elaydad
Member
Retina IIa vs. Vitomatic IIa
Retina IIa vs. Vitomatic IIa
Has anyone here used both and how would you compare them?
Retina IIa vs. Vitomatic IIa
Has anyone here used both and how would you compare them?
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
Comparing the XA and the Retina IIa is like comparing a Leica M7 and a Hasselblad... No relation in portability, metering&AE, and final image quality...
Cheers,
Juan
Cheers,
Juan
lxmike
M2 fan.
Both excellent cameras, I have used the Xa for many years and I love it, my carry anywhere camera, I have used a Kodak Retinette IIb, a slower in use camera, but the lens was a stunner. I have just aquired a Kodak Retina IIa, I'll shoot a few rolls and then let you know what I think, but as a lot have pointed out its a bit like comparing apples and oranges.
l.mar
Well-known
Last edited:
oscroft
Veteran
Ah, a resurrected thread about two of my favourite cameras 
I love the XA - I have one in my coat pocket almost all the time.
The IIa is a different thing altogether, with an excellent lens, whichever version you have (I have one of each, and I can't see any difference in quality).
I love the XA - I have one in my coat pocket almost all the time.
The IIa is a different thing altogether, with an excellent lens, whichever version you have (I have one of each, and I can't see any difference in quality).
panchro-press
Member
I use both cameras.
The XA is the one I most often use.
If wearing a jacket, both cameras can be paced in the pocket. If in just shirt sleeves, the XA is the way to go.
The XA is much faster to set-up. A quick slide of the clamshell, focus, and make the photograph. It's much more quiet as well.
I also think the Zuiko is the better lens.
The XA is the one I most often use.
If wearing a jacket, both cameras can be paced in the pocket. If in just shirt sleeves, the XA is the way to go.
The XA is much faster to set-up. A quick slide of the clamshell, focus, and make the photograph. It's much more quiet as well.
I also think the Zuiko is the better lens.