Looking for something in particular.
 

Hi,

Looking to buy a new camera.
It has been doing my head in trying to find a model of what Im looking for in my next camera. Could anyone please suggest any ideas.
Basically looking for an SLR or Rangefinder, 35mm, with automatic film advance, compact, something preferably before the 80s.
I want to be able to control shutter speed and aperture, without having to wind film in other words taking continuos photos but I'm looking for an older camera.

Any suggestions would be much appreciated.
Thankyou

Could go for something like a Pentax Spotmatic with ad on motor drive, nothing I can think of with built in motordrive before the middle 80s, ie, Canon EOS range.



Dave.

Hello racki09, firstly a very warm welcome to the forum.

Secondly, I don't think you are going to find a rangefinder with film advance, maybe they are out there, but I can't say I've heard of such a thing.

Thirdly, "something preferably before the 80s." same sort of comment applies. Yes, you can get film winders for cameras from the 70s, but you're going to have to search good and hard. Also, cameras of this vintage have an assortment of issues associated with their age and (lack of) usage. You're going to be looking at something that's 30+ years old that will have light metering cells that haven't seen daylight in most of that time, the light seals will be shot, the mirror damping foam will be sticky, the battery will be obsolete (maybe), the metering will be inaccurate (probably), the motor wind - assuming you can find one - will have been sitting in a shoe box under someone's bed for a couple of decades and need a very good clean and service.

You really are asking for trouble if you want to use this sort of kit seriously. There's plenty of stuff from the 80s and 90s that will be easier to find, not be so sticky with age, have batteries that you can still obtain, not be so full of crud and dust.

If you're after small and compact, look at Pentax or Olympus as this was a quality that both prioritised. There's plenty of stuff on ebay from both manufacturer's going for pin money. Pentax ME Super - plenty of those on ebay and also working winders. Olympus did a winder for the OM series, but be aware the OM1 used a mercury battery that's now unobtainable.

Also, bear in mind that these cameras, much like any of the things you express an interest in, are manual focus, which may or may not slow you down, and will only typically shoot between 2-3 frames per second. Still, with film costs, that can soon get very expensive anyway.

hey guys thanks heaps for the replies..

I understand what i was looking for was quite an ask. Id seen a camera in a shoot that had these qualities and someone suggested it was a leica. Thats besides the point i guess i was just fishing around to see if any models came close to what i was looking for. I currently shoot with a pentax mz50 which is great but bulky and digital adjustments. So thats the reason i was pushing for an older more compact camera. But i really want the motorwind so i can snap continously in a shoot.

Thanks again.

The mz50 has continuous motorwind, so will do what you want. It also has the option of fully manual exposure mode so fits that requirement. Sounds like you're better off sticking with what you've got and using its existing features. The mz50 isn't particularly bulky by SLR stadards. Sure, a rangefinder is smaller, but not by that much, especially if you use a prime (i.e. not a zoom) lens on your mz50. Rangefinders have prime lenses, which is one of the reasons they are small.

Sure you can get a Leica, but have you seen how much they cost? I'm guessing not from the tone of your comment.

I would echo what has already been posted here. Far from me advertising where I work,....but it really does sound like it might be worthwhile dropping my boss, Jem, an email with your requirements (Real Camera link below). If it was made, chances are we have one (or maybe more than one), or atleast know where to get one!.
However, the first question will probably be.... Do you have a budget in mind?

nah no budget but im just gonna settle for a rangefinder
thanks again for the replies.

Avoid Yashica Electro 35 GS/T/N unless you're prepared to send it off to a specialist for repair, they are terribly unreliable at the age they are and notoriously difficult (that's code for expensive) to fix. Also avoid Olympus 35 RC and RD models, they will inevitably have oil on the shutter blades and require a major strip down which is far from cheap. I'd recommend Canonet QL17 (currently in vogue, so prices are a bit inflated at the moment), or the QL19 which is not far behind in capability but massively cheaper.

Yelvertoft, may I politely disagree about your comment on the venerable Yashica Electro 35, I own one and it came to me in very battered condition but still works like a charm and takes fabulous pictures.They are (imho) on a par with (if not better than) the Canonet QL17 when price is taken into account, the Yashica is far cheaper and yet delivers excellent results.

Reasons to own one:

Very fast (f1.7) 45mm lens
Electromagentically controlled Copal leaf shutter: completely stepless, so you can have speeds like 1/133rd or 1/72nd of a second, resulting in very, very accurate exposures.
Very cheap on eBay (mine was 32 pounds including the original leather case).

However, the Copal shutter is fully automatic, no manual override.

If you want continuous winding you will need an SLR. Considering you want something compact let me recommend you the simply brilliant Olympus OM-system, notably the OM-1 and OM-2 versions. These can be fitted with a motor drive cheaply and easily and are reliable, quality metal SLRs, especially the all-mechanical OM-1. The Zuiko range of lenses is simply brilliant, but also the OM-1 was famous for launching the compact SLR revolution. Since you are looking for compactness and motor drive I think it is an unbeatable choice. I have one and I'm chuffed to bits with it. The old mercury battery CAN in fact be replaced with a Wein Cell from the Small battery company.

On that line, you could also consider the Olympus Pen F, very compact, not sure if it accepts a motor drive. It is sought after by collectors so expect to pay a lot more than for an OM camera.

Hope this helps,

Alex

You were lucky, very lucky.

Reasons not to own one:
Search for the term "Yashica pad of death".

If your Electro 35 doesn't suffer from this now, it's only a matter of time. If you find a fully working one then I agree it's a fantastic camera, it's just that this seems to be the exception, not the norm. I came within a whisker of buying one recently but consulted with a very experienced camera repair/service technician, his horror stories of the Electro put me off.

I agree with your comments about the OM-1 being an excellent camera. It is only fair to point out to potential buyers the obsolete battery issue. Yes, you can buy a Wein Cell. They cost about £9 and last at best 12 months even if you don't use the camera. You're better off getting it modified to take a silver oxide cell. Likewise, the Electro 35 has to have a work around to cope with its obsolete battery.

I'm not saying don't buy an Electro, or an OM-1, just pointing out that people should find out the potential pitfalls before buying. The original poster wanted fully manual control, so the Electro doesn't fit his needs anyway.

Yes, the Yashica doesn't fit the posters needs, but the OM cameras do. I just bought a replacement Wein cell and they cost just £5 now. Five quid for a year's use seems like a fair deal to me. Besides, the OM-2 (which also fits the posters needs) uses the commonly available SR44 battery.

yea the canon canonet giii ql17 and the minolta 7s 2 are the rangefinders im considering but im very interested in checkin out the olympus om cameras now. thanks

Yes, if you're considering OM camera bodies OM-1 OM-2 and OM-4 (ti if poss) are all worth a look. Better to avoid the double numbers (20, 30 and 40 etc), which do tend to suffer electrical gremlins....In all cases, check the 'click' positivity of the on/off/bat test dial. The test function is next to useless, but the wear of the click stops on that dial (the one beneath/around the rewind lever) is normally the first thing to get loose and a good indicator of how worn those bodies are.

OR,

What about a Voigtlander Bessaflex TM SLR? Compact design, incredibly clear bright viewfinders, beautifully made, and nice lenses....and its going to be less than 30 years old. I can't emphase how bright and clear the finder is. Admittedly, on paper it looks pretty boring, but the example I picked up was a pleasant suprise...almost breathtaking
http://www.cameraquest.com/voigtFlexTM.htm

I have heard about the Bessaflex and its excellent viewfinder, but all I can say is that the OM's viewfinder also has to be seen to be believed. It is enormous and extraordinarily bright, far better than the viewfinder on the bigger and more expensive Leica R3 and the newer Canon EOS 30 I also own. The OM is also a lot easier to find than the Voigtlander.

The double digit OMs (-10, -20, -40) were the lower spec versions, built with cheaper components and fewer features. The single digit ones are the ones to buy.

does anyone know anything about the konica hexar rf?

Yes, but I've never used one. My first impressions were that it was a Leica M pretender. I guess what I have heard about it may have been tarnished by that wrong badge type (lack of the red dot)......and may have suffered from lack of sales due to this. Contax G series stuff suffered a similar sales problem i believe.
Seriously though, if you are looking for something a bit like a Leica rangefinder camera, chances are you'll never quite be fully satisfied until you have a Leica rangefinder camera in your hands. It's a mindset
I'm also led to beleive that in some circles putting a Russian lens on a Leica is a punishable offence!

