Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,721   Posts: 1,514,958   Online: 1107
      
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 19
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    3

    yet another 'first rangefinder' question...

    I'm sure - I know, I've been browsing the forum - the regulars get these a couple of times a month, and I'vebeen back a few pages to see what the advice is... but none of the other threads quite answers my query. So here it is.

    Having messed about with a Zorki 4a as a kid which my dad bought, pretty much by accident as far as I can tell, I've slid back into photography after purloining a Fuji 6900 digital my wife bought and from there to an Olympus XA2 bought for a song off eBay. I've had fun with both, but the Fuji's too slow, too automated, and cracks through batteries, and the Olympus is great (realising what a good lens is like was similar to listening to a decent stereo for the first time) but I'd like a longer lens.

    I figure I can get a lot better quality film camera for the money than digital, I prefer being more in control, and I don't like being in thrall to expensive electronics.

    What I think I'm after (and correct me if I'm wrong) is a camera to use when the XA2 isn't right - portraiture and any situation when I can't barge into the middle of the action. So I'm thinking of a rangefinder with a longer lens, say in the 70-90 bracket. And cheapish. In an ideal world, with an ideal bank account, I'd go for a Bessa as entry level but life's just not ideal.

    So something Russian seems likely. But what? How much? Where from (I'm in the UK).

    All wisdom, rampant prejudice, and wry comments much appreciated.

    Matt

    PS. I'm not entirely averse to an old-but-good SLR either, a K1000 or OM10 say.

  2. #2
    RobLewis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Evergreen Park, IL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    167
    Images
    14
    I don't like people from Texas.
    Oh, not that kind of rampant prejudice...
    I have nothing of value to add to your quest. But good luck anyway.

  3. #3
    DBP
    DBP is offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Alexandria, VA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,882
    Images
    34
    Generally speaking, the longer the lens, the more attractive an SLR becomes, due to both parallax issues and focusing accuracy with shorter rangefinder bases. Given that, the best choices for longer lenses among the FSU rangefinders would be the FED 2, Kievs, and Zorki 5/6 due to longer base lengths.

    Screw mount SLRs being as cheap as they are now, why not do both?

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Westminster, Maryland, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    1,504
    If you like long glass, get a Pentax K-1000. Rangefinders are great for wide angle to very short telephoto.
    When I grow up, I want to be a photographer.

    http://www.walterpcalahan.com/Photography/index.html

  5. #5
    Brian Jeffery's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Altrincham, Cheshire, UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    317
    Hi Matt, you don't say what your budget is. However, you can pick up Canon A series cameras off ebay for a song at the moment. I picked up an AE1-Program for £35 complete with 50mm 1.8 lens. This camera comes complete with Shutter Priority, Program and Manual overide modes. However, most the A series cameras are great in my opinion (particularly the A-1). You can also pick up prime lenses for damn cheap although the 85mm 1.8 is probably one of the more expensive lenses going for arount £80. You'll should get the 100mm cheaper. One drawback with most cameras of this age is that the light seals are liable to need replacing. You might want to pay slightly more for a camera with the seals already replaced.


    Brian

  6. #6
    Mark Antony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    East Anglia,UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    772
    Images
    38
    Yes film cameras are cheap, I bought a Nikon F2 for £100 (I like no batteries)
    But I'd second the Canon A1/AE1 mainly because FD lenses are so cheap, it would be possible to get a 28, 50 and 100 for peanuts.
    I loved the FD100 F2.8 sharp good contrast and worth nothing!
    Here is a picture taken with it in 1991.
    http://www.pbase.com/mark_antony/image/59819421
    regards
    Mark

  7. #7
    DBP
    DBP is offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Alexandria, VA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,882
    Images
    34
    Quote Originally Posted by Pinholemaster View Post
    If you like long glass, get a Pentax K-1000. Rangefinders are great for wide angle to very short telephoto.
    I would actually advise against the K-1000, for only one reason. It gets recommended so often, especially to students, that almost any other reasonably similar K-mount body will be cheaper, and the ones from Ricoh and Chinon amazingly so. This is not to denigrate the K-1000 in any way, it's just that the market has overvalued a good camera.

  8. #8
    copake_ham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    NYC or Copake or Tucson
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    4,092
    Images
    56
    Without knowing your budget it's hard to make a recommendation - but I agree that a RF is probably not the best solution.

    The Nikon Nikkormats are going for real cheap on eBay. They are a bit heavy since they were built to last forever.

    You can often find a "package" on eBay that will include a Nikkor 50mm/2.0 lens and a early model Vivitar (or Tamrin etc.) 105mm.

    Anyway, good luck in your renewed photography endeavors - and don't forget to post a thread on the "Intro to APUG" forum!

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    726
    Quote Originally Posted by Pinholemaster View Post
    If you like long glass, get a Pentax K-1000. Rangefinders are great for wide angle to very short telephoto.
    Any decent rangefinder should be perfectly up to the 70 or 90mm lenses he mentions though.

    David.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Oxford, England
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    505
    Images
    35
    I started with a Fed-4 which is still my favourite of the three or four rangefinders I've owned. Not everyone's favourite choice but mine focuses really accurately. I have an accessory finder and Jupiter-9 85mm lens for it. Results are good although I have occasionally messed up the framing due to parallax issues with the accessory finder.

    The Jupiter-9 is a little soft and lacking in contrast wide-open but quite good otherwise.

    If you are going with an SLR the choices are endless. I bought a Pentax P50 a while back for under 20 pounds and it's a great camera -- much better than the endlessly recommended K1000 in the sense that is has proper depth of field preview and some exposure automation if you want it with A-series or later lenses. These days it's my main SLR.

    K-mount lenses are still holding their value though so getting good lenses can be pricier than a cheapskate like me would like.

    I also use an EOS 650 with an M42-EOS adapter and various screwmount lenses and which was also amazingly cheap -- I paid about 15 for the camera and another 10 or so for the adapter.

    Film SLRs are just crazily cheap. The lenses tend to be more pricy if they are lenses that can be mounted on a dSLR (with adapter). That's why the Canon FD-mount suggestion above might be useful.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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