Looking for something in particular.

[Alex1994]

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.

[racki09]

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

[Joe]

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

[Alex1994]

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.

[racki09]

does anyone know anything about the konica hexar rf?

[Joe]

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!!!)

[Joe]

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

[Alex1994]

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.

[Joe]

is generally constructed for what I call the all-automatic photographer who may as well buy a disposable camera.

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

[Alex1994]

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.