Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

What about a FED-3?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Film SLR / TLR Cameras
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 8:34 am    Post subject: What about a FED-3? Reply with quote
Hi MFLensers,

After my latest three failures (my unpaid selling, and the never arriving Zenith and Konica cameras), I'd like to get a rangefinder. Maybe a russian one. I love those old russian cameras, its kitsch design and the lovely shapes. I'd like to get one of those, but I have the request that my cameras will be fully functional. No decorative items.
So I'd like to ask if does anybody have any feedback on them.
Are them good to be used often, or are "toy designs"?.
Can them be used to shot good pictures (technically, I mean. I know the quality of a picture is 90% the photographer, 10% the camera, but I'd like to have at least a 10% quality pictures... Wink).
I believe they use the 39mm screw for lenses, is it true?.
Thanks in advance!
Jes.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 9:39 am    Post subject: Re: What about a FED-3? Reply with quote
Jesito wrote:
Hi MFLensers,

I'd like to get a rangefinder. Maybe a russian one. I love those old russian cameras, its kitsch design and the lovely shapes. I'd like to get one of those, but I have the request that my cameras will be fully functional. No decorative items.
So I'd like to ask if does anybody have any feedback on them.


I think Veijo has a working FED.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 12:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Hi, Jes!

I have one (FED-3b) and I love it!

Yes, you can use M39-lenses - I use an Industar-61 L/D (2.8/53) and a Jupiter-12 (2.8/35), both are great lenses.

If you follow some important rules, this cam is really fun to use!
(One essential rule is: Do never change exposure time without having the shutter cocked!!!)

This rangefinder cam is preicse, well built and can use great glass!

Definite recommendation!


PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 12:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Be careful with regards to 39mm screw lenses, not to confuse the proper rangefinder lenses (so called "Leica M39" or "L39") with the reflex M39 lenses like the Helios-40, which, albeit very similar in the mount (there is only a microscopical difference) have a wrong register distance for rangefinders.

Be careful especially with those lenses like Jupiter-9 which were produced in both rangefinder and reflex versions, and which often the sellers on Ebay advertise wrongly.
_


PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 12:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I already put jupiter-9 rangefinder and slr difference here illustrated with pictures you able to search it. Anyway I not recommended rangefinders we have so many good SLR cameras and you can use lenses on DSLR too. Range finder lens callibration etc not easy. One of my friend has many Zorki, FED etc he like to restaurate them, but I never seen any shoots from him taken with this cameras.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 12:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
That's right, Orio, but mostly the rangefinder lenses are called "LTM M39" (Leica Thread Mount) at least by decent sellers.

However, your warning is more than approriate, since some SLR-M39 lenses are on the market!


PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 12:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Attila wrote:
... Anyway I not recommended rangefinders we have so many good SLR cameras and you can use lenses on DSLR too.


You cannot generalize that, Attila. A rangefinder cam is used in different situtaions than a SLR. It is not an "OR" it rather is an "AND".

Attila wrote:
Range finder lens callibration etc not easy....


With the FED-3b it is easy!
I did it and I am not an expert at all.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 12:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
What is the situation when ragefinder more usable than SLR ? Please let me know I have no knowladge about ragefinders.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 1:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Attila wrote:
What is the situation when ragefinder more usable than SLR ? Please let me know I have no knowladge about ragefinders.


Rangefinders have three main advantages:

1 - they're silent (most of them), so you can use them in theatres, etc.

2 - they have no mirror vibration, so you can shoot free hand also at 1/15th or about and have still photos.

3 - back element of lens can be near the film, this increases much picture quality. This is the reason why the sharpest lenses existing are usually for rangefinders.

Of course they have many disadvantages:

- impossibility to visually control DOF

- impossibility to have a precise idea of what is in the frame and what is not

- impossibility to use long tele lenses

- need to use awkward additional viewfinders to use super wide angles

- and in general, lenses more expensive than SLR counterparts.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 1:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
OK.

1. A rangefinder cam has no mirror, thus there is no mirror slap; that means you can take a sharp photo with a longer exposure time than with an SLR. It no big problem to shoot at 1/15 sec with a 35mm lens.
So with my Jupiter 2.8/35 I can shoot with 1/15 sec at f2.8, with an ISO 400 film you can shoot inside and still get sharp pictures with an acceptable DoF (f2.8 is much more than e.g. f1.4 that would be necessary with an SLR).

2. A rangefinder ist quiet compared to a SLR, so candid photos of people who do not realise that they are photographed are easily possible.

3. A rangefinder cam is small, you can hide it in your pocket. Try this with an SLR. Wink

4. Due to the lack of mirror slap you always see the picture you shoot through the viewfinder, it is never blocked.

5. A rangefinder cam transports the classical "feeling" - this of course is very subjective. Running around with a rangefinder cam tells you something about the way Cartier-Bresson was looking at the world. He used a Leica rangefinder.

I guess you could find even more aspects...

EDIT: Oh, Orio, cross-posting again! Smile


PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 2:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I like rangefinders because:

1.) Smaller lenses

2.) Ability to see not just the final picture but around it - totally different way of framing...

3.) No mirror - which means that the viewfinder doesn't black out when you take a picture

4.) Rangefinder focusing miles better for low light photography

Rangefinders are new to me - but I have a Ricoh 500G, and two Olympus XA2 (which aren't really rangefinders though the XA is) which I'm experimenting with.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 2:15 pm    Post subject: Re: What about a FED-3? Reply with quote
Hello,

Jesito wrote:
...
After my latest three failures (my unpaid selling, and the never arriving Zenith and Konica cameras), I'd like to get a rangefinder. ...

