narsuitus
Well-known
My 6x7cm and 6x9 cm fixed Fuji rangefinders (also known as the Texas Leicas) are my personal favorites. My 6x7 (center) has a fixed normal lens. My 6x9 has a fixed wide angle lens. I use them more often than all the others.
My Canon Canonet QL17 G-III 35mm rangefinder (left) with fixed 40mm f/1.7 lens (also known as: Poor Man's Leica) was my favorite 35mm rangefinder until I purchased a Leica M6.
My Minolta Hi-Matic 9 35mm rangefinder (right) with fixed 45mm f/1.7 lens is a fine camera but I rarely use it.
Rangefinders by Narsuitus, on Flickr
My Canon Canonet QL17 G-III 35mm rangefinder (left) with fixed 40mm f/1.7 lens (also known as: Poor Man's Leica) was my favorite 35mm rangefinder until I purchased a Leica M6.
My Minolta Hi-Matic 9 35mm rangefinder (right) with fixed 45mm f/1.7 lens is a fine camera but I rarely use it.
Rangefinders by Narsuitus, on Flickr
David Hughes
David Hughes
My four are:-
Konica C35 - film in it at present,
Mamiya 135 EE - used earlier this year,
Olympus XA - the next to be used but
Yashica 35-ME (Black) - awaiting repair (glass cracked & loose).
Regards, David
Konica C35 - film in it at present,
Mamiya 135 EE - used earlier this year,
Olympus XA - the next to be used but
Yashica 35-ME (Black) - awaiting repair (glass cracked & loose).
Regards, David
Man/machine
Newbie
Thanks, I saw that thread during my search.
The pictures look so sharp, knowing the Ricoh 300 was considered as a low range camera.
aizan
Mentor
Got rid of almost all of my 35mm fixed-lens rangefinders (replaced by P&S and scale focus cameras), so now it’s mostly medium format.
- TDC Stereo Colorist II
- Polaroid 360 Land Camera
- Fujifilm GS645
- Fujifilm GW690III
- Fujifilm GSW690III
A Polaroid 110a or 110b converted to 4x5 and a Zeiss Ikon Super Ikonta 532/16 are still on my wishlist.
- TDC Stereo Colorist II
- Polaroid 360 Land Camera
- Fujifilm GS645
- Fujifilm GW690III
- Fujifilm GSW690III
A Polaroid 110a or 110b converted to 4x5 and a Zeiss Ikon Super Ikonta 532/16 are still on my wishlist.
Ambro51
Collector/Photographer
Ahhhhhh.....Stereo Realist Custom 1050, Stereo Realist 2.8 Model 1042 (very late production c. 1968. Seven 3,5 Realists, earliest serial # A0787 . Wollensak Stereo 10, KinDar Stereo
CharlesDAMorgan
Mentor
I forgot my Voigtlander Vitessa L and my Zeiss Ikon Super Ikonta 534/12
Dralowid
Michael
A few Certo Dollinas in a box, languishing. They need to go...
Jeremy Z
Well-known
There are a lot of great cameras, but many of you forgot to answer the second part of the question, namely: what are the status'?
Inquiring minds want to know.
Inquiring minds want to know.
Jeremy Z
Well-known
Jeremy Z
Well-known
I've read that these have great features, but were not built very well. Has that been your experience?
I had one, and the rangefinder was not accurate, and the lens rings were hard to grab one without also grabbing the other. Not one of their masterpiece designs, in my opinion.
Jeremy Z
Well-known
Big fan of the minis, eh?
You don't like the (original) XA? That's the one most of us go for.
Jeremy Z
Well-known
That is one awesome blog/site you've got going there. I particularly like the history of each camera, and posted results. I'm bookmarking this thread so I can come back and read all of those when I get the time.
Jeremy Z
Well-known
My 6x7cm and 6x9 cm fixed Fuji rangefinders (also known as the Texas Leicas) are my personal favorites. My 6x7 (center) has a fixed normal lens. My 6x9 has a fixed wide angle lens. I use them more often than all the others.
My Canon Canonet QL17 G-III 35mm rangefinder (left) with fixed 40mm f/1.7 lens (also known as: Poor Man's Leica) was my favorite 35mm rangefinder until I purchased a Leica M6.
