|
Post by nikkortorokkor on Jan 1, 2008 21:44:41 GMT -5
I've never had a lot of confidence in the mechanical 'trapped needle' AE system. It uses the first pressure on the shutter button to set the aperture mechanically. To my mind it's delicate with too much chance of friction and sticktion. from my very limted experience, I agree. Which brings us back to the Hi Matic E, which does away with the diaphragm altogeter and relies on the shutter for both aperture and speed. I suppose Minolta purchased this 'Electronic Control' system from Yashica; the E carries the little Yashica attom logo anyway. I wonder if they did so because of te exact problems Peter describes with their own trapped needle Hi-Matics ? I certainy haven't bothered to run a film through my original Hi-Matic, which, like the E is AE only, but using a trapped needle and Selenium cell. after 45 odd years thats a few too many cards stacked up against accurate exposure!
|
|
|
Post by nikkortorokkor on Jan 1, 2008 20:48:05 GMT -5
Peter,
electronics is a scam made up by tricksters (electricians) to keep the rest of us in the dark (pun intended) about the real source of 'electrical' energy: smoke.
Aside from that, your friend's advice sounds sage.
As one camera shop employee told me: 'the shutter is probably already out more stops due to age than will be caused by the change in voltage'.
In the case of my older Hi Matic 7 it is the mechanical AE link from the meter to the diaphragm that causes me problems. I find they meter accurately as metered manuals, but overexpose on AE, even after a clean. It'll be interesting to see how the much more electronic (thanks to Yashica) Hi-Matic E handles the change in batteries. I think it'l be well within the latitude of modern, consumer grade 200 print film.
|
|
|
Post by nikkortorokkor on Jan 1, 2008 19:57:07 GMT -5
Bob, Now we're starting to get into Leica-land, home of fragile egos and maniacal screw counters - or maybe just people who know what they're on about - so I'll tread carefully and claim absolute ignorance about all things Leitz. But, Jan-willem Hubbers, who has a Minolta Users Group www.sds.com/mug/has this to say: 'Some have suggested that the 40mm f1.7 employed by the E was the basis for the 40mm f2.0 Rokkor (aka the 40mm f2.0 Summicron-C) that Minolta built for use with the Leica CL. This seems unlikely. The design clearly predates the Leitz-Minolta partnership, but is known that Leitz originally intended to market the CL with a 40 mm f 2.8 lens and that Minolta proposed an f2.0 design. The f2.0 lens was deemed adequate in performance to bear the Leica name and was also considered more attractive the the upscale amatuer market for which the CL was intended.' I do know that Jan Willem is a little off in that the 40mm 2.0 Summicron C was made in Germany, even if it was as he's suggested, a Minolta design. My E carries the ROKKOR - QF legend, meaning it is a 4 group, 6 element lens. The venerable old Hi-Matic 7 had an f1.8/45mm ROKKOR PF: a 5 group, 6 element lens. A bit of digging finds that the M ROKKOR f2.0/40mm also had 6 elements in 4 groups, and that the 1st 6,000 or so units produced by Minolta did, indeed, carry the QF designation. So, it seems clear that the 40/2.0 M ROKKOR was not new territory for Minolta when they pitched the idea of a fast 40 to Leitz. They'd already had such a lens: the 40/1.7 ROKKOR - QF fitted permenantly to the E.
|
|
|
Post by nikkortorokkor on Jan 1, 2008 15:19:26 GMT -5
Bob, there is a film in there now. I've been away tramping (hiking for you non-kiwis) and decided the the E was just too purty to risk out in the bush. Instead I took my bush and beach standby, the Himatic AF2. So now I have 2 rolls on the go. So far, the most remarkable thing about the E is its weird sounding but very quiet shutter. It as the same cick-buzz as the AF2, but much quieter. I guess the strange sound is due to the electronic Seiko ESF shutter, the silence would make a Leica user green Speaking of which, the build quality of the E really impresses me. It almost makes me believe the rumor that it was the E which convinced Leitz that Minolta were up to the job f producing the CL, though when one thinks about it, the SRT 101 would've been proof enough. Maybe not much finesse, but plenty f quality. BTW, I pulled the batteries out of the E and they're plain old alkalines, so I guess the story that the E won't even fire on Alkalines is just more internet scuttlebut.
|
|
|
Post by nikkortorokkor on Dec 26, 2007 12:53:41 GMT -5
Thanks, Scott. I was a little worried, since I read that the E doesn't like to be fed on alkalines, they'll light up the circuit, but won't fire the shutter. After reading your post I checked and found a local supplier who has LR44 silver oxides 'specially for electronic shutters'. Sounds like the deal.
Bob, I think I'll get a film in it today and check out that lens.
|
|
|
Post by nikkortorokkor on Dec 25, 2007 22:58:47 GMT -5
Merry Christmas all. Here's the newest addition: Someone obviously cherished it, it even came with working batteries. Not sure what I'll do when they run out. Maybe this is Minolta's most frustrating rangefinder: It is very nicely made, handles nicely and is quiet beyond belief. However, No manual mode & MUST have batteries (2 RM640 Mercury cells) to operate. There is no aperture diaphragm as such, instead the shutter blades control both speed and arperture. sure is pretty though, and what a great lens.
|
|
|
Post by nikkortorokkor on Oct 16, 2007 19:33:49 GMT -5
I've just got back from lunch, where an incident befell me that may amuse.
I was partaking of a chicken and brie sandwich and Montieth's Radler (a very refreshing drop on a hot spring day) and taking a few pictures of the students and faculty having lunch at the union when a young feller comes up and asks 'Is that a Leica?'
Never has the owner of a humble Japanese 'Leica Wannabe' felt so proud.
And the Toyoca 35 doesn't even have the red dot of the Pax and Petri wannabe cameras!
I explained the mistaken ID and fielded questions about rangefinders, suggesting that the lad go for one of the more useable 60s era rangefinders which are, at present, 'going for pennies'.
Another potential convert.
Photos will, if successful, appear soon.
|
|
|
Post by nikkortorokkor on Oct 19, 2007 14:41:10 GMT -5
Walker, you make me cry. The camera which kicked off my 'collection' is a rashly-bought Fujica V2. Unfortunately it is well beyond economic repair (I'd have to buy a better one just to scavenge parts, and that seems to be putting the cart before the horse).
I have made a late discovery of the charm of the older, simpler camera. The Toyoca (which could be interchangeable with any number of 50s Japanese rangefinders) Is a nice handler. The shutter, which sounds deafening in my workshop recedes into a quiet *click* in a crowd. No meter means no long, heavy shutter release (my biggest complaint with the 7) and the speeds (b 1 2 5 10 25 50 100 300) are just strange enough to exercise my feeble brain.
|
|
|
Post by nikkortorokkor on Oct 11, 2007 4:51:21 GMT -5
I was going to make this JFLR (Japanese Fixed Lens Rangefinder) but hey, some of you may love the Durst Automatica enough to vote for it.
My entrée to the world of collectible cameras has been via that last hope of the bottom-feeding junk camera fiend, the fixed lens rangefinder. Beloved by those of us who just can't convince our spouse or our bank manager of actually why we NEED that M3 Leica, the FLR makes a pretty durned good second best which, in these days of film abandonment, can be bought for a family's worth of Happy Meals.
But which FLR is best? As an historian trained in the Whiggish tradition I've been firmly taught that there Is an ultimate truth, we'll just never know it, so the question of which is best remains unanswerable. That does not, however, prevent us from having favourites, and I reckon that you good folks on the CC board must have favourite FLRs and good reasons for your bias. So fire away! I'll start the ball rolling (to mix metaphors) with my personal fave: the stolid and respectable Minolta Hi-Matic 7.
I reckon the 7 is a camera built by photographers for photographers. Compared to the original Hi-Matic it's more conservative and controllable, being fully manual as well as AE. Here are some of its virtues:
Aesthetics- beauty might be in the eye of the beholder, but I think that most will agree that the 7, 7s, and 9 are all nice, modern, understated designs. Not quite as sleek and pretty as the QL Canonets, they are, nevertheless, understated when compared to the slightly flashier Yashica rangefinders.
Metering- the 7s and 9 have the fancy CLC metering, but I've found the plain old CDS cell on the 7 to be pretty good, even after 40+ years and alkaline 1.5 battery instead of the original 1.3 mercury. But there is more. The CDS eye is inside the filter ring (the 1st Japanese camera feature this) and there is an EV system display in the viewfinder. I like the EV system, it has helps me think about light. Best of all, the meter does not turn off when you switch to manual (unlike the Canonet QL17). Why did Canon stick that durned contact breaker in their lens barrel? Minolta seemed to figure out very early on (1963) that lots of us might like to hybridise metered shooting with guesstimation or to meter an area then recompose, or bracket or whatever. But whatever the reason, they new that we needed a metered manual camera sometimes. Like I said, by photographers for photographers.
Size. Big is good. I like the Ricoh 500G, but my daughter likes it better! The 7 is big, solid and grunty. Food for hand holding at low speeds.
Lens. 45/1.8-22 Rokkor. Its good. 'Nuf said.
Monkey-Brick mechanicals. I (a monkey with a brick) can fix the 7. The engineering is pretty obvious. Other contenders, (the QL17, especially) are more jewel-like, more clever, and need a cleverer monkey to fix 'em!
Bright rangefinder, quick focus. After struggling with a 135 Tele-Enalyt on the Super-Paxette, focussing the 7 is a snap. So intuitive.
Neat factory lens hood. It's very pro. I feel my masculine security growing just by clipping it on...the lens that is. Lens envy? Moi?
Cheap. I could buy 3 sevens for the same price some people pay for Dianas and Holgas. It takes all sorts.
Vices.
Only one, and it's not a real vice so much as a could do better. Speed and arperture rings are a little scrunched together and unlike the QL7, don't have raised pieces to aid grip. Thats it really.
I've gone on long enough. Your turn now. Remember Fixed Lens only, no cheating! (get behind me thee Leica).
|
|
|
Post by nikkortorokkor on Oct 11, 2007 3:57:58 GMT -5
Congratulations Curt. Two cameras I'd quite happily own!
Galen, I'll put my vote in for the Braun Super Paxette if you're after a modestly priced 'kit' rangefinder. Lenses available in 35 to 200 mm ( though the latter is quite rare, I think). People talk about reliability issues and lenses that haven't aged too well, but I've found nothing but good 'uns.
Still, if I was in the states I'd be taking Curt's lead, those C fourty-four lenses are too cool.
|
|
|
Post by nikkortorokkor on Aug 13, 2007 18:12:15 GMT -5
John, discretion certainly is the better part of valour. I do love some of these guys who can sniff out an auto bid and beat it by 50 cents! The Minister just turned up in the post & I'm kind of glad it's not a 1000. A tattier camera is hard to envision! The owner must've been a sweater, or maybe he took it to the tropics. Anyway, these are fairly simple little cameras to fix, so it'll be fun seeing what I can do. I've even found a nifty little innovation to love - the extra ring on the front with EV numbers. Turn the ring and to the 'correct' EV (as indicated by the meter) and the aperture ring sets itself 'automatically' to the right f-stop for the speed you've selected. Neato. Noeither is quite in the league of Reiska's Electro GS! The EV ring The J's Yashinon: No EV ring.
|
|
|
Post by nikkortorokkor on Aug 13, 2007 16:23:37 GMT -5
Update: Doh! The Lynx 1000 that I thought I was 'stealing' at NZ$20 + p&p is, on closer inspection of the vendor's fuzzy picture, a Minister, which looks almost identical to the 1000, but with a 1:2.8 Yashinon lens. If I'd been more circumspect, I'd have looked up from my computer to the camera shelf and recognized the lens as the same as that hanging off the front of my Yashica J. Caveat emptor! The Lynx 14 is, meanwhile, the centre of a bidding war. An advantage for the vendor using TradeMe (New Zealand's online auction site) is that all auctions now automatically extend, just like a 'real' auction does. Thus, if someone bids just as the auction is closing, it'll stay open for another two minutes. A feature which prevents sniping and promotes bidding wars. Let the games begin! Well, the Lynx 14 has just gone for NZ$100 (about US$74) - too rich for my blood, but good for the vendor, who placed a sensibly low reserve on the camera. I'm sure he's very happy. The rangefinder buzz seems to be alive and well here in NZ. The shutter on my Hi-Matic 7 has, alas, jammed again, causing me to get 3 exposed images off a 24 roll film. How come equipment failure always happens when you think you've made that image that'll make the cover of National Geographic? Just like the fisherman's 'One that got away' methinks. It's my own fault for being impatient with my cleaning. I must've sealed in some shellite and, when it finally dried, the dreaded oil on the blades reared its ugly head again. Obviously being too eager is my problem (see Minister purchase above)
|
|
|
Post by nikkortorokkor on Aug 10, 2007 0:50:53 GMT -5
Well, Mickey,
I have to say that after saying that the Japanese led innovation, I thought of the Vitessa and hoped nobody'd bring that lovely camera up to refute me! I wonder if the Fujica focus wheel was an 'homage' to Voigtlander (i.e. they pinched the durned thing from the Germans).
I've put a Vitessa on my 'when I'm richer' list! My own distaste for Vitos comes from my abhorrence for the 'viewfinder' on the BL, an item so imprecise that it shattered my novice-photographer ego and teenage wallet as I developed mis-framed print after print! Yet less than 10 years after my Vito was made the higher end Japanese compacts featured not only rangefinders, but compensating rangefinders.
Speaking of which, has anybody tried a Minesix 66? A folding, medium format rangefinder with a coupled meter in 1957 - wow!
John F, I've got a J, and now a Lynx 1000 (I hope), If I get an M too my Minoltas will think something is up and have a hissy fit. You'd better buy both of the Ms. But it's that Lynx 14E that's really weakening my resolve. I wonder what it'll fetch?
|
|
|
Post by nikkortorokkor on Aug 9, 2007 16:21:38 GMT -5
- the Exaktas, Zenits and Prakticas kind of calm me down... But hey - they look gorgeous! Every time I look at the original Minolta Hi-Matic on my shelf, resplendent in grey leatherette and with that boxy, ultra modern styling, I get the urge to don a pair of light chinos, some deck shoes, an outrageous Hawaiian shirt, a nice panama and some cool shades, and go hang out at some happening beach side bar. If the bar has a good Hi-Fi even better, but if not I've always got my trusty National Panasonic transistor radio. Did I watch too many sixties movies as a kid? Randy, I was totally unaware of the Airies Viscount, now I won't die happy unless I try one out. Is there medication for this? Seriously, I'm maxing out at around half a dozen Japanese fixed lens compacts, with the Hi-Matic 7 my only hard core user so far. I would like a 'system' rangefinder but can't afford Leica or Contax (surprise, surprise) or even a Cosina Voigtlander. Braun is an obvious choice, or an FSU body, which (if I find a good one) seems a more practical option. The Aries, with axillary 8 cm lens would be a nice way to go too, but I'd still miss a nice wide-angle. Any suggestions?
|
|
|
Post by nikkortorokkor on Aug 9, 2007 3:17:36 GMT -5
Thanks for the comments, Walker. Nice to know that a V2 handled Kodachrome with aplomb. That's a positive endorsement.
Fujica rangefinders seem to be rather unloved compared to their more cultish Yashica, Minolta, Canon, Olympus and Konica rivals. I got mine from a junk shop and paid too much for it given its paperweight status. But I bought it on looks alone (for about NZ$35 if I recall correctly) and it kicked off my current obsession with cameras, so it was money well spent. I too have my eyes peeled for a nice, working example.
|
|