Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,051   Posts: 1,561,163   Online: 819
      
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 38
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Hollis, NH
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    732
    Images
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Xmas View Post
    The two most practical bodies are the
    Canon P
    M4-2
    Both are fast handling slick machimes with superb viewfinders, and will accept any LTM lens, the M4-2 needs the LTM to M adapter.
    The most practical lens is the
    J12 (35mm) for the M4-2, the exception the J12 probably wont fit most Canon VI-T, VI-L or P's
    Canon f/2.8 for the P
    get a beaten up shooter...
    if you only use a 35mm the VI-T is really slick trigger wind.

    Noel
    According to what I've read at cameraquest.com, many Canon P 's have problems with flare in the viewfinder which is difficult to correct. What do you think of the Canon 7?

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Hollis, NH
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    732
    Images
    3
    I also read that due to some baffles in the Canon P they are not suitable for use with very wide angle lenses

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Hollis, NH
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    732
    Images
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Jersey Vic View Post
    If $ are an issue, how about a Zorki IV Leica-clone? With a 50mm 2.0 it's $50 or so and if you like the experience you could always mount the lens on an M later. The M's are at a low $-wise as are the III so you'll never lose much if any $ on them.
    Is this the same camera as a Zorki-4? How are the rangefinders in these cameras? Do you know what the baseline is?

  4. #24
    Jersey Vic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Columbia County NY
    Shooter
    Holga
    Posts
    3,919
    Images
    187
    Holding one in my hand..yes it's the "Zopkuu' - 4"
    I have the 50th anniversary (??) model.
    Baseline is width ? The rangefinder is clear and accurate and intergrated with the viewfinder and 1.5 inch wide between the windows.
    The camera is approx 5 inches.
    Not a Leica but I could hit someone with it in a seedy alley and take fine contrasty sunny f16 photos when we ran out of it. (I'm a native Bronx-ite)

    Very good review:

    http://cameras.alfredklomp.com/zorki4/
    Last edited by Jersey Vic; 09-13-2007 at 12:27 PM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: additional info
    Holga: if it was any more analog, you'd need a chisel.

  5. #25
    Rolleiflexible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York City
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,274
    Images
    31
    I use a Leica IIIa on those rare occasions where my Rolleiflex will not do. Don't believe those naysayers who claim the camera is hard to use -- it is not. It has some quirks that take maybe two minutes to sort out.

    I don't use the Russian cameras but my Russian photographer friend says he swears by the Fed-2 and swears at the Zorki line. He says the build quality is better and the Feds feel more solid.

  6. #26
    Jersey Vic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Columbia County NY
    Shooter
    Holga
    Posts
    3,919
    Images
    187
    Feds are smaller and more IIIa like, Zorkis are bigger and easier to focus and brighter. Both are reliable for the $$. I've used both pretty extensively.

    IIIx's are easy to use but film loading is slow (akin to a Rollei compared to a Bessa or an M but hen again, you do get 36 images.

    If getting a Leica, check the curtains for cracking (especially on f's) or tears in the stitching (a's) and the slow speeds.
    Holga: if it was any more analog, you'd need a chisel.

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    UK
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    3,202
    Quote Originally Posted by dslater View Post
    According to what I've read at cameraquest.com, many Canon P 's have problems with flare in the viewfinder which is difficult to correct. What do you think of the Canon 7?
    The Canon 7 have meters which may mean more maintenance ($) the cadding may be thinner, P and earlier are built like Ru tanks, the 7s like UK tanks.
    The pre 7 Canons do have different viewfinder (the frames are not projected like M's) optics - you have to look through them in dim light before you buy - finder problems also occur e.g. M3, and M4-2, cleaning a M4-2 is cheap, the M3 and early Canons may be more of a (>$) problem.
    Both my VI-L and P have tarnished optics but last Sat two M owners spent ages fondling them in dim lighting and said you cannot see the rangefinder frame like a M but the focusing coincidence is just as easy, their reference M2 had just been CLAed. The rangefinder is subjective you need to do the dim light test yourself to see if you are happy, with both the body you are buying, and the Canons P double image, it is not like an M, and can be off putting initially.
    But to answer your question I am not troubled by flare & later Ms than mid M4-2 can also flare badly, but there is an upgrade available. Take the body you are buying out into the sun, even if it is an early M4-2.
    The Canon lenses tend to be superb even after 40 years, but they also may need an internal clean, if it needs a clean ask for a discount. the Ru lenses are ok alas the j12 I have does not fit either body I have, it has also a tendancy to flare, but it is real cheap.
    If you have a local brick camera shop want until they have a Canon in the window, they dont sell that quickly, if you like it buy, buying one on e-bay more risky, if it shows signs of damage and the shutter will have more wrinkles then me, ask for discount, the shutters are normally ok wrinked. Dont stick a finger in the shutter after you buy...
    The Canon kit tends to be a lot cheaper than leitz, fewer collectors.
    Last edited by Xmas; 09-13-2007 at 12:40 PM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: dyslexia

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Hollis, NH
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    732
    Images
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Jersey Vic View Post
    Baseline is width ? The rangefinder is clear and accurate and intergrated with the viewfinder and 1.5 inch wide between the windows.
    The camera is approx 5 inches.
    Not a Leica but I could hit someone with it in a seedy alley and take fine contrasty sunny f16 photos when we ran out of it. (I'm a native Bronx-ite)

    Very good review:

    http://cameras.alfredklomp.com/zorki4/
    The effective baseline is the distance between the 2 windows multiplied by the magnification of the viewfinder. Knowing this can give you an idea of how long/fast a lens you can focus accurately. Sounds like the baseline is about 38mm. if the viewfinder is about .72x magnification, then the effective baseline is about 27mm. For comparison, a Leica M3 has an effective baseline of about 62mm while a Canon 7 is about 47mm

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Hollis, NH
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    732
    Images
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Xmas View Post
    The Canon 7 have meters which may mean more maintenance ($) the cadding may be thinner, P and earlier are built like Ru tanks, the 7s like UK tanks.
    The pre 7 Canons do have different viewfinder (the frames are not projected like M's) optics - you have to look through them in dim light before you buy - finder problems also occur e.g. M3, and M4-2, cleaning a M4-2 is cheap, the M3 and early Canons may be more of a (>$) problem.
    Both my VI-L and P have tarnished optics but last Sat two M owners spent ages fondling them in dim lighting and said you cannot see the rangefinder frame like a M but the focusing coincidence is just as easy, their reference M2 had just been CLAed. The rangefinder is subjective you need to do the dim light test yourself to see if you are happy, with both the body you are buying, and the Canons P double image, it is not like an M, and can be off putting initially.
    But to answer your question I am not troubled by flare & later Ms than mid M4-2 can also flare badly, but there is an upgrade available. Take the body you are buying out into the sun, even if it is an early M4-2.
    The Canon lenses tend to be superb even after 40 years, but they also may need an internal clean, if it needs a clean ask for a discount. the Ru lenses are ok alas the j12 I have does not fit either body I have, it has also a tendancy to flare, but it is real cheap.
    If you have a local brick camera shop want until they have a Canon in the window, they dont sell that quickly, if you like it buy, buying one on e-bay more risky, if it shows signs of damage and the shutter will have more wrinkles then me, ask for discount, the shutters are normally ok wrinked. Dont stick a finger in the shutter after you buy...
    The Canon kit tends to be a lot cheaper than leitz, fewer collectors.
    thanks for the information. The only problem is that I don't know of any camera shops near me that carry these old rangefinders, So I am limited to either ebay or KEH - makes it difficult to try the camera before buying it. If money were no object, I'd just get a Leica, but that's too expensive. So, if you had to buy one before trying it out, which would you choose?
    Dan

  10. #30
    Anscojohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,727
    Images
    13

    Screw thread mount

    Some of the Russian knock-offs of the screw mount Leicas were very look a like, others not so. Even the real lookalikes were built more lightly and do not have the feel. Still, you can put the Leica lenses there-on, and they usually work perfectly.

    The Russian cameras taking the same lenses which are less look a like can be downright ugly, but they do work. My Leicafriend has an old Zorki 4 which he uses with his screw thread leica lenses with perfectly good results. I have a bright-red-leather- bodied Fed with an Industar lens. Cost my 20 bucks plus shipping, used, from a guy in Ukraine. It actually works ok. Truth to tell, though, I bought it because of the red covering more than for any other reason, just so I could say I have one.

    John, Mount Vernon, Virginia USA

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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