My Minolta Hi-Matic 9 35mm rangefinder (right) with fixed 45mm f/1.7 lens is a fine camera but I rarely use it.
Rangefinders by Narsuitus, on Flickr
Nice write-up. Two questions:
1) Why cover the branding on the 35 mm's, butnot the the Fuji?
2) Why medium format? I guess you print large? Or maybe you like having fewer exposures per roll? I'm thinking of my recent scans of 35 mm, and there is plenty of resolution. I guess medium format wouldn't let you see the grain, but if that's your thing, there's always digital. Not challenging you, I'm just curious.
Jeremy Z
Well-known
I've never heard of the Yashica 35 ME until now. Cool. Reminds me of the Vivitar my dad used to have when I was a kid.
It looks automatic except for rough focusing. What sort of battery(ies) does it use? Might be a good alternative to a more modern AF point & shoot, which would be fooled by glass and such.
charjohncarter
Mentor
The Petri 7s is a much sturdier camera than the later late 60s early 70s compact fixed lens cameras. I've never had a problem with either of my Petri cameras, but one was new in 1963.
The 35RC is a problem with the lens rings, I always set the camera up to shoot and forget to set to 'A' which messes up all settings, so I start over. My RF is right on but I did have it CLA'd.
Solinar
Analog Preferred
Only 8 frames to a roll with 6x9 medium format
Only 8 frames to a roll with 6x9 medium format
One doesn't need to print to a larger size to enjoy a 6x9 medium format negative. In comparison to 35mm, I like the way 6x9 cameras render an image on film. There is a smoother gradation between tones, a.k.a. tonality, for one. Also, the effect of grain is noticeably reduced for what I'll refer to as a cleaner look.
See the link below for a couple of examples:
https://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=73622&page=30
Only 8 frames to a roll with 6x9 medium format
One doesn't need to print to a larger size to enjoy a 6x9 medium format negative. In comparison to 35mm, I like the way 6x9 cameras render an image on film. There is a smoother gradation between tones, a.k.a. tonality, for one. Also, the effect of grain is noticeably reduced for what I'll refer to as a cleaner look.
See the link below for a couple of examples:
https://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=73622&page=30
wwfloyd
Well-known
[Deleted my note; must have read that in a fog.]
That IS a nice site. I'm surprised I have not yet stumbled into it on my many research outings.
I have 3 Petri cameras, from 3 sources, and, ALL three had the same issue -- with the 45 degree mirror for the rangefinder having come loose. Fortunately, it's an easy repair, since the tops come off easily, and it just takes a bit of glue to reset the mirrors.
My Petri 7s, f1.8, makes sharp images, but, I don't get out with it, as it feels less refined, in comparison to Canon, Oly, Minolta, Konica.
I've got a dozen or so fixed lens RFs in my collection. All the usual suspects. When I first started collecting, my goal was to find the ultimate such camera for my own preferences. As I've used each one for a test roll, at least, I have not warmed up to them as much has I'd hoped to. I'll still shoot one occasionally, but, prefer the speed, accuracy and flexibility of an SLR.
Actually, the RF I use most is the Voigtlander Perkeo III. So compact, with the medium format film. It really is nice to work with such large negatives.
charjohncarter
Mentor
All of the observations you made are true. I have a print that is not much larger than the 6x6 negative. It is just beautiful. There is just something very nice about a small print made from a MF negative.
The first time I did a 35mm contact sheet I was stunned at how wonderful the tiny prints looked. Sorry, they did not look that good when I printed them to 8x10.
Ambro51
Collector/Photographer
I’m wanting to run a roll of Ektar through the Realist, and alternate lenses and double expose. Doing this will give 58 single images. Back in the day this was not done too often as labs were not set up to print 5P negs. Now of course scanning film solves this.
goamules
Well-known
I'd gotten out of fixed rangefinders, until I found the Retina. Now I have a handful of those, I shoot them occasionally, or one time, the look for another I don't have. None more than $25.
Not shot with a Retina, but with a Leica iiiF:
Not shot with a Retina, but with a Leica iiiF: