Home
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

a RF for starters?
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2008 4:16 pm    Post subject: a RF for starters? Reply with quote

There are 2 things I plan to do..
1- Try shooting with film (the colors just amaze me)
2- Learn the deal about RF's at first hand (I dunno what its all about, seems like an unefficient method to shoot but a forumfull of people can not be that wrong)

So maybe I can tame my ambition for both with an RF.. I wanna buy something with a very high performance/price since maybe after a couple of shots i will not find the RF deal as for liking..

I've browsed around for a couple of days and am thinking about "Zorki-4".. Do you think that this will be the right Zorki as other models like "-5 or -3" exist..

And there are "FED"s.. I understand they are exact copies of Leicas and are inferior than Zorki's.. And there are MIRs but i have no idea on them..


Is "Zorki-4" a right choice for getting to know RFs?


PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2008 4:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Laughing Laughing
Well I know you guys are tired of my same drum beat Embarassed

For a first RF there is one perfect choice.

Yashica Electro GS/GSN


Take one for $30 and spend an hour tuning it up.
You will discover what everyone else who has tried one of these cams has.
Success will be yours Cool


PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2008 4:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

F16SUNSHINE wrote:
Laughing Laughing
Well I know you guys are tired of my same drum beat Embarassed

For a first RF there is one perfect choice.

Yashica Electro GS/GSN


Take one for $30 and spend an hour tuning it up.
You will discover what everyone else who has tried one of these cams has.
Success will be yours Cool


What does it offer against the zorki? I'ill be shooting mostly with neopan 1600.. do you think yashica is fast enough? i hear its 1/500 max while zorki-4 has 1/1000..


PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2008 5:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well that is only one stop.
Neopan 1600 has at least 2 stops of exposure latitude Wink
Since you are using 1600 I assume you plan low light shoots.
The leaf shutter in the Electro will buy you a stop of hand hold ability on the slow end over the focal plane shutter of the Zorki. Cool


PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2008 5:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If you want a fast cam, the Electro with its 1.7/45 is almost perfect.
An alternative would be the Minolta Hi-Matic E, for example.


PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2008 6:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The main issue with what you propose is that the GSN goes up to ASA1000 only. Apart from this, they are fantastic though large cameras.

Though large, they are better made than the Feds and Zorkis. The Russian cameras do allow you to change lenses... and don't have meters, most of them.

In general, the fixed lens Japanese RF cams of the '70s tend to be very decent performers, some excellent. The one thing to check out before buying is whether or not the battery is still available.


PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2008 6:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Throndor wrote:
F16SUNSHINE wrote:
Laughing Laughing
Well I know you guys are tired of my same drum beat Embarassed

For a first RF there is one perfect choice.

Yashica Electro GS/GSN


Take one for $30 and spend an hour tuning it up.
You will discover what everyone else who has tried one of these cams has.
Success will be yours Cool


What does it offer against the zorki? I'ill be shooting mostly with neopan 1600.. do you think yashica is fast enough? i hear its 1/500 max while zorki-4 has 1/1000..


It has only aperture priority mode but that's not a problem. It's more quiet having a leaf shutter not a focal plane cloth shutter and cames with a great, fast lens (but it's not removable).
I hate that russian "thing" regarding RFs: winding/cocking before setting the shutter speed.


PostPosted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 2:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

K, I'm goin' with the Yashica Electro GSN.. The Zorki has better looks and is more compact but I guess Yashica will be more efficient..


PostPosted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yashica has one of the best image quality what I ever seen.


PostPosted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

HI

If you look for a fast lens, have the yashica lynk 5000 (F/1,4 lens, a.k.a. the poor's men leica). The viewfinder is very luminous, tha patch permit to you a very fast focus.

Mamiya offered a good one with 1,5 lens. (Super de luxe, may be).

Olympus had a beatufull 35 mm RF with great 1,7 (RC or similar)

And perhaps the queen of all, the KONICA S 2 (a leica seems lens 1,8 or 1,9 with one version 1,6) Leica quality here!!!

And, of course the yashica G line.

Look for, you will find an excelent RF.

Good luck. Rino.


PostPosted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oh....I forgot!!

I knew professionals in the diary Clarin and Nacion (argentine) whom, to work in night's events, leaved your leicas at the office and go with the konicas.

Rino.


PostPosted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rino has a good idea with the Konica S2 or S1.6.
I have both of them.
You can use it in Auto or in full manual.
The camera is very well made and heavy.
Takes one 645 battery. The battery cover is the only crappy part on the camera.
It's Plastic. I use my 1.6 with IR film exclusively. The meter is dead but the speeds are perfect on this one.
I don't think the lens has the lovely almost Zeissy personality of the Yashica GSN.
It is sharp like a knife with Neutral colors.
If you want to do high contrast B+W (neo1600) then take a Konica.