Sorry to hear that.
About the FED and other russian rangefinder (Zorki too, but I don't know about Kiev) you must be careful with ... see this link http://www.fortunecity.com/marina/marine/569/rusrngfdrs/fed3.html at the section : "SETTING SHUTTER SPEED"
Good luck.

Cosmin.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 3:23 pm    Post subject: Re: What about a FED-3? Reply with quote
Orio wrote:
I think Veijo has a working FED.


Yes, I've got a FED-2, Model B (or c according to some classifications), which has the least number of things to go wrong as it lacks the slow shutter speed mechanism and a self-timer. See http://galactinus.net/vilva/retro/fed-2.html

Veijo


PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 3:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
LucisPictor wrote:

1. A rangefinder cam has no mirror, thus there is no mirror slap; that means you can take a sharp photo with a longer exposure time than with an SLR. It no big problem to shoot at 1/15 sec with a 35mm lens.
So with my Jupiter 2.8/35 I can shoot with 1/15 sec at f2.8, with an ISO 400 film you can shoot inside and still get sharp pictures with an acceptable DoF (f2.8 is much more than e.g. f1.4 that would be necessary with an SLR).


There isn't necessarily very much difference between an RF and an SLR in this respect as even with an RF you'll need steady hands at low speeds, and the old RF cameras may have a much stiffer shutter release than a modern SLR. OTOH, I haven't found the mirror slap of the 350D to be a problem - the 5D is another matter, there even the shutter slap may sometimes be a problem. Anyway, here is a recent hand-held shot at ISO 400, f/4.5, 1/25 s with the 140 mm Cooke mounted on the 350D:



I took three shots, and all of them were about as steady. I don't think I'd manage much better with any camera even with a shorter lens. This is one of my standard tests - not so much of the lens as of my hand Smile Shots with the FED at its minimum speed of 1/25 s and a 50 mm lens are about the same - or worse when I forget to take care.

Veijo


PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 3:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have noticed a small but clear improvement in my G2 shots compared to reflex cameras. I can't manage 1/15th but I can manage 1/25th most of the times, even when mounting the Sonnar 90.
On a reflex I can never use safely times slower than 1/40th unless I shoot with a super wide angle.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 4:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thank you guys to improve my knowledge, we have tons of Kiev, Zorki,Fed here.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 6:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?p=17562#17562

More data Smile


PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 6:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
It is always a matter of personal reference, actually.
If somebody is trained with SLRs he might not feel a difference, those guys who like to shoot with either kind of cam mostly say there is a difference, you can hold still an RF longer than an SLR. Well...

Attila, if you have easy access to Russian RF cams, you should try one. I went for the FED-3b because of its M39-LTM-mount. The Zorkis mostly have a proprietary mount.

Perhaps you can even make some money by selling these cams on ebay. Most Russian RFs you have to buy in Russia or the Ukraine with high shipping costs...


PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 7:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
They are going cheaply on Ebay too, profit is very little like on not popular lenses.I saw today a Fed-5 for 12 EUR I don't know is worked or not.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 8:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
But, how about the very little Pentax 110 ( http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?p=17588#17588 ). Unfortunately I don't think that there exists 110 format film http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/110_film

Had anyone any experience with this camera ?


PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 8:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I've read somewhere that the Pentax 110 was a great cam, but even if you could find some films, you would have difficulties to get them developed, I guess.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 8:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Attila wrote:
They are going cheaply on Ebay too, profit is very little like on not popular lenses.I saw today a Fed-5 for 12 EUR I don't know is worked or not.


Anyway, I think I have to travel to Budapest and get some RF cams. Wink


PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 8:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
One of the best fixed lens RF cameras ever....

http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/OlympusXA.html


PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 10:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
First of all, a big thanks to all of you guys!.
I'm overhelmed for the massive response, with such long and informative answers.
Now I've to digest all this information, but for sure I'll look for a Fed camera as well. I started today bidding for another Konica C35, let's see if this time I can put my hands on it.
Best regards,
Jes.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 8:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
This Zeiss presentation page about the ZM range of lenses is a confirmation of what I wrote before about the rangefinder lenses being the best possible.

http://www.zeiss.com/C12567A8003B58B9/ContentsWWWIntern/126DD8618C84E339C12572290055A5D7

Note in particular the sentences:

Quote:
From the lens designer’s perspective, a rangefinder camera offers an exciting advantage over single lens reflex (SLR) cameras: more space. After all, there is no moving reflex mirror and drive mechanism. This allows for a short distance between the last lens element and the film meaning more opportunities for designing of superior lens types, including high performing wide-angle lenses.


and:

Quote:
For our lens designers, the chance to develop the Carl Zeiss family of T* ZM-mount lenses was a dream come true. They were free to follow their passion in pursuit of perfection in lens performance, taking full advantage of our uncompromising symmetric lens designs.


and:

Quote:
The Carl Zeiss range of T* ZM-mount lenses offers the highest possible standards in terms of performance, reliability and, of course, image quality. Quite simply, they are superior in every way. You can count on highly advanced flare control for crisp and brilliant images, for example. And virtually zero geometric distortion, ensuring precise accuracy when reproducing shapes – especially useful when photographing products and architecture.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Film SLR / TLR Cameras
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2