfinder. One regular SLR viewfinder, and one 'direct viewfinder' which allows you to track your subject or whatever you RF addicts need the viewinder for at all times
Here is a page with images for the people to lazy to google
http://www.praktina.com/r23cam6e.htm
Here is a page with images for the people to lazy to google
http://www.praktina.com/r23cam6e.htm
Some of the Alpa's have TTL viewing and an optical viewfinder with an RF.
A pellicle mirror gets rid of the mirror flap and a lot of the associated noise. The Pellix is the only SLR that I've used that really feels like an RF when you fire it.
A pellicle mirror gets rid of the mirror flap and a lot of the associated noise. The Pellix is the only SLR that I've used that really feels like an RF when you fire it.
BillBingham2
Registered User
Using the tank of the RF world (Nikon RFs) I have to say that an FH with a standard prism and a regular back (rather than the motor and 250 frame cassettes to me would be as close as I could get to a Nikon RF feel in SLR-land. The H stood for high-speed and had a pellicle mirror that Brian spoke of above. I held one once and fell in love but had to give it back to my friend at the Nikon House in NYC. The only down side I could ever think of for it was that spots on the mirror could show up on the film, but I could have gotten over that if I had one.
Below is one of Jon M’s shots to show how close they are.
From the M side of the house I have to say OM-1, hands down wins my vote. But not having any Ms any more, it’s the FH.
Below is one of Jon M’s shots to show how close they are.
From the M side of the house I have to say OM-1, hands down wins my vote. But not having any Ms any more, it’s the FH.
Attachments
