What is your favourite "Poor man's Leica" ?

Bertram2 said:
There is no "poor man's Leica" . That's an imagination only existing in the heads of some Leica owners who think somebody must be poor if he is not willing to pay five times more for his gear than he has to pay fore another well comparable brand.

LOL - Mystery solved. No B&W C-41 either, that's just imaginary absence of some layers and mixing all primary colors into one to make the W in B&W existing in the heads of some B&W film emulsion aficionados who think somebody must be colorblind if he is not willing to use three colors with the C-41 process 🙄
 
gabrielma said:
LOL - Mystery solved. No B&W C-41 either, that's just imaginary absence of some layers and mixing all primary colors into one to make the W in B&W existing in the heads of some B&W film emulsion aficionados who think somebody must be colorblind if he is not willing to use three colors with the C-41 process 🙄

Ha ! And now you'll say that Santa Claus is just a marketing artifact eh ?

Tsk tsk...

And where's the poor woman's Leica ? Still wondering why ladies tend to run out of here ? 😀
 
I am quite pleased with the Vivitar 35ES. I know it was not designed or probably built by Vivitar, but it has a nice 1.7 lens and the color and saturation is excellent. Easy to use and very small. I have others, including the IIIc, and I find the 35ES easier to grab and take when I just want a small package with me. I have not been unhappy with the results I have from this camera.
 
Pedro, I wouldnt overlook the Konica Auto S2, it has a great lense, that I wish I could mount on my M6, same thing happend with my Yashica Electro GSN.
But if you still want to go further you should look for a Canon VI or VII (if you like vintage cameras) or a Bessa R would be the smartes thing to do if like modern cameras.
I think it isn`t just how good they perform, it's about "how", I mean in the way making the picture and having fun with the result you get.
 
I would also say the Hexar AF. There does not seem to me to be a more capable camera anywhere near its price range. The meter is great, its focus is always spot on, the 35/2 lens is wonderful, it is totally silent, and it just works...built like a tank. Everybody makes a big deal about the 1/250th top speed, but that is only two stops slower than the M, something you can make up for by shooting slow film or bringing a nd filter. It is designed as a low light camera anyway....

In any case, my vote would be for the splending hexar af.
 
Zorki 2C with coated Industar 61, 55mm, 2.8 lens. Built like a T-4 tank--equally functional but equally ugly. A good lens like this has click stops and can hold its own with any other, IMHO.
Johne
 
$50 wasn't the original price range, but I can accept it as more in line with a true "poor man". In that case, I'd go for any of the good fixed lens models with manual exposure option that have been discussed and could be snagged for fifty bucks.

Trius
 
gabrielma said:
I still think that for somebody that is poor, $50 is a luxury. Interesting to see others' definition of what would fall under a "poor man" 's range

Gabriel,

Your Black FED 2 arrived. This one has a real smooth film advance. It has a soft vinyl covering in place of the usual course sand paper-like, vulcanite. I've already calibrated the RF and may take it for a spin later in the week.

For the minimum wage members of the proletariat, photography in general is pretty much a bourgeois affair.

The FED 1 and Zorki 1 with a collapsible Industar is probably the essence of Leica-style 35mm photography without any bells or whistles. The FED 2 adds a little more flair and a wider RF base. Japanese fixed-lens rangefinders are more automated and less Leica-esque.
 
Seems to me a "poor man's Leica" is by definition an interchangeable lens rangefinder, so that lets out all the fixed lens cameras. And, I don't think you can call an older Leica a "poor man's Leica." I think the whole point of the exercise was to identify a non-Leica that approaches Leica quality. The FEDs and Zorkis fit the inexpensive requirement, and have interchangeable lenses. But the quality sample to sample takes them out of consideration. Someone (Brian?) proposed the Retina IIIS; I think that's a pretty strong contender -- pretty reasonably priced these days; advanced features like automatic framelines; good lens selection. The Bessa fits the bill, but let's face it, they're still pretty expensive to buy new, as are the lenses. So it's hard to say a "poor man" could afford one, but since they're only a fraction of the cost of a Leica, maybe they're the best contender.
 
>I still think that for somebody that is poor, $50 is a luxury. Interesting to see others' definition of what would fall under a "poor man" 's range

For somebody that is poor, any camera is one of the last things to worry about... So let's better talk about the "poor" man's Leica, no ? 🙂
 
Olympus 35RD (i'd say SP but there's something about the RD), It's also got one of the best zoom's (my legs).
 
Back
Top Bottom