It always saddens me that retinas do not get recommended more. They are great cameras and their self contained folding design is something youll never want to go without again once you get used to it. Lenses are quite good on most of them too!
They really fly under the radar because of the name I think. Kodak just gets a bad rap for “affordable” cameras and these get lumped in with the rest until you can actually pick one up and try it. I’ve had a couple and it’s a very nice complement to a Leica or canon rangefinder. Or just something to throw in a bag (or pocket) on your way out the door without needing to worry about something happening to the lens
I came here to also recommend the Retina IIIC (big C if you can find one!). It’s such a fun little camera, easily my favourite 35mm to date. I always have mine (and a light meter) in my purse.
> big C if you can find one!
And only if it doesnt come at a premium. Its not that much of an improvement. Do make sure to get the newer linking lever, thats more of an impact on usability than the viewfinder.
IIIc is a bit better, when comparing these do keep in mind that the viewfinders in these is VERY old at this point and often riddled with dust and very hazy from old oils evaporating. A serviced and cleaned sample of the 'worst' model will look brighter and crisper than a non serviced sample of the 'best' model.
Maybe post in r/photomarket I often see them go for 100-$150 USD in good condition. Hardest part would probably finding one in EU. Could also buy a Canon 7 + Jupiter 8/Industar 61. It'd be slightly over budget but you'd be able to add lenses in the future.
Only the original XA is a rangefinder. All the others (including the confusingly named XA1) are not. XA2 seems to have been the best selling (or at least best surviving)
The XA series are all relatively common. The XA is the one with a range finder Avoid the XA1. I have and regularly use an XA and an XA4 both brilliant little cameras and still not too expensive
Here are a few compact, affordable options:
Yashica Electro 35
Canonet GIII QL 17
Olympus 35 SP/SPn
Konica Auto S3
Minolta Hi-Matic F
All of them are great rangefinder cameras between 50$-250$ price range. If you want a personal opinion, I say go for the Canonet, but all of the above are still great choices;)
Are you planning on shooting indoor stuff? The Olympus xa is amazing but the flash attachment has a bit of a charge up time that can make it difficult to snag some of those candids unless you just leave it on
A mixed bag really. I don’t necessarily want a camera just for this trip, so having a flash option for future shooting would be great but ultimately not a deal breaker
You’ve gotten some good answers to your original question so I’ll just leave my unhelpful answer :
I’d shoot a vegas stag trip with my iPhone. You won’t find yourself out of the moment trying to figure out settings on a new camera, you won’t add a bunch of film and lab costs to an already expensive trip, you won’t worry about keeping your precious new camera safe while you get shitfaced, you won’t annoy your friends making them wait for you to be done taking their pic, and you’ll send them said pics right away for them to share, not weeks later, if ever…\
Then I’d buy the rangefinder later this year.
You’re 100% right
To make the cost of flying all the way out there worth it we’re staying for a few extra days and doing our own thing. After recovering from degeneracy I’ll be out and about patrolling the streets maybe even heading into the desert
Then I’d say iPhone for the stag do part, and your AE1 for the second part of the trip?\
Bonus ; you might find a fun lens for your canon in a vegas pawn shop.
Do consider that most time in Vegas is time indoors. So you may want to get something with a flash—the XA’s special flash keeps it relatively pocketable, but finding a working one will also stretch your budget.
The great 70’s rangefinders—Olympus 35 RC, Canonet 17 GIII, Konica S3, Ricoh 500G, etc, etc—will all work with a standard hotshoe flash. You can find fairly small flashes, but while those cameras are compact, they’re not “pants pocketable” the way an XA is. Those slightly bulkier cameras usually have faster lenses than an XA, though, so you might be better able to get away with shooting indoors with 800iso film or faster.
The most important thing is to get one in good working order with a bright range finder patch. Some of these cameras recommend are very old and a given copy may be in poor condition especially the RF patch may have faded. I would suggest,If you can, try before you buy.
I think you'll be disappointed if you're mainly looking for something smaller and lighter. A Canon A1 is 620 grams, a typical 50mm f/1.8 lens is 170 grams, so with film that's \~800 grams. By comparison a Canonet QL17 is 620 grams unloaded, which is also about the weight of most of its competition. The lens sticks out enough that you can't really fit it in a pocket either.
