-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
35 mm fixed lens rangefinders
- Thread starter Smaug01
- Start date
Smaug01
Veteran Member
It's beautiful and I wouldn't mind having one, but it's not a fixed lens camera.
I've always liked that camera, but they're pretty dear these days? Matter of fact, they were ALWAYS dear.
In the end though, it doesn't do much that a Yashica T4 or Olympus Stylus Epic wouldn't do. (a bit of manual control, maybe...)
tassienick
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,830
- Solutions
- 2
- Reaction score
- 2,232
They Electro does, but the S2 only has parallax correction lines, which are ambiguous at best. I meant full parallax correction, where the framelines are linked to the focus mechanism.
Yep there's several that do, but most and aperture or shutter priority (or full auto).
I specifically meant terrible ergonomics in manual mode. The Electro doesn't have manual mode, and looking at the control layout, I imagine the S2 is about as good as my 35RD, which is pretty bad.
I'm really not in the market. I guess my experience with the 35RD has shown me that while I like the concept, they just don't work for me in practice.
Leswick II
Senior Member
- Messages
- 2,464
- Solutions
- 3
- Reaction score
- 1,082
Bessa sounds pretty good. I saw Minolta (also) on epay and it gained my attention. Don't ask me why, I'm certainly not into rangefinders.
Smaug01
Veteran Member
They are linked to the focus mechanism, just like the Electro 35.
The Auto S2 is a bit better, maybe 20%. (I had a 35 RC, which is quite similar to your RD) The rings are wider and have better traction.
I'm not giving up!
I just noticed the Minolta 7S II. It has a nub that sticks down from the aperture ring, then the lever for focusing, so the only ring one needs to grab on the lens is the shutter speed. It looks pretty slick, but they're pretty dear when everything's working right.
First things first though: re-foam the Electro 35, as it seems to have a light leak, as well as my OM1N.
tassienick
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,830
- Solutions
- 2
- Reaction score
- 2,232
My mistake, I misread a review.
Heritage Cameras
Senior Member
The company worked on a half frame model, but it was never released:Leica never made a 35mm fixed lens RFOr are their lenses not good enough?
The Leica H: A Little Leica Camera That Never Got Made
Heritage Cameras
Senior Member
Yes, there were lots of these leaf shutter, interchangeable lens rangefinders.
My personal favourite was the Kodak Retina IIIS which had a range of Schneider and Rodenstock lenses from 28mm to 135mm (including a 50mm f/1.9) shared with the Retina Reflex S/III/IV, a range/viewfinder with bright frames and auto parallax compensation, plus a built-in coupled (manual) meter.
A great example of late 1950s German engineering.
Vegar Beider
Forum Enthusiast
Hello Smaog01!Does anyone else here like that particular niche of camera?
To me, there's always been something magical about them:
Right now, I've got the following:
- Big enough to use a serious film size
- Many had top quality optics
- They could be compact (Olympus XA) or full size. (Yashica Electro 35)
- They could be manual, automatic, in between or both
The problem with the above 3 cameras is that they have either 40 or 45 mm lenses, and I find that to not be a very good focal length for general outdoor photography, where these cameras are at their best. I want 35 mm, as that is often wide enough, but not so wide that it's useless for general people pictures. It's SUCH a small pool of cameras in that niche.
- Yashica Electro 35 GS; perfect condition except a dent in the filter ring
This one had a fully electronic exposure meter and is aperture priority. It uses an electro magnet to control the shutter, which can go longer than 30 seconds. Great handling; really easy to shoot. This was my grandpa's, and once I found the adapter for the mercury battery, it has been a cracking good camera. I'm thinking of trying to pend that filter ring out with a needlenose pliers and a napkin wrapped around the jaws, so I can put a yellow filter on it. (as I plan to shoot mostly outdoors and B&W)
- Rollei 35: Not technically a rangefinder, but a zone focus camera. Nice shape, but it only opens to f/4. Feels like there's dust inside that is keeping it from opening to f/3.5. Can't find anything but a yellow filter for this guy.
- Rollei B 35: The budget model. I bought this as my grandpa had one, back in the day, and he loved it. I'll develop my first film with it soon. The selenium meter is dicey.
What have you got?
- Olympus XA
- Yashica Electro 35 CC
- Minox 35
I was toying with the idea of getting a used Bessa R and a 35 mm lens for that. Would that be a good option.
Let me know if you have anything you might want to pass on.