Another to look for if you have a bigger budget is the Konica S3.
A pro level camera and expensive.
It is easy to see this group likes fixed lens leaf shutter cameras.
These cams are truly the best way to get into RF film photography.
It is Folly to think that Interchange able lens RF's are better.
If they are better then they are better otherwise no.
When you are comparing Russian RF's with the best Fixed lens cameras from Japan.
The FLRF's are really a better way to go.


PostPosted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 4:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

F16SUNSHINE wrote:

I don't think the lens has the lovely almost Zeissy personality of the Yashica GSN.
It is sharp like a knife with Neutral colors.



Excelent.

I define in the same way.

Konica lenses are sharp, very, very sharp and not very contrast. As the

leica 50/2 summicron M (first and DR version, not the collapsible). The

konica was a leica clone.

I love konica lenses, in RF and more in SRL (of course, I love Leica M).

Regards, Rino.


PostPosted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 5:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

When I was buying my first proper camera my father advised me to get a rangefinder, but at that time SLRs were still quite new-fangled and being able to change lenses and look through the taking lens seemed fantastic advantages. So I went down the SLR route and never looked at a RF camera until last year. Now I've seen some of the RF pics from our members here I wished I'd listened to my Dad. Smile

Is there a special reason you want to use Neopan 1600? These old cameras were never designed for such fast film, so 1/500 could be a problem, even if the film can be pushed (should that be pulled?) a couple of stops. Even in our usually dull daylight I think I'd prefer a more modern cam for the Neopan and use slower films in an older RF. The finer grain is worth it and better for scanning.


Last edited by peterqd on Sat Oct 11, 2008 5:43 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 5:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

peterqd wrote:
When I was buying my first proper camera my father advised me to get a rangefinder, but at that time SLRs were still quite new-fangled and being able to change lenses and look through the taking lens seemed fantastic advantages. So I went down the SLR route and never looked at a RF camera until last year. Now I've seen some of the RF pics from our members here I wished I'd listened to my Dad. Smile



Most sons did the same, and our sons repeat.

Rino.


PostPosted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 9:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

peterqd wrote:

Is there a special reason you want to use Neopan 1600? These old cameras were never designed for such fast film, so 1/500 could be a problem, even if the film can be pushed (should that be pulled?) a couple of stops. Even in our usually dull daylight I think I'd prefer a more modern cam for the Neopan and use slower films in an older RF. The finer grain is worth it and better for scanning.



This is the reason; http://www.flickr.com/photos/junku-newcleus/


PostPosted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 11:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Throndor wrote:
peterqd wrote:

Is there a special reason you want to use Neopan 1600? These old cameras were never designed for such fast film, so 1/500 could be a problem, even if the film can be pushed (should that be pulled?) a couple of stops. Even in our usually dull daylight I think I'd prefer a more modern cam for the Neopan and use slower films in an older RF. The finer grain is worth it and better for scanning.



This is the reason; http://www.flickr.com/photos/junku-newcleus/


Very good reason!!

But did you think about that some of this pics could be taken with iso 400/800 film, leaf shutter RF and good pulse? Other alternative, may be a cloth shutter with 1,4-1,8 lens and 400 iso. Some use 800 film in 600 iso.

The range of possibility is wide. Your's the choice.

Rino.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 12:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ah, you're after the high contrast, grainy look. Good luck! Smile
I don't know enough yet to offer any help on that, but I'd guess the processing and the photographer's skill are just as important as the film. The Pan F I'm using at present is very high contrast too, and that's only 50ASA, but it's a lot less grainy, at least when processed normally.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 2:31 am    Post subject: A first rangefinder Reply with quote

Greetings, Forum.

I would have guessed that the Canonet QL 17 would have popped up in this thread by now. It is a great first RF, from all I have heard and read over the past few years.



The Canon/Canonet QL17 cameras also have a full complement of shutter speeds and aperture control. As others have mentioned, the otherwise wonderful Yashica Electro 35 rangefinders are more constrained with automation.

Upthread estudleon recommended the Yashica Lynx 5000. I was thinking the same thing as he was because of the complete manual control set.

Some rangefinders from the FSU, modeled on early Contax and Leica models tend to have smaller viewfinder eyepieces. This may be an issue with some folks who wear glasses, such as myself. I have to use an auxillary finder device with my Kiev 4a for this reason.

In any case, I think it is wise to "check out" rangefinder shooting before spending a lot on it. Personally, I prefer it. To me it is liberating, putting me more at one with the process and with the subject. The camera is small, stable, and quiet, not taken too seriously by the subject (person). Nevertheless, some folks just plain don't like shooting with an RF. Fair enough. Better that they had not wasted a lot of money to find out.

Happy day.

Smile


PostPosted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 8:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Welcome to the forum Henry, nice to see you here.. Very Happy

and thanx for your comments... I wear glasses and this is the second time someone is mentioning the viewfinder issue.. That is a good reason to leave the Zorki out...

I was about to go with Yash. GSN but now i'm reading about the Yash. lynx 5K and the Konica s2...and now will about read about Canon QL 17..

i like readin about glasses and cams anyway.. what better thing to read. Smile


PostPosted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 8:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Welcome Henry!


PostPosted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 9:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Throndor wrote:
I wear glasses and this is the second time someone is mentioning the viewfinder issue.. That is a good reason to leave the Zorki out...


I believe Henry was talking about his problems with the Kiev 4a and I feel I must jump here in to defend the Zorki - it has lots of quirks and faults, but the viewfinder is its best feature in my opinion. I need to wear glasses with all my cameras, apart from two - the 400D and the Zorki 4. Why? Because they both have dioptric adjustment. It's true that the visible area in the viewfinder is reduced when you're wearing glasses, but the Zorki viewfinder is way oversize to start with.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 9:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

peterqd wrote:
Throndor wrote:
I wear glasses and this is the second time someone is mentioning the viewfinder issue.. That is a good reason to leave the Zorki out...


I believe Henry was talking about his problems with the Kiev 4a and I feel I must jump here in to defend the Zorki - it has lots of quirks and faults, but the viewfinder is its best feature in my opinion. I need to wear glasses with all my cameras, apart from two - the 400D and the Zorki 4. Why? Because they both have dioptric adjustment. It's true that the visible area in the viewfinder is reduced when you're wearing glasses, but the Zorki viewfinder is way oversize to start with.



This is another quote from another topic;

rick_oleson wrote:
I like the early (up to about 1965) Zorki 4, mainly because I like having a full range of speeds.
The finder is OK but not great, I can't see the whole frame with my glasses on and the diopter correction goes so far that it's NEVER within the range of human eyesight when you pick up the camera. It's a reliable camera though and it doesn't leak light.

After about 1966, they lost the strap lugs, changed from leather grain to ugly ribbed vinyl covering, and worst, stopped engraving the shutter speeds and just printed them onto the chrome. If you want a bargain and an adventure, there are a lot of 4K's and late 4's with no shutter speed markings left on them, available pretty cheap.


What i figured out from what i read is "yes there s a diopter correction option but you have to fiddle with it everytime you pick the cam up.."

and BTW I am very nearsighted. (-5.00 diopter) .. Does the correction go up to -5.00..


PostPosted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 6:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, I agree with Rick about needing to adjust the diopter, it seems to need slightly different settings depending on the distance of the subject. The VF is very large and there are no frame lines. With my glasses on I can just about see the full 50mm frame (thanks to Carsten for the accessory viewfinder he gave me! Smile). I can't see the whole 35mm frame, but that's about the limit when not wearing glasses. Sorry, I can't tell you about the amount of adjustment for short-sightedness, my eyes are +1.5 and there's still plenty of adjustment both ways.

PM on its way to you.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 2:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello Forum.

Thank you all for the warm welcome here. I am enjoying the good company.

peterqd said:
Quote:
I believe Henry was talking about his problems with the Kiev 4a and I feel I must jump here in to defend the Zorki - it has lots of quirks and faults, but the viewfinder is its best feature in my opinion ..... but the Zorki viewfinder is way oversize to start with.

Yes, Peter, I was thinking of the Kiev 4a which I use, and its wee little peephole viewfinder. I should have been a bit clearer when I said early FSU Leica copies. I was thinking of those made early on, before Zorki 3. In fact, if I were to get another FSU RF today I would get a Zorki 3 or 4 because of the larger finder, and its simpler (than Contax) fabric shutter.

In my very prejudiced opinion, it appears that there are four major things going for the FSU RF solution:
1. Affordability
2. Lens interchangeability
3. All that "German inspired" M39 glass at reasonable prices
4. Rock solid build that will last forever, if a good working sample can be gotten to begin with

I would be careful to buy from a reputable source because of the QC problems during Soviet times. Repairs on an FSU camera can easily exceed the value of the instrument itself.

The advantages of the better fixed-lens Japanese RFs from the 60s and 70s seem to be these:
1. Overall, better QC, fit, and finish. A good working sample should be quite reliable.
2. Affordability
3. Larger viewfinders
4. Easier film loading (QL 17 means Quick Loading f/1.7)
5. Leaf shutters. Sync at all speeds. Impart no camera motion, and no focal plane distortion.
6. Very fast, sharp glass on some models

Throndor, I see that your eyes are quite near-sighted. I don't know if I have ever seen a camera with -5 diopters of correction. So, you will likely appreciate a large finder that allows you to use your glasses.

I see that Rick Oleson is a Member here. It is with his guidance and encouragement that I have repaired several things: A Nikkor 50mm F1.4, A broken ribbon in my Kiev 4a, and a stiffened, capping shutter in my Practica FX. How privileged we are that he is here to show us the way with all this classic MMM gear that has our imaginations captivated.

Happy day.

Smile