Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,908   Posts: 1,521,505   Online: 926
      
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 60
  1. #11

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    32
    Not true, *if* a selenium meter is working properly, it's actually more linear and less influenced by colour than a CdS meter.
    I've also never seen a Selenium meter "suddenly" die.

    The Retinas have Selenium cellss which seem to be far more durable and lasting than most.
    I have 2 Kodalux meters (made by the same company which made the in-camera Retina meters) which are spot-on.
    Also my old Sekonic Studio Pro can still be used as a reference...

    Selenium meters are basically an "all or nothing deal": either they work and are sensitive enough, or they're dead (or largely so)...
    I've had far more insidious and complicated problems with CdS cells.
    I've never used one, but that's what I've read and been told. Sorry about the misinformation.

    I don't understand though what problems can be caused by CdS cells. The only problem I have faced is the discontinued mercury batteries.

  2. #12
    Matthew Thompson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Quispamsis
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by perkeleellinen View Post
    I think the Olympus 35RC could be what you're looking for:

    http://home.comcast.net/~youngds/Cla...lympus35RC.htm
    I'll second this. Small enough to carry everywhere, sharp little lens, fairly well built.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Cape Canaveral, FL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    97
    Images
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by tomalophicon View Post
    If anyone knows of any camera that fits this bill, please post here.
    You did not say if a built-in meter was a requirement.

    Japanese rangefinders
    * Olympus 35RC
    * Ricoh 500G aka Sears rf|35
    * Yamato Pax M3 (also sold under different names, no meter)

    Folding German rangefinders from the 50's
    * Retina IIIC
    * Retina IIC (no meter)
    * Agfa Karat 36/Ansco Karomat (no meter)

    American:
    * Kodak Signet 35 (no meter)

    Neither the Oly nor the Ricoh need the battery in manual mode, but the meter doesn't read in manual mode either. You should buy one that already has been CLA'd with new back seals. A clean rangefinder makes a huge difference. These have 42 or 40mm f/2.8 lenses, squarish aperture blades, and lack slow shutter speeds.

    As said, the Retina's are compact when folded, but very heavy. (A IIIc weighs about 1.5lbs compared to the 35RC's under 1lb.) There is a difference between the big-C and the little-c versions: the big C have much larger viewfinders (and command a higher price.) But the III has an 50mm f/2 lens as do many of the Agfa/Ansco cameras (the II is a 50mm f/2.8)

    The Pax has a 45mm f/2.8 and Signet has a 44mm f/3.5. Both only have shutters to 1/300th and no slow speeds (the Kodak is manually cocked.) The body of the Pax is the same length and height as the 35RC but the lens sticks out a bit more. The Kodak is a bit taller.

  4. #14
    tomalophicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Canberra, ACT.
    Shooter
    Sub 35mm
    Posts
    1,562
    Images
    24
    Wowzers.
    No a light meter isn't a requirement. I'll be guessing and using a hand-held meter.

    So many to choose from. I'm gonna have to to do some major research.

    Keep em coming.

    The Bessa R sounds great but a bit expensive for me at the moment.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Jersey Channel Islands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    430
    Blog Entries
    2
    Retinas are very good cameras, also consider voightlander vitomatic, if you get one with a color skoper lens you will get one of the best "tesser types",if you can find one with the ultron lens,even better, big viewfinder,easy to use, built in selimun meter,maybe not working, I have two of them with the skoper lens and love them,Richard

  6. #16
    Anscojohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,727
    Images
    13
    American:
    * Kodak Signet 35 (no meter)


    The Pax has a 45mm f/2.8 and Signet has a 44mm f/3.5. Both only have shutters to 1/300th and no slow speeds (the Kodak is manually cocked.) The body of the Pax is the same length and height as the 35RC but the lens sticks out a bit more. The Kodak is a bit taller.[/QUOTE]
    ************
    I have a Signet 35 I do not use. I would sell it for 20 dollars plus shipping. It's a heavy, clumsy little beast, but that Ektar lens is stunningly sharp. The shutter was CLAed about two rolls of film ago. Oops, I see you are in Australia. Hardly worth shipping to the Antipodes, methinks.
    John, Mount Vernon, Virginia USA

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Oceania
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    388
    Russian

    Zorki 4k/ industar 61 panda lens, no battery,no meter. Small, great lens,and so cheap you can get half a dozen. That way if one breaks, just grab another.

    Regards
    CW

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,686
    Quote Originally Posted by pakeha View Post
    Zorki 4k/ industar 61 panda lens, no battery,no meter. Small, great lens,and so cheap you can get half a dozen. That way if one breaks, just grab another.
    Does that mean you have to carry half a dozen, or at least two, so that if one breaks, you can grab another?

  9. #19
    Ria
    Ria is offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    160
    Images
    49
    I have a Retina IIa which I use and like. It is not, in my opinion, particularly difficult to operate. It is not, in my opinion particularly heavy; although you certainly couldn't carry it around in your shirt pocket. Of course, everything is relative,

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Oxford, England
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    505
    Images
    35
    Having owned both an Olympus XA and a Retina IIc, for me there'd be no contest. The Retina takes _much_ better pictures. In fact, I didn't really like the rendering of the XA lens at all.

    The Retina is heavier, but, for me has better ergonomics, also. I think the only downside to the Retina is that the viewfinder is a little pokey and dim.

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin