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

Alternatives to the olympus 35 rc
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon Jun 01, 2015 5:57 pm    Post subject: Alternatives to the olympus 35 rc Reply with quote

So,
my olympurs 35 rc goes soon back since I had problems with the light meter (I would have keep it her if in the manual mode I was turning all time the focus ring).

Before I order a new one, I wanted to ask what similar there is in terms of price and size that perhaps allows also faster exposure compensation. I am very fine with "auto" cameras (shutter or aperture priority) but I would like to assist these modes when I know that their measurements would be off in tough lighting conditions.

Any ideas?
Regards
Alex


PostPosted: Mon Jun 01, 2015 9:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Upon looking at the 35 RC and seeing what its capabilities are, my first suggestion would be to check out the Canon QL17 GIII. It's a very popular camera on the used market, which means sometimes it gets pricey. The QL17 has a 40mm f/1.7 lens that is tack sharp. Plus, like the Olympus, it has auto-exposure with a manual override feature. There was even a flash made especially for it, and often you will see the two listed together.

If eBay prices are looking a bit too stiff for you, you might try your luck at shopgoodwill.com. There's always QL17s there. Figure on having to replace the light seals, though, regardless of where it comes from.


PostPosted: Tue Jun 02, 2015 12:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Olympus XA or Minolta Hi-Matic 7sII (Revue 400 SE) if small size, easy use and good quality is required.
Small cameras like the Olympus 35 RC are always a compromise.
It's very difficult to recommend something to an unknown person.


PostPosted: Tue Jun 02, 2015 8:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

tb_a wrote:
Small cameras like the Olympus 35 RC are always a compromise.


Could you explain? I am thinking about getting a fixed lens rangefinder and I am considering a compact also.


PostPosted: Tue Jun 02, 2015 8:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have the Olympus 35 SC Rangefinder which I got by accident really, it was in a kit of of other cameras. But it is a great camera with a very good reputation. It seems to be well made and works well, but mine does look hardly used.

Another small rangefinder that I have used a lot in the past is my Minolta Hi Matic F, which is auto exposure. It's got a lovely 38 / 2.7 lens and is very easy to use. It's popular with street photographers, but still cheap.

If you want a good compact, I have a box full that I'm trying to get rid of. There's some good ones in there, I can make a list if you want.


PostPosted: Tue Jun 02, 2015 9:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

uddhava wrote:
tb_a wrote:
Small cameras like the Olympus 35 RC are always a compromise.


Could you explain? I am thinking about getting a fixed lens rangefinder and I am considering a compact also.


Of course, compared to SLRs or RF system cameras (like Leica or Voigtlaender), those mini RF 35mm cameras are a compromise in terms of both quality and possibilities. Even an old Russian RF camera like a Zorki with interchangeable lenses beats every of those mini cameras in terms of picture quality. Models like e.g. a Yashica Electro 35 (45mm/F1.7) are not bad at all but also quite heavy and bulky.
The smaller the camera the less precisely it will work. Also the used mini lenses are not really state of the art and the light metering systems are rather average. All that result in more bad pictures for the waste. That's at least my experience and I have a quite big collection of RF cameras from micro to maxi. You have to set priorities whether portability or quality is the more important feature.
My favorite RF-type camera in terms of best quality is my Fujica G690BL ( http://camerapedia.wikia.com/wiki/Fujica_G690 ) but it's a bulky and heavy beast! Wink
The best 35mm RF camera is the Voigtlaender Bessa R. I would never trade my R2 for a Leica. If you want to look more seriously into RF photography, a Bessa R could be a very good choice and it's rather small and handy. Used ones can be found not too expensive. I bought mine for less than 200 Euros. The features like TTL metering and aperture times from 1/1 to 1/2000 fully mechanical are really great and the VF can be switched for 35/50/75/90mm on the R2. You can use also the old Russian RF lenses on it. A Bessa with e.g. a Jupiter 12 (35mm/F2.8 ) is a very handy and top quality set and those lenses should still be easily and rather cheaply available in Hungary. Wink


PostPosted: Tue Jun 02, 2015 10:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks everyonefor the answers so far.

That what I need.
Size like the olympus 35 rc. No just full automation but also manual settings. The problem I have with my olympus 35 rc was that the aperture was very packed and as I was rotating I was also moving my focus point.

Also a nice light meter is nice and a good viewfinder to look in for focusing and of course a good lens so I do not need to care stopping down


QL17 looks to fit nice in the bill
and also the

Minolta Hi-Matic 7SII


PostPosted: Tue Jun 02, 2015 12:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

btw the Minolta HI-Matic 7 S II looks to be idendical to the canonet QL 17...


PostPosted: Tue Jun 02, 2015 12:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

alaios wrote:
btw the Minolta HI-Matic 7 S II looks to be idendical to the canonet QL 17...


I don't know as I was never interested in Canon. But what I know for sure is, that the Minolta and the Revue as recommended by me is identical as both have been made by Cosina. Maybe the Canon was also made by Cosina. Could easily be. Cosina produced also some Nikon and other well known cameras.


PostPosted: Tue Jun 02, 2015 1:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Would the the Ricoh 500 G or GX be a good alternative also?


PostPosted: Tue Jun 02, 2015 1:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

tb_a wrote:
alaios wrote:
btw the Minolta HI-Matic 7 S II looks to be idendical to the canonet QL 17...


I don't know as I was never interested in Canon. But what I know for sure is, that the Minolta and the Revue as recommended by me is identical as both have been made by Cosina. Maybe the Canon was also made by Cosina. Could easily be. Cosina produced also some Nikon and other well known cameras.


No, it wasn't made by Cosina. And it may look like that Minolta, but it isn't the same camera. Early QL17s were made in Japan and later ones were made at a Canon facility in Taiwan. The GIII, from what I understand, stands for "3rd generation" of their Canonet series of cameras with f/1.7 lenses. It's also the one you're most likely to find. Canon also noted that the GIII had been improved quality-wise and it is acutally quite good. The lens is often compared to Leicas in terms of sharpness and contrast and frequent comparisons are made between the QL17 and the Leica CL I believe it was here at the forum several years ago when a member displayed photos taken with a QL17 and a Leica of some sort -- it might have been the CL, I just don't recall anymore. The images were very close, but I -- and several other members -- actually chose the Canon's photo as the better of the two. I was somewhat surprised.

I've shot the QL17 off and on for over 25 years. Currently I own two. It's a well made, durable camera that takes excellent shots. About its only drawback functionally that I can think of is it takes the old PX625 mercury 1.35v battery. But it can use the 675 hearing aid battery without probems. Just make sure, if you go after one, to buy one that has a working meter. Having a leaf-shutter lens up to 1/500 of a second is a big plus in my book. Flash sync at all speeds. Plus, like all these rangefinders, it's dead quiet, so can be used surreptitiously in street environments. Here's a write-up on it over at my friend Steve Gandy's site, Camera Quest:

https://www.cameraquest.com/canql17.htm

There's another Oly, apart from the XA, I can recommend. It doesn't have much in the way of manual control, but it works very well and delivers high quality photos. The Oly Trip 35. I have one of these also. Doesn't require batteries because it has a Selenium meter. According to Wikipedia, it was made from 1967 to 1984! Over 10 million were made. Comes with a 40/2.8 lens. It was available in chrome and black finishes. Apparently the black one is somewhat rare. Mine is black, and I was rather surprised to see what black examples are selling for on eBay, especially considering how many of these cameras were made. Read more about it here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympus_Trip_35

And don't rule out the XA. You might not have direct control of shutter speeds but you have complete control of apertures and a good rangefinder for focusing. Couplled with the A11 flash, it's a great all-around compact.


PostPosted: Tue Jun 02, 2015 10:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Olympus MJU-2 as limited device, very small, very good , super duper easy to handle it.


PostPosted: Tue Jun 02, 2015 10:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Early Canon rangefinders had a bad reputation for being shoddily made out of inferior materials. It is hard to get a good, working model. The 35RC is in my opinion a very good model and probably one of the best anyway. Have a look at Lloydy's list he has some nice cameras and he wouldnt let you have one unless it was working (apart from the one he gave me - oh, it was free so that doesnt count).

The Ricoh 500G or GX as uddhava suggests are good cameras. The Oly 35 XA is an RF camera, the other models are scale focusing.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 03, 2015 12:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

philslizzy wrote:
Early Canon rangefinders had a bad reputation for being shoddily made out of inferior materials. It is hard to get a good, working model.


First I've heard of this. Do you have any examples in particular that were shoddily made? Apart from my QL17s, I own a IIIa rangefinder, uses LTM lenses, made in about 1953, and I'd consider its quality to be quite high. Years ago, I owned a IVsb, which apparently was a very popular model because so many still exist. Another LTM rangefinder. Same thing applies to it with regard to quality. Those old Canons actually had innovations that their Leica contemporaries lacked, which made them easier to use. I prefer them actually over the LTM Leicas made back then.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 03, 2015 7:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Konica Auto S2 is a great camera.

However, if you really want an RF camera, go for a Kiev and pair it with a Jupiter-8 2/50, Jupiter-3 1.5/50 or Jupiter-12 2.8/35.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 03, 2015 9:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I had a look on all the nice suggestions.
I think the two that fit what I need is the
QL 17 GIII
and the
Minolta Hi-Matic 7 Sii

the reason I am picking those two are:

-Full manual control If I want
-the lens rings (aperture, shutter speed, focusing) do not seem that much stacked or have small levers. In my olympurs 35 rc my major pain what that when I was chaning aperture I was moving accidendtally the focus ring too
-both cameras seem to have very good lenses and fast apertures.

I am not sure on their size. Olympurs 35 rc was the ideal size and I can not understand how larger these cameras might be or not.
That is all for now
Alex


PostPosted: Fri Jun 05, 2015 9:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lloydy wrote:
I have the Olympus 35 SC Rangefinder which I got by accident really, it was in a kit of of other cameras. But it is a great camera with a very good reputation. It seems to be well made and works well, but mine does look hardly used.

Another small rangefinder that I have used a lot in the past is my Minolta Hi Matic F, which is auto exposure. It's got a lovely 38 / 2.7 lens and is very easy to use. It's popular with street photographers, but still cheap.

If you want a good compact, I have a box full that I'm trying to get rid of. There's some good ones in there, I can make a list if you want.


Thank you Lloydy. I would like to look at that list if you don't mind. Will you put it with your cameras for sell?

tb_a wrote:
uddhava wrote:
tb_a wrote:
Small cameras like the Olympus 35 RC are always a compromise.

Could you explain? I am thinking about getting a fixed lens rangefinder and I am considering a compact also.

Of course, compared to SLRs or RF system cameras (like Leica or Voigtlaender), those mini RF 35mm cameras are a compromise in terms of both quality and possibilities. Even an old Russian RF camera like a Zorki with interchangeable lenses beats every of those mini cameras in terms of picture quality. Models like e.g. a Yashica Electro 35 (45mm/F1.7) are not bad at all but also quite heavy and bulky.
The smaller the camera the less precisely it will work. Also the used mini lenses are not really state of the art and the light metering systems are rather average. All that result in more bad pictures for the waste. That's at least my experience and I have a quite big collection of RF cameras from micro to maxi. You have to set priorities whether portability or quality is the more important feature.


I have a Zorki and a Kiev which I like, but I was thinking of getting a fixed lens rangefinder (mainly Japanese)
but not necessarily a compact one. I have heard some of them performed well. I also notice there are a lot of
German rangefinders. In general there are a lot of old rangefinder cameras. Here I am seeing Voigtlander CLR's,
Minolta Hi-matics, Yashica Minister D, 35 Electro, a Belmira, etc...


PostPosted: Fri Jun 05, 2015 9:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

After using my Minolta HiMatic 7sII for quite a long I have sold my Oly 35RC. Far better lens and without that silly distortion the little oly produces.
What I don't like on my HiMatic is that the shutter button goes a long way until it trips the shutter.


PostPosted: Fri Jun 05, 2015 12:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

uddhava wrote:

I have a Zorki and a Kiev which I like, but I was thinking of getting a fixed lens rangefinder (mainly Japanese)
but not necessarily a compact one. I have heard some of them performed well. I also notice there are a lot of
German rangefinders. In general there are a lot of old rangefinder cameras. Here I am seeing Voigtlander CLR's,
Minolta Hi-matics, Yashica Minister D, 35 Electro, a Belmira, etc...


If size is not your biggest concern I would definitely recommend the Minolta Hi-Matic 7SII AKA Revue 400 SE (both identical made by Cosina).
It's much smaller than the Yashica Electro 35 but not as small as the Olympic ones and is still made in metal and therefore also more heavy than e.g. the Olympus XA made of plastic. However it's a real RF camera with full manual control where you are setting the time manually and the corresponding aperture could be seen in the viewer. Time setting around the lens (B, 1/8 to 1/500) and automatic aperture from F1.7 to F16. Focus is done by a lever on the left side of the lens and goes from 0.9 m to infinity by only approx. 30 degrees turn of the lever. Focus control as usual in the viewer. There is also a flash sync connector and a middle contact for flash usage. There is also a aperture setting when manual flashes are used. The shutter release can take any conventional cable release. A mechanical self timer is located on the front. All in all a decent camera with nearly all necessary features. The lens takes 49mm filters and the light sensor is in front of the lens which enables the correct metering including filter when used. ASA setting from 25 to 800. Copal shutter. The optical quality is not bad either (40mm/F1.7). It takes normal 1.5V battery 675px which is easily available.
Instruction Manuals:
http://www.cameramanuals.org/minolta_pdf/minolta_hi-matic_7sii.pdf
http://www.cameramanuals.org/pdf_files/revue_400se.pdf


PostPosted: Fri Jun 05, 2015 1:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What about other versions of the Hi-matic? Like a plain 7 or 9?


PostPosted: Fri Jun 05, 2015 1:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

uddhava wrote:
What about other versions of the Hi-matic? Like a plain 7 or 9?


Sorry, that you have to find out yourself. I have only the recommended model because it was always considered to be the best one and I believe also the latest of the MF "real" ones. So all other models are somehow a compromise and I don't like compromises. Wink

For further reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minolta_Hi-Matic


PostPosted: Fri Jun 05, 2015 5:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

tb_a wrote:
uddhava wrote:

I have a Zorki and a Kiev which I like, but I was thinking of getting a fixed lens rangefinder (mainly Japanese)
but not necessarily a compact one. I have heard some of them performed well. I also notice there are a lot of
German rangefinders. In general there are a lot of old rangefinder cameras. Here I am seeing Voigtlander CLR's,
Minolta Hi-matics, Yashica Minister D, 35 Electro, a Belmira, etc...


If size is not your biggest concern I would definitely recommend the Minolta Hi-Matic 7SII AKA Revue 400 SE (both identical made by Cosina).
It's much smaller than the Yashica Electro 35 but not as small as the Olympic ones and is still made in metal and therefore also more heavy than e.g. the Olympus XA made of plastic. However it's a real RF camera with full manual control where you are setting the time manually and the corresponding aperture could be seen in the viewer. Time setting around the lens (B, 1/8 to 1/500) and automatic aperture from F1.7 to F16. Focus is done by a lever on the left side of the lens and goes from 0.9 m to infinity by only approx. 30 degrees turn of the lever. Focus control as usual in the viewer. There is also a flash sync connector and a middle contact for flash usage. There is also a aperture setting when manual flashes are used. The shutter release can take any conventional cable release. A mechanical self timer is located on the front. All in all a decent camera with nearly all necessary features. The lens takes 49mm filters and the light sensor is in front of the lens which enables the correct metering including filter when used. ASA setting from 25 to 800. Copal shutter. The optical quality is not bad either (40mm/F1.7). It takes normal 1.5V battery 675px which is easily available.
Instruction Manuals:
http://www.cameramanuals.org/minolta_pdf/minolta_hi-matic_7sii.pdf
http://www.cameramanuals.org/pdf_files/revue_400se.pdf


which of the two is smaller? Can you also confirm me when you turn the dials for aperture, shutter speed and focus can you change each one independently? In my olympus 35 rc my problem was that when I turned aperture I was also moving the focus ring (and I was losing my current focus point).

Regards
Alex


PostPosted: Fri Jun 05, 2015 6:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

alaios wrote:

which of the two is smaller? Can you also confirm me when you turn the dials for aperture, shutter speed and focus can you change each one independently? In my olympus 35 rc my problem was that when I turned aperture I was also moving the focus ring (and I was losing my current focus point).


I dont't know whether I understand your question correctly. I don't know the details of the Olympus 35 RC.
The Minolta and the Revue are IDENTICAL, that means that the only difference is the brand and the name written on the camera and nothing else; it's one and the same camera produced by Cosina with two different inscriptions. Maybe Cosina produced this camera also for somebody else. I don't know. It's size is 115 x 77 mm (just measured), so it's also rather small compared to other RF cameras of that time. Maybe the Olympus is even a little bit smaller. I simply don't know as I don't have it. My Olympus XA is smaller.
However, neither the movement of the time ring around the lens nor the movement of the aperture is in any way affecting the focus ring as the focus ring is only moved by a lever left side of the lens. So the focus will stay as it is if you change the time setting for automatic adjustment of aperture setting. That's the way the camera is designed. Obviously the Olympus works the other way round that you have to change the aperture setting to adjust the time automatic. The manual aperture setting is primarily for the use of manual flash lights or for fully manual exposure. If you look into the manuals you will see how it works.


PostPosted: Sat Jun 06, 2015 3:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

uddhava wrote:
What about other versions of the Hi-matic? Like a plain 7 or 9?


A few years ago, I participated in a send-a-camera-around-the-world project over at the Rangefinder Forum. When you got the camera, you'd load it up with film, go out and shoot a roll or two, then post your results at the forum, and then box the camera up and send it to the next person on the list.

The camera that was used for this project I participated in was a Minolta Hi-Matic E. Unlike the Hi-Matic 7's, the E was an auto-only camera. All you could do with it was set the ISO, focus, and shoot. It handled everything else. At first, I felt really leery about trusting this little camera to deliver well-exposed photos, but when I got my first roll of film back, it removed all doubt.

Without a doubt, the nicest thing about the "E" was its 40mm f/1.7 lens. It produced remarkably sharp photos. I was shooting Kodak 200 film, an OK emulsion I suppose, but I must admit the camera and that film got along well.





Now, if I were to buy a Hi-Matic, I'd go for one of the 7s, because they have manual control of shutter speeds as an option, at least. They also have either a 45mm or 40mm f/1.7 or f/1.8 lens, so they're great for low light stuff, and maybe even halfway decent bokeh -- who knows? I think the 7sII looks the coolest, though, especially in black.

By the way not only was the Minolta Hi-Matic 7sII marketed as the Revue 400SE as Thomas has mentioned, but it was also sold as the Konica Auto S3, the Prinz 35ER, and the Vivitar 35ES.


PostPosted: Sat Jun 06, 2015 5:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

tb_a wrote:
alaios wrote:

which of the two is smaller? Can you also confirm me when you turn the dials for aperture, shutter speed and focus can you change each one independently? In my olympus 35 rc my problem was that when I turned aperture I was also moving the focus ring (and I was losing my current focus point).


I dont't know whether I understand your question correctly. I don't know the details of the Olympus 35 RC.
The Minolta and the Revue are IDENTICAL, that means that the only difference is the brand and the name written on the camera and nothing else; it's one and the same camera produced by Cosina with two different inscriptions. Maybe Cosina produced this camera also for somebody else. I don't know. It's size is 115 x 77 mm (just measured), so it's also rather small compared to other RF cameras of that time. Maybe the Olympus is even a little bit smaller. I simply don't know as I don't have it. My Olympus XA is smaller.
However, neither the movement of the time ring around the lens nor the movement of the aperture is in any way affecting the focus ring as the focus ring is only moved by a lever left side of the lens. So the focus will stay as it is if you change the time setting for automatic adjustment of aperture setting. That's the way the camera is designed. Obviously the Olympus works the other way round that you have to change the aperture setting to adjust the time automatic. The manual aperture setting is primarily for the use of manual flash lights or for fully manual exposure. If you look into the manuals you will see how it works.


Revue 400se looks way cheaper.. I wonder why if it is identical. Btw on this youtube video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_gJhnQlttI
revue 400 se is also reported as konica s3 clone

Regards
Alex