Along a different tac, I've always lusted after some of the Nikon Rangefinder gear (absolutely no way to justify it for myself tho).......
also, the Leica M fit Voigtlander 50mm f/1.1 nokton looks rather minty (which is going to test the accuracy of the finder focus calibration on any s/h body!!!)

In a way its a shame you specified 35mm film camera.....The new Olympus EP-1 rangefinder camera might well be worth a look at (it's digi tho)....has some great features, the hi ISO hi contrast mono feature is very film-like

The EP-1 is indeed nice, but having held one in a camera store I think it isn't as well built as its film forefathers, just feels a little too tacky for my hands (though I am used to Leica gear, but the OM series and even my Yashica Electro feel much better put together). It also has way too few lenses (only 2) and is generally constructed for what I call the all-automatic photographer who may as well buy a disposable camera.

Regarding the Hexar RF, it sounds like a good buy if you can fork out for Leica M lenses but not quite enough for the body. I read that they feel very solidly put together, deceivingly close to a Leica M.

I have to admit that's not the common view I've heard so far of the EP-1, and the owners I have met have usually been more fans of rangefinders (primarily Leicas) than disposables. Though I guess we can almost begin to expect some digi's not to have that same age old build quality of some of those OM cameras.
There might only be two 'official' lenses available, but others can be used with a suitable adapter. The spec levels of the EP-1 are nearer to the semi-pro E30 than any point n shoot auto digi compact I've come across.
I've never personally been a big fan of the small Olympus cameras, but they do justify investigation if a potential owner is looking for something a bit different.

Would be interesting to find out how the original poster (racki09) feels of the alternatives, and whether the OM route has been chosen

Most reviews complain that the AF on the EP-1 is too slow for a camera in that price bracket. I would personally LOVE to use OM lenses on a digicam to get that old silky smooth manual focus...

I think the original poster (racki09) is considering the OM cameras and the Konica Hexar rangefinder. I'd say build quality is excellent on both, the advantages of the Olympus against the Hexar being that it is an SLR and has a wide variety of great Zuiko lenses that can be bought for it. The Konica, being a rangefinder, will be more compact (though the OM is no fatty at all) and it has a built in motor drive and accepts the superb (but very expensive) Leica M lenses.

On eBay the cheapest Konica Hexar RF is just as body, buy it now 470 pounds. Other examples are going for as much as a Leica M (well over 1000 pounds). By contrast an OM-1 will set you back around 70 pounds for a body and 50mm lens, motor drive 70 pounds.

ended up buyin a canonet giii ql17. first roll was great, id never used a rangefinder before and the results were very interesting. A guy from the local camera shop gave me a great flash so when i took out with me to the city the other night got some great shots of me n my friends out and about. Still seein smaller cameras for the future though. Im not interested at all hauling around slrs looking for shots but more havin somethin compact and shots finding me. Any one know if u can get point and shoots that u can mount a flash on.
(probably a dumb question)
wat do people think of yashica t4's any similar cameras that i should check out.

I have one. If I went out and about with both the SLR and the T4 and shot a reel of film in each. A few days later when the prints came back, as soon as I flipped the envelope open, I knew which set had come from the T4. This camera probably has the sharpest lens I've even had the pleasure of using.

Fully auto, so you're stuck with the settings it gives you, it doesn't tell you what those settings are either. So, if it's creative effects you're after, then avoid. If it's point and shoot with a great lens, then, providing you can live with the relatively wide fixed 35mm prime, then it's a good camera.

I've just gone to dig mine out of the cupboard and found it has a half used reel of film still in it. The film is at least 6 years old, I wonder what's on it?

For compactness try Olympus XA and Minox 35. Both are tiny and take flashes (the Minox has a dedicated line of flashes but it'll take other models as well). The Olympus has a coupled rangefinder whereas the slightly smaller Minox is scale-focus. People tend to think the Minox's lens may have the edge in sharpness, though the glass on the XA is certainly not shabby either. Both have cult followings, the only one I own is the Minox and I can vouch that the lens is really very sharp indeed, it's up there with the Summicron glass.

The Genuine Minox 35 series stuff have great lenses. DO NOT be tempted by the look-a-like Kiev35 cameras. They may look the same and usually cost only about £30 'new' but that's where the similarity ends......truly dreadful build quality, awful soft lens and next to no genuine reliability.