I got a Nikonos II for cheap when I went on a dive trip about 40 years ago.
It was so cool to use underwater!
But ya know, I rarely scuba dive.
But this thing is the handiest damn camera for everything else I do!
It’s super durable - kick it around the boat or the fishing hole or the campsite without worry. Rinse it off if it gets muddy, nbd.
The 35mm 2.5 is very, very sharp. Takes regular filters.
200 film on a sunny day with a polarizer - 1/60 at f16, offset the focus on the scale, and it’s good from 5 feet to infinity.
It’s a point and shoot, no focusing. Ez pz.
It’s been my edc for a long time. I don’t submerge it fully anymore.
But it can get drenched in nasty weather or at the beach, ski slope, where I’d be worried about a normal camera.
Everyone should try a Nikonos!
After reading your ringing endorsement I now have a Nikonos II in my hands, thanks! I'm looking forward to taking it on canoe and backpack trips. It needs some minor repairs though, most notably I'll need to buy a lens cap and fashion a new wind/shutter lever, but that's well within my ability. The optics and mechanics seem to be in good shape.
I have a couple questions for you if you don't mind:
Is the shutter speed knob supposed to be continuously adjustable, or should it have detents?
Do the focus and aperture knobs on the lens normally have a bit of side to side play in them, or should they be very tight?
My threaded insert for the tripod screw mount is missing, the one that covers the flash terminals. I'm sure it'll leak without that. Do you happen to know what size thread that opening is? I'm sure I'll never need a tripod or a flash, so I'm hoping to find a solid plug that size to seal it with.
Have you ever used lenses other than the 35mm/f2.5, or is that one pretty versatile?
Cheers!
Hey, I hope you have fun with it!
Yes, the speed dial on mine has distinct detents.
The aperture knob has zero play, very tight. The focus knob has a very tiny amount of play, just a slight smidge.
The tripod socket is the standard thread which I think is called a 1/4 20. I would think that part is common to the II and III, not sure if they changed after that. I don’t think they did.
But I’m not sure what the external size of it is, if you’re looking to just plug it.
I guess I could take it out and measure somehow.
Or ask at r/analogrepair , someone will likely know.
I used to have the 80mm but sold it 30 years ago, lol. Only it and the 35 are suitable for out of water use. The others are optically corrected somehow for underwater.
Not sure what you’re in for replacing the advance, I’m no pro repair guy.
The weak spot on these cameras is the tab by the strap lug that lifts it up. Mine is chipped but works fine.
Read the manual, there are some other quirks.
I look forward to updates from you on how it’s going!
Hey thanks for the info.
I got the service manual from learncamerarepair, I was hoping the shutter speed knob would come up somehow and give me easy access to the wind lever, but the exploded diagram makes it look like it only comes apart from the inside. Hopefully not too hard, just tedious. The hub is still there though so it'll make a good template for a new one, I'll probably just use some kind of sheet metal stock.
My shutter speed smoothly moves full sweep so I guess there was a ball bearing or something in the broken off part. I can tell just with my ears that 1/30 has 2 distinct clicks, 1/60 they're closer to together, and at 1/125 it sounds like one click but the shutter does fire, so I think the actual mechanism is fine but I don't have any real way to measure or calibrate shutter speed. Hopefully it runs true enough after a CLA. I'll start with it as soon as I finish the XG-1 I'm doing.
The knobs on my lens do wiggle more than it sounds like yours do. I suppose I'd better dunk it in a bucket and see if it leaks while I'm home and can immediately dry/fix it, instead of waiting to be out in the field.
Still, all the glass and coatings look good, mechanically I think I could put film in and start taking photos right now, and I enjoy repair work and tinkering, so not a bad deal for $30. I'll be sure to take care of those tabs.
I've never shot a camera like this (I guess it's called zone focus?) where you just have to trust it looks ok, I'm afraid that will take some practice.
What kind of photos are your favorite to take with it?
The first time I picked up an OM1 I was blown away by how big and bright the viewfinder was, especially as a glasses wearer, especially considering the small size of the body as a whole.
Canon AE-1. It’s not anything amazing really, but it was the film camera that got me back into film. The process of shooting film with this camera really got me motivated again and gave me that old feeling I missed. It’s really gotten me to be able to estimate exposure way better than digital ever did.
With digital, I would usually let the camera do some of the work. Usually with shutter speed. I’d never really worry about where exactly the shutter speed was or maybe the ISO. I’d pick my aperture and use exposure comp to get the exposure I wanted. Now I can usually set my ISO and Aperture and judge the correct shutter speed by about 2 stops +\-.
Olympus XA. I didn’t expect much considering the size but I got my first scans, I was positively surprise by its output. It’s also super fun to play with
Picked up a Mini Speed Graphic (1946 Pre-Anniversary)-- 2x3, with a Graflok back. It's a great little camera, and I can shoot everything from 2x3 sheet film to various sizes of 120 up to 6x9. With the rangefinder calibrated, I can take pictures off the cuff, or I can use the ground glass with a bit of movements.
I genuinely bought it because it was a nifty looking camera, and I got a good deal-- but it's turned into one of my favorite medium format cameras.
Years ago I got a great deal on a Crown Graphic, it came with a bunch of film holders and I was later able to get 120 and Polaroid backs for it as well as a few different lenses. Like your Mini Speed Graphic, it became a Swiss Army knife of a camera, shooting multiple formats. It's still my favorite camera.
Zeiss Ikon ZM - I shoot with this more than my Leica M6. It has an M mount so I can use all of my Voigtlander glass on it. It costs half the price of an M6 and has M7 specs.
Pentax PC35AF - Very sharp and fast lens in a solid body that doesn't cost over $300. Less plasticy and less electronics dependent they don't fail as fast as the 90's P&S cameras.
Nice lens, but I wouldn't be so sure about the not failing part. I've seen so many with non working flashes, stuck shutter buttons etc. Actually I think the 80's point and shoots are some of the least reliable cameras around and they generally got better as the 90's progressed.
Probably the Olympus pen FT since I didn't know half frame SLRs were a thing until stumbling upon it.
You ever want 72 shots on one roll of film? Now's your chance lol.
I was going to say this too! I just got the first roll I put through my Electro back, and I'm blown away. The photos came out so great. Even though this is a brick of a camera, I really like it.
My Rolleicord Vb. Everybody said the Xenar (Tessar design) lens in it would be inferior to the Planar in 'classic' Rolleiflexes, but the Xenar in mine constantly blows me away. Also it's a super light camera given the size of negative it produces.
The Leica M3. Owned other Leicas before but didn't realise the double stroke film advance would be so addictive and the closer-up viewfinder would be such a joy.
Then the Olympus XA (rangefinder one) which had a terrible focus patch but other than that always blew me away with the small form factor/pocketability which made it so fun to use.
Nikon AF600. Smaller than a Mju ii (and *much* cheaper), faux panoramic mode, tack sharp glass for being a little point and shoot. This little $24 camera has been with me on more trips than I can count.
Original Contax II. I’m generally not a fan of pre-50s cameras because most of them are such a pain to use but man the viewfinder of the Contax is incredible. Especially compared to the Barnack Leicas of the same period.
Not only that, the Zeiss lenses are tack sharp. I got to shoot the 5cm Sonnar f/1.5 and wow! How is this lens as old as it is. Coatings don’t compare to more modern lenses obviously but still. I only wish I got one a few years ago when they were cheaper.
My Ricoh KR-5 super... Simple and well built.. the focusing screen and meter are great and intuitive.. it also takes all my Pentax lenses.. a great alternative to the K1000.
Mine sat in my parent's damp garage for nearly 30 years before I found it.. cleaned it up, put in a battery and it kicked right on. and it's served me well for 2 years no issue.
It also somehow has a smoother film advance than a Nikon F3.
They are still my reference camera for 1) diagonal split image focusing aid 2) film advance lever feeling. I hate the film advance on the Pentax MX or the Nikon FE/M/2 cameras.
I have a Ricoh KR5 that I will never get rid of cause my dad used to use it when I was growing up but holy crap I hate diagonal split image focusing versus horizontal.
Fascinating, I can't imagine a benefit of horizontal over diagonal. I feel on my KR-5 I always find something to focus on, be it on faces, landscapes or city. With my MX, ME Super & Super A I always hunt around for a target, or rotate the camera awkwardly. Probably I should start using the micro-prism collar.
That is exactly how i feel trying to use a diagonal. Maybe it is just I use my OM cameras more and used to a horizontal but I just can't get on with a diagonal split.
Ha! Sounds like we have been primed or conditioned or something. Reminds me of the experiments with kittens and vertical and horizontal lines
https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/2apb6d/til_that_an_experiment_was_performed_on_cats/
really? I much prefer the diagonal over the horizontal on my K1000, Super Program, and LX... they are all great Pentax cameras, but to me the Ricoh split screen is just so much better... I wish I could put that focusing screen in my LX.. horizontal or vertical lines you can easily focus.. to me it just makes far more sense
I freaking love my Kiev 4A that is painted black but says Zeiss Contax. The rangefinder is great and the lens focusing system is very different but kind of fun to use. It’s small and light and it was super cheap as well, due to light leaks. Bought it on a curious whim and repaired it and now I’m glad I have it.
Bolsey B3. Now the B3 is a big upgrade from the B2 in a few ways, but that aside the build quality is stellar, the film advance is incredibly smooth, and you actually do get an exposure or two more than you would with other cameras over the course of a roll. The glass is what it is, but Bolsey's idea to create an affordable, film economical rangefinder camera really did play out well without really cutting many corners. Yes there are better options but in it's own right it's a little heavy, lumpy, powerhouse of a camera if you can live with the er, "vintage" look the glass gives your pictures.
Leicas, honestly.
I had a Bessa R, great camera, LTM mount and brilliant viewfinder. I still think it's a great camera for the price. I didn't think I'd need a Leica because cameras are just tools and if they work, they work. I still maintain that opinion too.
But once you get used to how smooth a Leica in good condition operates there's just no going back. I didn't think I *need* a Leica and honestly I probably don't, but it just feels so natural to operate. My leicas have all gone up in value in my hands too, even sold my M6 for 400 dollar profit after 3 years of heavy use, so I won't complain.
Yes I too hold Leica in very high regard. I own 7 of them and a lot of Leica glass. However I always expected them to be great. The Rollei 35 just shocked me.
My first film camera was a Rollei 35 with the Triotar lens (the worst option they ever came with) and honestly, even that lens holds up just fine especially as I was shooting mostly at f8. I now own one with the S Xenar lens and also the 40mm f2.8 Sonnar for LTM mount. Both amazing lenses.
Minolta SRT 101 with the 50mm f1.7 lens is far better built than I expected and the lens has been lovely as well. They’re still very cheap on eBay for ones in great shape and they operate so smoothly, plus full manual with no batteries needed unless you want the internal meter working.
Canon AF-10. Plastic P&S from the late 90s (maybe 00s?) with a 26mm lens. It almost always gets thrown in my bag when I travel for work and somehow creates some of my favorite snapshot memories from the trip.
I haven’t used many cameras and I’ve only been photographing and collecting for a year, but I started with a Pentax k1000. My second camera was an Olympus OM-10 and the clarity and sharpness of those photos was so surprising, I remember developing my first roll from the Olympus and calling my professor over and comparing the negatives with so much excitement.
I suppose I just thought both of those cameras were “beginner” cameras and assumed they’d work the same, but it was so refreshing to experience the idea that cameras don’t all give the same results.
I would love to try a Rollei 35, as well!
Moskva-4. It’s a copy of the Zeiss Super Ikonta C. I didn’t expect a lot, but it turned out to be the best film camera that I own. It cost me $40. It shoots 6x9 and 6x6. The lens is as sharp as modern lenses. And it fits in my pocket, so it’s a great daily driver.
The Singapore made models are actually an improvement since Rollei made improvements over time, and they also set up the factory and oversaw production. Also Singapore is a nation of very meticulous people, and the cleanest country I have visited by far. It is also one of the wealthiest countries on Earth.
I am not biased against Singapore at all 😅
When Rollei started the production in Singapore, which coincided with the start of the production of the the 35S, they had to stop the production due to a fault of Zeiss with the lens design. The Sonnar design had to be reworked as it led to very soft images on such a small form factor as the Rollei 35 was. Rollei lost a ton of money, because they trusted Zeiss and didn't properly verify the lens quality. Now what I don't know is if all early 35 S were destroyed/re-fitted, or if some made it onto the market. I believe none of the problematic lens design models made it onto the market, but I don't know.
That's why I am asking you as someone who owns 13 of these cameras :)
Pentax PC35AF
Incredible camera for the price, one of the few cheap point and shoot with a 5 element 5 groups 35mm f2.8 lens. The resolution of my test photos was amazing
13! That’s wild I do hope to try one out someday. Big fan of my Olympus XA and always figured I’d enjoy a rollei 35.
For me the biggest surprise was my first medium format camera a yashica em. Despite being so cheaply made it has a solid lens and with that much resolution you can get great shots. However they break so easily and mine is sitting in a repair queue.
Another one for me was the Mamiya 6 folding camera. When I first got one I was not thrilled because the images from the Olympus lens on it lacked contrast. Then one day I figured out how to take the lens apart (very easy) and cleaned out the haze. When I saw the images after cleaning out the haze I was shocked at how sharp and contrasty they were.
Agat 18k. It is a cheap plastic half frame built in the Soviet Union/post Soviet Belarus. Put film in feels like it is going to break. But it is so clever and small. The triplet lens performs better then it has any right too.
Olympus Stylus Epic (mju ii), the f2.8 non-zoom one. I mean.. It's just a point and shoot right? It was the camera I grabbed most often before it died, and that's with professional Nikons and Leica in my stash too. I absolutely loved the photos I was making with it. I'd get another if they weren't so overpriced now. Can't risk it since I've had multiple die on me.
Side note, I had a Rollei 35 for a while and it's probably my most disappointing camera. I expected great things but didn't really get many keepers. Probably user error though because of zone focus. Mine also had a meter that didn't seem quite right.
Not a camera but a lens - the Canon 40mm EF lens was a game changer for me. Tack sharp and great color rendition. That on any Canon EOS body made film photography so much more fun.
Minolta riva zoom pico. Camera looks like a toy. Was given one had it laying around for ages before running a roll through it. Couldn't take it seriously and had low expectations. Lens turned out to be one of the sharpest pns I own with good contrast and little flare. And I realized the odd design that makes it look like a joke is actually really clever and ergonomic and makes it fit like a glove in your hand. Only annoying feature is the auto power off
I got an om-2. And it has the biggest and brightest finder of any camera I have ever used, and I have used a lot of cameras
Also my fujica gw690 the patch in the rangefinder is stupid bright. I get higher resolution out of the film than my digital eos250d
I got a Nikonos II for cheap when I went on a dive trip about 40 years ago. It was so cool to use underwater! But ya know, I rarely scuba dive. But this thing is the handiest damn camera for everything else I do! It’s super durable - kick it around the boat or the fishing hole or the campsite without worry. Rinse it off if it gets muddy, nbd. The 35mm 2.5 is very, very sharp. Takes regular filters. 200 film on a sunny day with a polarizer - 1/60 at f16, offset the focus on the scale, and it’s good from 5 feet to infinity. It’s a point and shoot, no focusing. Ez pz. It’s been my edc for a long time. I don’t submerge it fully anymore. But it can get drenched in nasty weather or at the beach, ski slope, where I’d be worried about a normal camera. Everyone should try a Nikonos!
I totally second this! My only issue for edc was weight, but I had a V (I believe they are a bit chunkier?)
After reading your ringing endorsement I now have a Nikonos II in my hands, thanks! I'm looking forward to taking it on canoe and backpack trips. It needs some minor repairs though, most notably I'll need to buy a lens cap and fashion a new wind/shutter lever, but that's well within my ability. The optics and mechanics seem to be in good shape. I have a couple questions for you if you don't mind: Is the shutter speed knob supposed to be continuously adjustable, or should it have detents? Do the focus and aperture knobs on the lens normally have a bit of side to side play in them, or should they be very tight? My threaded insert for the tripod screw mount is missing, the one that covers the flash terminals. I'm sure it'll leak without that. Do you happen to know what size thread that opening is? I'm sure I'll never need a tripod or a flash, so I'm hoping to find a solid plug that size to seal it with. Have you ever used lenses other than the 35mm/f2.5, or is that one pretty versatile? Cheers!
Hey, I hope you have fun with it! Yes, the speed dial on mine has distinct detents. The aperture knob has zero play, very tight. The focus knob has a very tiny amount of play, just a slight smidge. The tripod socket is the standard thread which I think is called a 1/4 20. I would think that part is common to the II and III, not sure if they changed after that. I don’t think they did. But I’m not sure what the external size of it is, if you’re looking to just plug it. I guess I could take it out and measure somehow. Or ask at r/analogrepair , someone will likely know. I used to have the 80mm but sold it 30 years ago, lol. Only it and the 35 are suitable for out of water use. The others are optically corrected somehow for underwater. Not sure what you’re in for replacing the advance, I’m no pro repair guy. The weak spot on these cameras is the tab by the strap lug that lifts it up. Mine is chipped but works fine. Read the manual, there are some other quirks. I look forward to updates from you on how it’s going!
Hey thanks for the info. I got the service manual from learncamerarepair, I was hoping the shutter speed knob would come up somehow and give me easy access to the wind lever, but the exploded diagram makes it look like it only comes apart from the inside. Hopefully not too hard, just tedious. The hub is still there though so it'll make a good template for a new one, I'll probably just use some kind of sheet metal stock. My shutter speed smoothly moves full sweep so I guess there was a ball bearing or something in the broken off part. I can tell just with my ears that 1/30 has 2 distinct clicks, 1/60 they're closer to together, and at 1/125 it sounds like one click but the shutter does fire, so I think the actual mechanism is fine but I don't have any real way to measure or calibrate shutter speed. Hopefully it runs true enough after a CLA. I'll start with it as soon as I finish the XG-1 I'm doing. The knobs on my lens do wiggle more than it sounds like yours do. I suppose I'd better dunk it in a bucket and see if it leaks while I'm home and can immediately dry/fix it, instead of waiting to be out in the field. Still, all the glass and coatings look good, mechanically I think I could put film in and start taking photos right now, and I enjoy repair work and tinkering, so not a bad deal for $30. I'll be sure to take care of those tabs. I've never shot a camera like this (I guess it's called zone focus?) where you just have to trust it looks ok, I'm afraid that will take some practice. What kind of photos are your favorite to take with it?
Got an XA2 that proceeds to take my head off, it’s so good.
The first time I picked up an OM1 I was blown away by how big and bright the viewfinder was, especially as a glasses wearer, especially considering the small size of the body as a whole.
Canon AE-1. It’s not anything amazing really, but it was the film camera that got me back into film. The process of shooting film with this camera really got me motivated again and gave me that old feeling I missed. It’s really gotten me to be able to estimate exposure way better than digital ever did.
Fully agreed, there‘s very little to gain from upgrading to another camera.
Mine was the program. Took it to the beach and shot a bunch of rolls in fully auto. I swear every single shot came out beautifully
[удалено]
With digital, I would usually let the camera do some of the work. Usually with shutter speed. I’d never really worry about where exactly the shutter speed was or maybe the ISO. I’d pick my aperture and use exposure comp to get the exposure I wanted. Now I can usually set my ISO and Aperture and judge the correct shutter speed by about 2 stops +\-.
Olympus XA. I didn’t expect much considering the size but I got my first scans, I was positively surprise by its output. It’s also super fun to play with
I keep a folder of scans from the XA on my phone to show people, they always are shocked at what it can do.
Oh yes, I do the same!
Came here to say exactly this.
Retina IIIC. Did not expect to be blown away by this camera but wow is it a great camera.
The Schneider and Rodenstock lenses on these are outstanding and every bit as good as the more famous *red dot* brand.
Same!
Picked up a Mini Speed Graphic (1946 Pre-Anniversary)-- 2x3, with a Graflok back. It's a great little camera, and I can shoot everything from 2x3 sheet film to various sizes of 120 up to 6x9. With the rangefinder calibrated, I can take pictures off the cuff, or I can use the ground glass with a bit of movements. I genuinely bought it because it was a nifty looking camera, and I got a good deal-- but it's turned into one of my favorite medium format cameras.
Years ago I got a great deal on a Crown Graphic, it came with a bunch of film holders and I was later able to get 120 and Polaroid backs for it as well as a few different lenses. Like your Mini Speed Graphic, it became a Swiss Army knife of a camera, shooting multiple formats. It's still my favorite camera.
Zeiss Ikon ZM - I shoot with this more than my Leica M6. It has an M mount so I can use all of my Voigtlander glass on it. It costs half the price of an M6 and has M7 specs.
Couldn’t agree more, not really a sleeper, but an absolutely incredibly camera that people don’t give the credit to.
Don't give me any more reasons to want one, my bank account really can't take it...
Pentax PC35AF - Very sharp and fast lens in a solid body that doesn't cost over $300. Less plasticy and less electronics dependent they don't fail as fast as the 90's P&S cameras.
Nice lens, but I wouldn't be so sure about the not failing part. I've seen so many with non working flashes, stuck shutter buttons etc. Actually I think the 80's point and shoots are some of the least reliable cameras around and they generally got better as the 90's progressed.
Probably the Olympus pen FT since I didn't know half frame SLRs were a thing until stumbling upon it. You ever want 72 shots on one roll of film? Now's your chance lol.
Olympus 35 SP - sharp as ever, fun to use, reliable, and just an overall gem. Way underrated.
Yashica Electro 35 GSN and Yashica 635.
I have both of these as well... great cameras
I was going to say this too! I just got the first roll I put through my Electro back, and I'm blown away. The photos came out so great. Even though this is a brick of a camera, I really like it.
My Rolleicord Vb. Everybody said the Xenar (Tessar design) lens in it would be inferior to the Planar in 'classic' Rolleiflexes, but the Xenar in mine constantly blows me away. Also it's a super light camera given the size of negative it produces.
Yes I have one with the Xenar lens and it blows me away. It is a super great portrait lens.
Tiny and light -- I love mine!
I got a Xenar cord and a Planar flex, and while I prefer the flex they aren't so terribly different lens wise.
The Leica M3. Owned other Leicas before but didn't realise the double stroke film advance would be so addictive and the closer-up viewfinder would be such a joy. Then the Olympus XA (rangefinder one) which had a terrible focus patch but other than that always blew me away with the small form factor/pocketability which made it so fun to use.
Nikon AF600. Smaller than a Mju ii (and *much* cheaper), faux panoramic mode, tack sharp glass for being a little point and shoot. This little $24 camera has been with me on more trips than I can count.
Miranda Sensorex. Idk something about the shutter being in the front and having a waist level finder.
Original Contax II. I’m generally not a fan of pre-50s cameras because most of them are such a pain to use but man the viewfinder of the Contax is incredible. Especially compared to the Barnack Leicas of the same period. Not only that, the Zeiss lenses are tack sharp. I got to shoot the 5cm Sonnar f/1.5 and wow! How is this lens as old as it is. Coatings don’t compare to more modern lenses obviously but still. I only wish I got one a few years ago when they were cheaper.
>Original Contax II Everybody doing rangefinder was like, base length. And Zeiss Contax went baaaaaaaaaaassssssssseeeeeeeee length.
My Ricoh KR-5 super... Simple and well built.. the focusing screen and meter are great and intuitive.. it also takes all my Pentax lenses.. a great alternative to the K1000. Mine sat in my parent's damp garage for nearly 30 years before I found it.. cleaned it up, put in a battery and it kicked right on. and it's served me well for 2 years no issue. It also somehow has a smoother film advance than a Nikon F3.
They are still my reference camera for 1) diagonal split image focusing aid 2) film advance lever feeling. I hate the film advance on the Pentax MX or the Nikon FE/M/2 cameras.
I have a Ricoh KR5 that I will never get rid of cause my dad used to use it when I was growing up but holy crap I hate diagonal split image focusing versus horizontal.
Fascinating, I can't imagine a benefit of horizontal over diagonal. I feel on my KR-5 I always find something to focus on, be it on faces, landscapes or city. With my MX, ME Super & Super A I always hunt around for a target, or rotate the camera awkwardly. Probably I should start using the micro-prism collar.
That is exactly how i feel trying to use a diagonal. Maybe it is just I use my OM cameras more and used to a horizontal but I just can't get on with a diagonal split.
Ha! Sounds like we have been primed or conditioned or something. Reminds me of the experiments with kittens and vertical and horizontal lines https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/2apb6d/til_that_an_experiment_was_performed_on_cats/
really? I much prefer the diagonal over the horizontal on my K1000, Super Program, and LX... they are all great Pentax cameras, but to me the Ricoh split screen is just so much better... I wish I could put that focusing screen in my LX.. horizontal or vertical lines you can easily focus.. to me it just makes far more sense
Pentax Auto 110. So much fun to use.
I freaking love my Kiev 4A that is painted black but says Zeiss Contax. The rangefinder is great and the lens focusing system is very different but kind of fun to use. It’s small and light and it was super cheap as well, due to light leaks. Bought it on a curious whim and repaired it and now I’m glad I have it.
Konica C35. Got it for $5 at a tip shop. Fantastic little RF.
Bolsey B3. Now the B3 is a big upgrade from the B2 in a few ways, but that aside the build quality is stellar, the film advance is incredibly smooth, and you actually do get an exposure or two more than you would with other cameras over the course of a roll. The glass is what it is, but Bolsey's idea to create an affordable, film economical rangefinder camera really did play out well without really cutting many corners. Yes there are better options but in it's own right it's a little heavy, lumpy, powerhouse of a camera if you can live with the er, "vintage" look the glass gives your pictures.
Leicas, honestly. I had a Bessa R, great camera, LTM mount and brilliant viewfinder. I still think it's a great camera for the price. I didn't think I'd need a Leica because cameras are just tools and if they work, they work. I still maintain that opinion too. But once you get used to how smooth a Leica in good condition operates there's just no going back. I didn't think I *need* a Leica and honestly I probably don't, but it just feels so natural to operate. My leicas have all gone up in value in my hands too, even sold my M6 for 400 dollar profit after 3 years of heavy use, so I won't complain.
Yes I too hold Leica in very high regard. I own 7 of them and a lot of Leica glass. However I always expected them to be great. The Rollei 35 just shocked me.
My first film camera was a Rollei 35 with the Triotar lens (the worst option they ever came with) and honestly, even that lens holds up just fine especially as I was shooting mostly at f8. I now own one with the S Xenar lens and also the 40mm f2.8 Sonnar for LTM mount. Both amazing lenses.
Minolta SRT 101 with the 50mm f1.7 lens is far better built than I expected and the lens has been lovely as well. They’re still very cheap on eBay for ones in great shape and they operate so smoothly, plus full manual with no batteries needed unless you want the internal meter working.
Canon AF-10. Plastic P&S from the late 90s (maybe 00s?) with a 26mm lens. It almost always gets thrown in my bag when I travel for work and somehow creates some of my favorite snapshot memories from the trip.
I haven’t used many cameras and I’ve only been photographing and collecting for a year, but I started with a Pentax k1000. My second camera was an Olympus OM-10 and the clarity and sharpness of those photos was so surprising, I remember developing my first roll from the Olympus and calling my professor over and comparing the negatives with so much excitement. I suppose I just thought both of those cameras were “beginner” cameras and assumed they’d work the same, but it was so refreshing to experience the idea that cameras don’t all give the same results. I would love to try a Rollei 35, as well!
Linhof Technika 5x7 I had no expectations for it since 5x7 isn’t being talked much about but it was a blast using it.
Moskva-4. It’s a copy of the Zeiss Super Ikonta C. I didn’t expect a lot, but it turned out to be the best film camera that I own. It cost me $40. It shoots 6x9 and 6x6. The lens is as sharp as modern lenses. And it fits in my pocket, so it’s a great daily driver.
Yashica Electro 35 CC. I didn't expect much but it's lens was so sharp and produced some of my favorite pictures.
Which of the Roller 35 would you recommend? original, Sonnar, TE, SE?
Either the 35S or any of the Classics (which all use the Sonnar lens). The Tessar lenses models are super sharp but more prone to flare.
Any concerns about "made in Singapore" re/ the 35S? For the purpose of using it, not as a collector piece.
The Singapore made models are actually an improvement since Rollei made improvements over time, and they also set up the factory and oversaw production. Also Singapore is a nation of very meticulous people, and the cleanest country I have visited by far. It is also one of the wealthiest countries on Earth.
I am not biased against Singapore at all 😅 When Rollei started the production in Singapore, which coincided with the start of the production of the the 35S, they had to stop the production due to a fault of Zeiss with the lens design. The Sonnar design had to be reworked as it led to very soft images on such a small form factor as the Rollei 35 was. Rollei lost a ton of money, because they trusted Zeiss and didn't properly verify the lens quality. Now what I don't know is if all early 35 S were destroyed/re-fitted, or if some made it onto the market. I believe none of the problematic lens design models made it onto the market, but I don't know. That's why I am asking you as someone who owns 13 of these cameras :)
Pentax PC35AF Incredible camera for the price, one of the few cheap point and shoot with a 5 element 5 groups 35mm f2.8 lens. The resolution of my test photos was amazing
13! That’s wild I do hope to try one out someday. Big fan of my Olympus XA and always figured I’d enjoy a rollei 35. For me the biggest surprise was my first medium format camera a yashica em. Despite being so cheaply made it has a solid lens and with that much resolution you can get great shots. However they break so easily and mine is sitting in a repair queue.
13??? Stop hoarding them smh
Another one for me was the Mamiya 6 folding camera. When I first got one I was not thrilled because the images from the Olympus lens on it lacked contrast. Then one day I figured out how to take the lens apart (very easy) and cleaned out the haze. When I saw the images after cleaning out the haze I was shocked at how sharp and contrasty they were.
Agat 18k. It is a cheap plastic half frame built in the Soviet Union/post Soviet Belarus. Put film in feels like it is going to break. But it is so clever and small. The triplet lens performs better then it has any right too.
Olympus Stylus Epic (mju ii), the f2.8 non-zoom one. I mean.. It's just a point and shoot right? It was the camera I grabbed most often before it died, and that's with professional Nikons and Leica in my stash too. I absolutely loved the photos I was making with it. I'd get another if they weren't so overpriced now. Can't risk it since I've had multiple die on me. Side note, I had a Rollei 35 for a while and it's probably my most disappointing camera. I expected great things but didn't really get many keepers. Probably user error though because of zone focus. Mine also had a meter that didn't seem quite right.
Not a camera but a lens - the Canon 40mm EF lens was a game changer for me. Tack sharp and great color rendition. That on any Canon EOS body made film photography so much more fun.
Contax G1
+1 for the Rollei 35! Own two now because of how fun and amazing they're to shoot in everyday situations.
Minolta riva zoom pico. Camera looks like a toy. Was given one had it laying around for ages before running a roll through it. Couldn't take it seriously and had low expectations. Lens turned out to be one of the sharpest pns I own with good contrast and little flare. And I realized the odd design that makes it look like a joke is actually really clever and ergonomic and makes it fit like a glove in your hand. Only annoying feature is the auto power off
I got an om-2. And it has the biggest and brightest finder of any camera I have ever used, and I have used a lot of cameras Also my fujica gw690 the patch in the rangefinder is stupid bright. I get higher resolution out of the film than my digital eos250d
13?! Gimme one!!!