The Most Beautiful Cameras Ever Made: Part 1, Interchangeable Lens Rangefinder 35s

Muggins said:
I can't quite believe we've got to three pages and no-one has mentioned the interchangeable lens models of the Werra. So here's some Werras - the 3 is the interchangeable one, and is also Roger Hicks' old camera. Look up his shutterbug review and compare the dent in the top plate with mine.

Werra family by gray1720, on Flickr
Click to expand...

I have mixed feelings about the Werras. I have used the 3 with a tessar and although they are cute little cameras, the focusing ring felt so cramped in terms of ergonomics.
 
Capt. E said:
Here's my original black paint Nikon S2:
Click to expand...

That’s beautiful. The black S2 and SP are the gems of Nikon.

ranger9 said:
Well, everybody is going to be huffy because s/he has a favorite that got left out, so let's go at this from the other end: What's the UGLIEST interchangeable-lens coupled-rangefinder camera for 35mm film?
…
I'll offer up the Kodak Signet 80, but I'm sure there are even more ill-favored contenders out there. And yes, I picked the Signet over the Argus C-3 Matchmatic because Kodak certainly had the resources to make a better-looking camera, but possibly Argus didn't.
…
Click to expand...

Argus C-3 came immediately to mind. It’s the only camera I’ve ever sold. It was painful to hold, painful to focus, and painful to trip the shutter (somehow the release would kick back against my finger. I can feel it even now).


The Signet 80 seems to represent the successor to the 1950’s Populuxe era of American style. I’m not sure what this successor era was called, but it was symbolized with thin chrome accents, fake wood trim, and rectangles everywhere (@Retro-Grouch, any idea?). I’d use a Signet 80, but I’ll never touch an Argus again.
 
My hands-down favorite is the Ilford Witness. Image copied from Camera-wiki.org.
6690159089_ee44a4eebf.jpg
 
No love for the Kodak Retina IIIS? Here with the Schneider-Kreuznach Retina-Curtagon 28mm f/4 and matching Kodak 28mm finder.
 

Attachments

  • photo118805.jpg
    photo118805.jpg
    478.7 KB · Views: 6
Just checked MY M6 1986 it says 'LEITZ' but it does have the 'Strap Bumpers' serial number : 1705489
 
Never owned one, but Hasselblad C or CM with waist level finder and chrome lens. I did use one with a 150 for some portraits.
A pro wedding guy in his spare time, forced a M3 with 50 2.0 rigid on me. Trying it cost me thousands of $. I finally made prints that matched the ones in the sample books on the first try. Contax lenses from 1980`s rival Leica glass.
Probably would have bought into Hasselblad if their lenses were as sharp as Leicas. They are dumbed down for medium format which requires less magnification.
 
I was taken to meet a bloke in Stanford-le-Hope ESSEX ( England) who is a Mate of my Camera Club / Flickr Mate Richard , and he has 15 LEICAS and about 200 other cameras in racks and in boxes in the floor of his outbuilding. He never actually USES the Cameras but Buys and Sells them ! I had a play with a LEICA R4 -- never touched one before - and he had a IIIc with RED SHUTTER material - but through Non -Use most of his Barnack LEICAS were jammed up ! Anyway - he brought out a CANON RANGFINDER with 50mm f1.4 CANON lens == never used - MINT from 1955-56 and asked if I would like to " Put a Film through it" so I jumped at the chance and did a series of B&W on outdated AGFA APX 100 processed in my Home-Made DIAFINE 2- bath and printed on some KODAK 'BROMESKO WFL 1D' which was still good after about 40 years !
Here is the wonderful Machine -- he wants £ 600 quids for it but my Wife would DIVORCE me if I spent any more Cash on CAMERAS when we have a £ 850 Gas and Electric Bill to pay -----
CANON Rangefinder.jpg
 
Pál_K said:
The Signet 80 seems to represent the successor to the 1950’s Populuxe era of American style. I’m not sure what this successor era was called, but it was symbolized with thin chrome accents, fake wood trim, and rectangles everywhere (@Retro-Grouch, any idea?). I’d use a Signet 80, but I’ll never touch an Argus again.
Click to expand...
The Signet 80 is a new one for me; I've never seen or heard of it. It looks interesting, and I'd try it for a hoot, but the info online indicates it bombed pretty badly, and was plagued by poor construction. It does have a certain ugly charm (like a '58 Rambler), and though I can't find info about its designers, the Signet's descendants (aesthetically) are clearly the higher-end Instamatics, like the Instamatic 404. Any of those Instamatics send me into a swoon of nostalgia; my very first camera was the rock-bottom Hawkeye Instamatic, a Christmas present when I was ten. It initiated my descent down a lifelong path of perdition.
And no, I have no idea of what that period of design might be called. But I think "Bad Taste" will cover it nicely.
 
Last edited:
The problem is that 1:1 viewfinder, which would be perfect for both eyed shooting, is way off center on the right side so the left eye is totally blocked by the body.

52725958154_24269c377f_c.jpg


At least the forward throw double stroke winder doesn't poke you in the eye.

Edit: Forgot to mention the rapid loading, no takeup spool design.....

Shawn
 
shawn said:
The problem is that 1:1 viewfinder, which would be perfect for both eyed shooting, is way off center on the right side so the left eye is totally blocked by the body.

52725958154_24269c377f_c.jpg


At least the forward throw double stroke winder doesn't poke you in the eye.

Edit: Forgot to mention the rapid loading, no takeup spool design.....

Shawn
Click to expand...
Well, I'm left-eyed, so of course I have to have one of these.
 
LOL, you can get them cheap. At least with the standard 50mm. The 35mm is a little more and you need the accessory finder for that one.

The shutter on mine was very slow when I got it but gentle cleaning of the blades front/rear with some Q-tips with naptha on them and it fires fine now. Some year I need to put a roll through it. ;)
 
I had gotten a couple of these years ago and I pulled them out yesterday -- had never run film through them. One body is DOA -- shutter jammed somehow, and one of the 50s has a stuck aperture. But I do have a working body, 50/2.8, 35/3.5 and 90/4, plus the viewfinder for the 35 and 90. Plastic construction, which really doesn't inspire confidence. Setting the exposure index number is a little confusing too, but we'll see what results we get. (This ain't no Retina IIIS, in case you're wondering.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top