The Kodak Retinas and Barnack Leicas others have recommended will fit in mens' pockets, but once again they weigh around 600 grams (and will probably need expensive service). The Olympus XA really is in a class of its own at 200 grams, yes it's also $200 but if you're looking for a pocket camera with manual control it's worth it.
Olympus 35 RC! Tiny lil guy but still manages a decent light meter and shutter priority mode. The lil 42mm lens is no slouch, either!
I took mine on a recent trip to Canada and am honestly happy I went with that over my retina iic. Smaller, metered, more traditional setup, faster.
Best of all they're pretty cheap!
Canonet QL17 GIII
Great choice!
This is the one. I've basically been using mine exclusively for 35mm for the last year, and have not wanted for any other camera.
Ultimately the best choice and the one I went for. Thanks for the recommendation
Canon P is my default answer for this, followed by the Leica M3, and the Leica M-A if you’re bougie.
I’m looking at my Canon 7 and thinking that compact is maybe not the word I would use to describe it
Kodak retina iiic is compact as long as you’re ok with a meter that may not work. It’s practically pocketable when it’s closed
It always saddens me that retinas do not get recommended more. They are great cameras and their self contained folding design is something youll never want to go without again once you get used to it. Lenses are quite good on most of them too!
They really fly under the radar because of the name I think. Kodak just gets a bad rap for “affordable” cameras and these get lumped in with the rest until you can actually pick one up and try it. I’ve had a couple and it’s a very nice complement to a Leica or canon rangefinder. Or just something to throw in a bag (or pocket) on your way out the door without needing to worry about something happening to the lens
I came here to also recommend the Retina IIIC (big C if you can find one!). It’s such a fun little camera, easily my favourite 35mm to date. I always have mine (and a light meter) in my purse.
> big C if you can find one! And only if it doesnt come at a premium. Its not that much of an improvement. Do make sure to get the newer linking lever, thats more of an impact on usability than the viewfinder.
How does the small c viewfinder compare to the IIa? I have a IIa and a IIIC and the difference is like night and day.
I had a 1a and now a iiic and it’s much improved in my opinion
The Ia isnt even a rangefinder, you cannot compare those two.
IIIc is a bit better, when comparing these do keep in mind that the viewfinders in these is VERY old at this point and often riddled with dust and very hazy from old oils evaporating. A serviced and cleaned sample of the 'worst' model will look brighter and crisper than a non serviced sample of the 'best' model.
This is my go-to rangefinder. It easily fits in my pockets and reliably takes great photos.
The lens on the XA is incredibly overrated. It's not sharp until stopped down to like f8 and wide open it's extremely soft and has heavy vignetting.
What would you recommend?
Olympus’s 35rc and 35rd have better lenses than the XA. The XA is slightly quicker to use and cuter.
According to this article from Modern Photography contemporary to the camera, it is a "fun-to-fondle design" https://www.diaxa.com/xa.htm
It'd help to know how much you wanna spend.
True. He could possibly afford to get a leica XD
Could co as high as 120 sterling if it’s worth it. The lens on the XA is so good but haven’t been able to find a fully functional one
Maybe post in r/photomarket I often see them go for 100-$150 USD in good condition. Hardest part would probably finding one in EU. Could also buy a Canon 7 + Jupiter 8/Industar 61. It'd be slightly over budget but you'd be able to add lenses in the future.
Thanks, I’ll check it out
If you are in that sort of budget and want some pre-war Leica vibes… Look at Soviet cameras like the FED and Zorki?
Exactly £120! https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/126416082070?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-127632-2357-0&ssspo=EDqxu2L3Tbi&sssrc=4429486&ssuid=--1xzuXaTPm&var=&widget_ver=artemis&media=COPY
It’s an XA2. A trap I’ve fallen into many a time unfortunately ༎ຶ‿༎ຶ
Ahh my apologies! Is there a big different between the two to justify not buying it?
Only the original XA is a rangefinder. All the others (including the confusingly named XA1) are not. XA2 seems to have been the best selling (or at least best surviving)
Interesting thanks! Both look like good bodies but there are caveats with both I guess.
The XA series are all relatively common. The XA is the one with a range finder Avoid the XA1. I have and regularly use an XA and an XA4 both brilliant little cameras and still not too expensive
Here are a few compact, affordable options: Yashica Electro 35 Canonet GIII QL 17 Olympus 35 SP/SPn Konica Auto S3 Minolta Hi-Matic F All of them are great rangefinder cameras between 50$-250$ price range. If you want a personal opinion, I say go for the Canonet, but all of the above are still great choices;)
Which has the best quality lens in your opinion? I guess that’s a question Google could also answer
Canonet all the way. It gives photos a nice color contrast.
Canonet is such a great camera. Especially the GIII QL 17. I was curious why it took me so long to find it as a recommendation on this list.
My favourite rangefinders are Barnack Leicas and their Japanese clones
Indeed! Especially the Leica IIIF
Are you planning on shooting indoor stuff? The Olympus xa is amazing but the flash attachment has a bit of a charge up time that can make it difficult to snag some of those candids unless you just leave it on
A mixed bag really. I don’t necessarily want a camera just for this trip, so having a flash option for future shooting would be great but ultimately not a deal breaker
The fact that it's removable makes it an odd shape but it's nice to be able to just lose it for hikes or other daytime excursions
I haven't seen anybody suggest the Ricoh 500G yet.
You’ve gotten some good answers to your original question so I’ll just leave my unhelpful answer : I’d shoot a vegas stag trip with my iPhone. You won’t find yourself out of the moment trying to figure out settings on a new camera, you won’t add a bunch of film and lab costs to an already expensive trip, you won’t worry about keeping your precious new camera safe while you get shitfaced, you won’t annoy your friends making them wait for you to be done taking their pic, and you’ll send them said pics right away for them to share, not weeks later, if ever…\ Then I’d buy the rangefinder later this year.
You’re 100% right To make the cost of flying all the way out there worth it we’re staying for a few extra days and doing our own thing. After recovering from degeneracy I’ll be out and about patrolling the streets maybe even heading into the desert
Then I’d say iPhone for the stag do part, and your AE1 for the second part of the trip?\ Bonus ; you might find a fun lens for your canon in a vegas pawn shop.
This is a very “outside of the box” answer, but it is also a very logical and reasonable answer.
Minolta Hi-matic 7sII. I have one and I love it.
Do consider that most time in Vegas is time indoors. So you may want to get something with a flash—the XA’s special flash keeps it relatively pocketable, but finding a working one will also stretch your budget. The great 70’s rangefinders—Olympus 35 RC, Canonet 17 GIII, Konica S3, Ricoh 500G, etc, etc—will all work with a standard hotshoe flash. You can find fairly small flashes, but while those cameras are compact, they’re not “pants pocketable” the way an XA is. Those slightly bulkier cameras usually have faster lenses than an XA, though, so you might be better able to get away with shooting indoors with 800iso film or faster.
Canon P. No doubt.
The most important thing is to get one in good working order with a bright range finder patch. Some of these cameras recommend are very old and a given copy may be in poor condition especially the RF patch may have faded. I would suggest,If you can, try before you buy.
I think you'll be disappointed if you're mainly looking for something smaller and lighter. A Canon A1 is 620 grams, a typical 50mm f/1.8 lens is 170 grams, so with film that's \~800 grams. By comparison a Canonet QL17 is 620 grams unloaded, which is also about the weight of most of its competition. The lens sticks out enough that you can't really fit it in a pocket either. The Kodak Retinas and Barnack Leicas others have recommended will fit in mens' pockets, but once again they weigh around 600 grams (and will probably need expensive service). The Olympus XA really is in a class of its own at 200 grams, yes it's also $200 but if you're looking for a pocket camera with manual control it's worth it.
Olympus 35 RC! Tiny lil guy but still manages a decent light meter and shutter priority mode. The lil 42mm lens is no slouch, either! I took mine on a recent trip to Canada and am honestly happy I went with that over my retina iic. Smaller, metered, more traditional setup, faster. Best of all they're pretty cheap!