Some time ago I was searching for a compact fixed lens film camera. I got the opportunity to compare 4 cameras: the Olympus XA, the Minolta AF.C, the Minox PL and the Olympus AF-1. All 4 cameras were loaded with Kodak Gold 200 and pointed simultaniously at the same objects (mostly at infinity to avoid focus issues). The films were developted and printed at a Kodak lab. The one camera, out of those 4, that constantly gave the best exposure, the most natural colours and the sharpest pictures, was the Minolta AF-C, which I then bought and always carried with me, either in my shirt pocket (without the flash) or in my jacket pocket. During the next 20 years of use, the camera got quite scratched up and rough around the edges, but it always gave me correctly exposed and sharp Kodachrome 25 and/or Fujichrome Sensia 100 slides. I retired the AF-C only because I went digital.
The lens in the Minolta AF-C is a 35mm 2,8 and has 6 lens elements and internal focus. The longest shutter speed the camera gave me was 4 seconds. The ASA scale: 25 - 400 (the later models: 25 - 1000).
Regards
Mark S Abeln
Forum Pro
Epoxy a 35 mm to an M6 and now you got a fixed lens.Leica never made a 35mm fixed lens RF
--
http://therefractedlight.blogspot.com
Last edited:
Leica had another version of a half frame camera but with interchangeable lenses.The company worked on a half frame model, but it was never released:Leica never made a 35mm fixed lens RFOr are their lenses not good enough?
The Leica H: A Little Leica Camera That Never Got Made
This is the only fully working prototype.
http://gmpphoto.blogspot.com/2018/03/the-extremely-rare-half-frame-leicaflex.html
tassienick
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,830
- Solutions
- 2
- Reaction score
- 2,232
I'm guessing (going off the name) that that was a SLR, like the Olympus Pen F/FT/FV, rather than a RF?Leica had another version of a half frame camera but with interchangeable lenses.The company worked on a half frame model, but it was never released:Leica never made a 35mm fixed lens RFOr are their lenses not good enough?
The Leica H: A Little Leica Camera That Never Got Made
This is the only fully working prototype.
Yes.I'm guessing (going off the name) that that was a SLR, like the Olympus Pen F/FT/FV, rather than a RF?Leica had another version of a half frame camera but with interchangeable lenses.The company worked on a half frame model, but it was never released:Leica never made a 35mm fixed lens RFOr are their lenses not good enough?
The Leica H: A Little Leica Camera That Never Got Made
This is the only fully working prototype.
Ashley Pomeroy
Well-known member
The original XA is one of my favourite cameras, probably my favourite 35mm camera. It's terrific - excellent distortion-free lens, tiny body, large viewfinder, with control over focusing and aperture-priority autoexposure. It's the reason why despite trying out lots of old film cameras I've never felt a need to try out those old Russian Fed / Zorki rangefinders, because they don't really do anything the XA can't.
Yoshihisa Maitani was a genius. As you point out the XA has a 35mm f/2.8, which is fast and wide enough for most things. The only downside is masses of vignetting, which is tolerable. The XA2 and XA3 had f/3.5 lenses and the XA1 had a fixed-focus f/4.
I'm not sentimental, but there still isn't a direct digital equivalent of the XA. It stows flat and it's really fast. I took it on holiday to Rome a few years ago - XA in one jacket pocket, film in the other - and I could whip it out, slide open the cover, take a photo, and whip it back again in no time. I didn't have to wait for it to boot up, or extend the lens; I didn't have to magnify the display or move the focus point around, I just twiddled the focus lever with my thumb.
[ATTACH alt=""He's got away from us, Jack" "]2351907[/ATTACH]
"He's got away from us, Jack"
From what I remember the XA4 had a 28mm f/3.5 lens, but pocket-sized rangefinders with wider-than-35mm lenses were a rare breed. Ricoh made one. There were some really naff budget models. One of the Pentax Espios was 28mm. Vivitar had a 21mm "ultra wide and slim" that had no exposure controls at all (and the one I had tended to scratch the film).
There were also a bunch of panoramic viewfinder / autofocus cameras, but they just masked the film, but there was one that actually did have a 24mm lens but you had to remove a plastic baffle to get it working. Sadly I no longer have access to the internet so I can't look it up.
I also tried an Olympus Stylus Epic, which was autofocus and had a slightly better lens - less vignetting - but the viewfinder was one of those early-digital-style optical tunnels and in the end I kept my XA.
Most of the 1970s rangefinders were of a piece. They mostly had a 38mm or 40mm f/2.8 lens with an inside-the-filter-thread lightmeter. I used to have a Ricoh 500ME, which was a very late example that came out in the early 1980s, and it was good fun:
-
women-and-dreams.blogspot.com
Yoshihisa Maitani was a genius. As you point out the XA has a 35mm f/2.8, which is fast and wide enough for most things. The only downside is masses of vignetting, which is tolerable. The XA2 and XA3 had f/3.5 lenses and the XA1 had a fixed-focus f/4.
I'm not sentimental, but there still isn't a direct digital equivalent of the XA. It stows flat and it's really fast. I took it on holiday to Rome a few years ago - XA in one jacket pocket, film in the other - and I could whip it out, slide open the cover, take a photo, and whip it back again in no time. I didn't have to wait for it to boot up, or extend the lens; I didn't have to magnify the display or move the focus point around, I just twiddled the focus lever with my thumb.
[ATTACH alt=""He's got away from us, Jack" "]2351907[/ATTACH]
"He's got away from us, Jack"
From what I remember the XA4 had a 28mm f/3.5 lens, but pocket-sized rangefinders with wider-than-35mm lenses were a rare breed. Ricoh made one. There were some really naff budget models. One of the Pentax Espios was 28mm. Vivitar had a 21mm "ultra wide and slim" that had no exposure controls at all (and the one I had tended to scratch the film).
There were also a bunch of panoramic viewfinder / autofocus cameras, but they just masked the film, but there was one that actually did have a 24mm lens but you had to remove a plastic baffle to get it working. Sadly I no longer have access to the internet so I can't look it up.
I also tried an Olympus Stylus Epic, which was autofocus and had a slightly better lens - less vignetting - but the viewfinder was one of those early-digital-style optical tunnels and in the end I kept my XA.
Most of the 1970s rangefinders were of a piece. They mostly had a 38mm or 40mm f/2.8 lens with an inside-the-filter-thread lightmeter. I used to have a Ricoh 500ME, which was a very late example that came out in the early 1980s, and it was good fun:
-
Women and Dreams
A whole lot of words and some photographs. Started off dull; got better some time in 2009-2010; now very good.
women-and-dreams.blogspot.com
Attachments
Smaug01
Veteran Member
Great post.
I had an XA and really liked it. I don't remember why I sold it. The thumb advance wheel was slightly less satisfying than a lever.
One stroke of genius on that camera was the +1.5 exposure compensation switch. If I want to do that on another camera, I have to lie to it about the film speed.
They're a relatively good value too; good ones are going for under $200 on eBay. By comparison, a Rollei 35 S in similar condition goes for $350 or so, is manual everything and zone focusing. (The Zeiss Sonnar is a better lens though...)
I had an XA and really liked it. I don't remember why I sold it. The thumb advance wheel was slightly less satisfying than a lever.
One stroke of genius on that camera was the +1.5 exposure compensation switch. If I want to do that on another camera, I have to lie to it about the film speed.
They're a relatively good value too; good ones are going for under $200 on eBay. By comparison, a Rollei 35 S in similar condition goes for $350 or so, is manual everything and zone focusing. (The Zeiss Sonnar is a better lens though...)
tassienick
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,830
- Solutions
- 2
- Reaction score
- 2,232
Speak of the devil, I stumbled across one of these in the local classifieds last night.
Olympus Wide-S (Wide-Super).
- 35mm rangefinder
- H.Zuiko 35/f2 lens (8 element, similar design to the 8 element Summicron)
- Coupled RF and parallax-corrected brightlines
https://photojottings.com/olympus-wide-s-35mm-f-2/
PhotoTeach2
Forum Pro
By far the best ...
Canon QL-17 G-III
QL was for "Quick Loading" (had a special mechanism that "grabbed" the film instead of threading it into a slot)
17 was for f/1.7
G was for gold-contact for flash-sync
Flash-Sync was 1/500s
Auto was Shutter-Priority
Even had a GN-aperture control for "manual" flash, you simply set the Guide-Number and then the aperture linked to the distance, (opened w/ further distance).
Canon QL-17 G-III
QL was for "Quick Loading" (had a special mechanism that "grabbed" the film instead of threading it into a slot)
17 was for f/1.7
G was for gold-contact for flash-sync
Flash-Sync was 1/500s
Auto was Shutter-Priority
Even had a GN-aperture control for "manual" flash, you simply set the Guide-Number and then the aperture linked to the distance, (opened w/ further distance).
According to Canon it stood for Grade Up , that is an improved version.
You might be thinking of the Yashica 124 G.
PhotoTeach2
Forum Pro
Well ... had one of those also, (and 635).
Smaug01
Veteran Member
I had a QL-17 G III. It was good. The lens wasn't as good as several others I had:
- Yashica Electro 35 GS
- Rollei 35 (Tessar)
IMHO, "the best" were:
- Olympus 35 SP - Had spot metering and manual, partial or full automatic shooting. Killer lens, too. CLA'd examples of these still fetch over $250.
- Rollei 35 - for compactness without any sacrifice in quality. One just had to be decent at estimating range and familiar with hyperfocal theory.
- Olympus XA - Even MORE compactness, if you're OK with aperture priority and a single preset for +1.5 exposure comp. Still a great lens, but a bit more fussy than the Rolleis. (electronic shutters could be problematic, and they're always full of dust, since people stick them in their pockets) 35 mm focal length was better than the 40-45 that almost everyone else was putting in fixed lens rangefinders.
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum