Small, manual rangefinder

[lrochfort]

Hi all,

I'm about to buy my first rangefinder.

I normally use a Hasselblad 500cm, but want something pocketable. I was looking at the old folding MF RFs, but have decided to go 35mm.

I was going to buy a Yashica GSN, but the lack of manual shutter speeds is not for me.

My wish list is:

£50 or less
35mm
Lens faster than f2.8 if possible
Meter
Manual shutter/aperture (don't mind AE, but I have to be able to turn it off)

I look forward to your suggestions!

Regards,
Laurence.

 

[btgc]

Then I have to ask how small is small?

If you are mentioning GSN then fixed lens is OK for you. All FL RF's with sub-f2 lenses I know aren't exactly manual. Say, Yashica 35GX or 35CC are small and have fast lenses (for their class) but are Av-only.

Olympus 35RC and Ricoh 500G (500GX) are small, have mechanical exposure - but lenses are of f/2.8

If you can accept "small" which is bigger than mentioned cameras but smaller than GSN - then Yashica Lynx 5000 and Konica III are my suggestions.

Welcome to RFF, btw!

 

[Brian Legge]

I'd definitely try to get your hands on a camera if possible. I wouldn't personally consider the GSN very pocketable but I don't know about our relative pocket size. 😉

Seriously - how important is size? It may make a big difference when looking at these cameras. Some are closer to the size of an SLR, others much smaller.

Edit: Hah - walk away for a few minutes and someone asks the same question. 🙂

 

[RichL]

Keep your eyes open for a Kodak Retina II or IIa, or a Super Dollina II. They run around £75 to £80 but can definitely be found in the £50 range if you don't get to anxious.

Disregard, I just noticed you wanted a meter as well.

 

[batterytypehah!]

Welcome to RFF. Our sponsor has a very (very...) detailed write-up here:

http://www.cameraquest.com/com35s.htm

 

[lrochfort]

Thanks all for the suggestions and welcomes.

I suppose I would describe small and pocketable as smaller than a Nikon FM2.

The Retina II is appealing, but yesRichL, I would ideally like a built-in meter. I want this as a companion to the Hassy to provide more immediate photography.

I think I'd go for the Konica III or Yashica Lynx 5000.

The Konica III has a selenium meter. Is it likely it would be dead or malfunctioning by now? Would the 1.8 lens push above my price limit?

Any suggestions as to a replacement for the PX625 battery on the Yashica? Ideally I'd like to avoid having to adjust the film speed to get an accurate reading.

 

[ruby.monkey]

Lynx 5000 - it's pretty big, and would be a very tight fit in a coat pocket.
Konica III - also not tiny, and quite a hefty camera. Bear in mind that the IIIM is the version with a meter - the earlier III has none - and it's likely that on any one you find the meter will be shagged anyway. The IIIA has fewer protuberances and also offers a self-timer. Neither is particularly fast-handling in terms of changing aperture or shutter speed separately.

For what it's worth, a Pentax MX with 40mm f/2.8 - even with an accessory handgrip fitted - is a far handier pocket camera than any of these cameras, and there's no problem with finding batteries for the meter.

 

[gliderbee]

Do not forget the Petri Color 35 cameras: very small, manual speeds and aperture, zone focussing, meter build-in, great lens.

Of course I'm unbiased: I have only four of these 😀

You can read more here: http://www.cameraquest.com/petri35.htm

Stefan.

 

[taskoni]

I might be wrong but a 50 quit camera might not be what you'd expect from a good rangefinder.
I don't speak from personal experience since I don't owe any of those named above, but "you get what you are paying for" might have the opposite effect on you. The good rangefinder is such a pleasure, the bad one can be a pain.
Regards,
b.

 

[rxmd]

Take a good look at the ongoing Best Under $50 Ebay Rangefinder for Newbies thread.

The most common suggestions there seem to be Electro GSNs (no manual speeds though), Canon GIII-QL17s, Minoltas and Olympus XAs (also no manual speeds). I used a Canonet for years, a 40 EUR purchase, and was very happy.

 

[lrochfort]

The Petri Color 35 looks like a really interesting camera. The ergonomics seem much like a modern DSLR.

ruby.monkey and taskoni, I understand what you're saying, but I really want to try a rangefinder because I've never used one. I'm willing to make a few compromises given my budget constraints.

 

[sevo]

The Petri Color 35 looks like a really interesting camera. The ergonomics seem much like a modern DSLR.

ruby.monkey and taskoni, I understand what you're saying, but I really want to try a rangefinder

The Petri Color 35 is neat, but no rangefinder...

 

[ruby.monkey]

The Petri Color 35 looks like a really interesting camera. The ergonomics seem much like a modern DSLR.

ruby.monkey and taskoni, I understand what you're saying, but I really want to try a rangefinder because I've never used one. I'm willing to make a few compromises given my budget constraints.

If you drop the desired lens speed to about f/2.8, or up your budget to about £100, then you'll make your life *much* easier.

 

[lrochfort]

sevo, I thanks for pointing out Petri is scale focusing. I'm doing this at work, so having to divert my attention (ahem).

ruby.monkey, which f2.8 £100 cameras would you suggest?

 

[Luddite Frank]

I'll probably catch some flak for this, but here-goes...

If you want a "small 35mm RF", and the option to change lenses, with a meter, a good bet would be a Kodak Retina IIIc (small "c").

It does have its limitations, and you'll probably spend more like $100 for a clean working example, but it offers:

> folding pocketability
>interchangeable front lens elements: 35-50-85 ( All are excellent Schneider)
>full manual Synchro-Compur leaf shutter w/ flash sync M - X
>single-stroke lever wind
>single-window VF/RF for 50mm lens
>Built-in Selenium meter
>host of optional accessories
>No icky-sticky-crumbly black foam light-seals to deal with
>No corroded, obsolete batteries to deal with...

I got a 1955 Retina IIIc outfit back in 1985, and it was my primary 35mm shooter kit for nearly 20 years... they are capable of very good work.

Just my 2 cents-worth.

Luddite Frank

 

[Brian Legge]

The Retina IIIc (little c) is a great camera but may be hard to find given your price constraints. The meter may also be questionable though some seem to work reasonably well. Brilliant small camera though. It also has a 50mm lens.

The Olympus 35RC, Olympus XA and Ricoh 500G are likely within your budget, small and have a slight wider open lenses. They are all f/2.8 though.

Finding a camera this small with a faster lens will likely mean upping your budget a bit. There is a nice band of compact cameras larger than these cameras but still smaller than the 1960s rangefinders that may be worth checking out. One of the most frequently referenced pages for info is: http://www.cameraquest.com/com35s.htm

 

[batterytypehah!]

Ergonomics is not the Retina's strong suit (thinking mostly of the infernal focus-at-infinity before you fold routine, and the EV lock) but man are they ever well made. The accessory finder for 35 and 85 is really nice, too. And affordable, because it would block the speed dial on a Leica...

 

[Greyscale]

Keep your eyes open for the often overlooked Vivitar 35ES. Shutter-priority, compact, and with a wonderful, fast, 40/1.7 lens. And it usually will sell for much less than its "kissing cousins", the somewhat pricey Minolta Hi-Matic 7sii and the Konica Auto S3.

 

[_goodtimez]

Nikonos V. I just bought a couple for quite cheap and the cover all your specs.

 

[dbarnes]

I've had the Canonet QL17/GIII and the Minolta 7sii. Both great introductory RFs, the Canon larger and much easier to find, the Minolta lighter and smaller and more expensive. Both with sharp, fast lenses.

Beware, however, these "entry level drugs." ;-)