as some of you lot know, il be going on my travels soon and have decided to take a 35mm with me for back up and when i cant or dont want to use my dslr(think this will be aq good idea)
my praktica and cannon slr and rangefinder are a bit on the heavy side and im trying to be as light as possible. Anyone got a recomendation for a compact (cheap as possible, am on a bit of a budget) 35mm that i could run some b/w through?
knowledge is the opposite of originality
How about an Olympus XA? Has a degree of manual control (Aperture priority) a decent lens, and manual focusing. They aren't expensive, if you can find one that is.as some of you lot know, I'll be going on my travels soon and have decided to take a 35mm with me for back up and when I can't or don't want to use my dslr (think this will be a good idea)
my Praktica and Canon slr and range-finder are a bit on the heavy side and im trying to be as light as possible. Anyone got a recommendation for a compact (cheap as possible, am on a bit of a budget) 35mm that I could run some b/w through?
How about one of these. I've had several over the years and can really recommend them. Fifty quid should get a nice one if you look around the net and auctions.
Rog
I'm still very happy with my Rollei B35. If you want something different, a Vivitar Ultra Wide and Slim? (Click)
Or a Minox 35mm (again if you can find one). I have one and it's great. Doesn't have the 'bells and whistles' of modern stuff but the lens is as sharp as a tack.
MickLL
Ricoh 500 series? Manual or shutter priority, split image rangefinder and metal construction.
Seconded. The XA2 is pretty good as well.
How about an Olympus XA? Has a degree of manual control (Aperture priority) a decent lens, and manual focusing. They aren't expensive, if you can find one that is.
Can't be a***d with a signature.
The disadvantage of the Oly 35 series, and the Trip 35 that I'd otherwise suggest, is that if you want to take any filters for B&W, they take 43.5mm, which are like hen's teeth. The Ricoh 500 series take 46mm, and Eb*y suggests that they aren't too bad to get hold of.
The Ricoh 500s are nice to use and punch above their weight in terms of image - but you will have to reseal if you don't buy one that's already been done.
Adrian
All part of the fun of extreme vintage photography
You'll be amazed at the carp I've posted here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/gray1720/
If you're not too fussed about the degree of control you have, the Olympus Mju II takes some beating - decent lens, very small and compact, excellent meter. And a lot more modern than most of the other recommendations (which are all decent cameras), so less likely to go wrong.
OTOH it won't work at all without a battery, and if the electronics go down it's just a lump. The "manual everything" cameras usually degrade gracefully rather than stopping altogether if something goes wrong; you can carry on using them if e.g. the slow speeds on the shutter start sticking, or the meter gives up the ghost.a lot more modern than most of the other recommendations (which are all decent cameras), so less likely to go wrong.
If you're not living on the edge, you're wasting space
Not sure I actually agree at the age of most of the cameras suggested - and many of these are also battery-dependent, rather than all mechanical anyway. To get a reliable mechanical camera at the sort of price these go for would be rather too much to hope for, IMHO. I would normally recommend a Rollei, but it would be pot luck getting a good one for next to nothing, and the same goes double for lesser cameras. The Mju II is about 20 years younger than the others, is actually quite a bit tougher than some of the cameras mentioned, and is weatherproofed. Don't get me wrong, I prefer the XA, the Rollei 35 S and various others, but probably not for the job in question. The Ricoh 500 series isn't that bad a shout - they take great pictures, have loads of features, but don't inspire any confidence as to build quality!
How about an Olympus XA?
A good suggestion.AV exposure,rangefinder focus.
I have one which needs new seals.I really must do it.
You could pick one up cheaply these days.
Battery dependency is the only downside though.
Cheers
Dave NRIPN
If it wasn't for bad luck, I wouldn't have no luck at all - Albert King
Blues is a healer - John Lee Hooker
my flickr
Rollei 35S. Mine has been all over the place. Lens second to none. Mechanical (except meter). Tiny.
No real argument there Nick, most of those suggested are getting on a bit, but the real constraints are "light" and "cheap". Unless you accept battery dependency, you can get some great light weight cameras, at a price. You can get some really cheap cameras but they aren't light.Not sure I actually agree at the age of most of the cameras suggested - and many of these are also battery-dependent, rather than all mechanical anyway. To get a reliable mechanical camera at the sort of price these go for would be rather too much to hope for, IMHO. I would normally recommend a Rollei, but it would be pot luck getting a good one for next to nothing, and the same goes double for lesser cameras. The Mju II is about 20 years younger than the others, is actually quite a bit tougher than some of the cameras mentioned, and is weatherproofed. Don't get me wrong, I prefer the XA, the Rollei 35 S and various others, but probably not for the job in question. The Ricoh 500 series isn't that bad a shout - they take great pictures, have loads of features, but don't inspire any confidence as to build quality!
The ideal would probably be an old Leica with a 24mm or 35mm lens, mechanical, reliable, not too heavy but not cheap either. The Fed or Zorki copies are pretty good, if they have survived they are good ones, but they couldn't really be called light.
As this is to be a back-up camera I can only suggest a quick search to see what is available and then accept the possibility that an older camera may let you down. A camera that uses SR44 type batteries would be a good choice because they are small and you can carry spares. In many parts of the world they are readily available. AAs likewise but avoid the more exotic batteries.
Exactly - light and cheap, but still reliable was what made me suggest the Mju II. Or not quite as good, but even cheaper, a Mju - mine cost me 50p last year.No real argument there Nick, most of those suggested are getting on a bit, but the real constraints are "light" and "cheap". Unless you accept battery dependency, you can get some great light weight cameras, at a price. You can get some really cheap cameras but they aren't light.Not sure I actually agree at the age of most of the cameras suggested - and many of these are also battery-dependent, rather than all mechanical anyway. To get a reliable mechanical camera at the sort of price these go for would be rather too much to hope for, IMHO. I would normally recommend a Rollei, but it would be pot luck getting a good one for next to nothing, and the same goes double for lesser cameras. The Mju II is about 20 years younger than the others, is actually quite a bit tougher than some of the cameras mentioned, and is weatherproofed. Don't get me wrong, I prefer the XA, the Rollei 35 S and various others, but probably not for the job in question. The Ricoh 500 series isn't that bad a shout - they take great pictures, have loads of features, but don't inspire any confidence as to build quality!
The ideal would probably be an old Leica with a 24mm or 35mm lens, mechanical, reliable, not too heavy but not cheap either. The Fed or Zorki copies are pretty good, if they have survived they are good ones, but they couldn't really be called light.
As this is to be a back-up camera I can only suggest a quick search to see what is available and then accept the possibility that an older camera may let you down. A camera that uses SR44 type batteries would be a good choice because they are small and you can carry spares. In many parts of the world they are readily available. AAs likewise but avoid the more exotic batteries.
cheers guys. some good recomendations there. been looking through em. tbh, im after summat quite basic thats small and i can just whip out when im in a bit of a dodgy area or sketchy weather conditions. batteries are not really an issue and i love the idea of a lomo style device, but, although i love the holga style do i want all my film stuff to be like that? food for thought i guess.
still looking though as i speak.
knowledge is the opposite of originality
Ive used all the cameras mentioned while travelling,except the Ricoh the others were second to either a Nikon F,F3, or Olympus OM 1 or 2
The XA & other small Olympus tend to stop working,you slide open aim & nothing??The Rollie goes forever but i didnt like the fold out lens
The Ricoh with i bought new in Holland many years ago on the way to Greece as id lost my Nikon,was very inexpensive very portable very reliable & took great images.
Today as said all these cameras are ageing & no longer reliable buys secondhand.
Todays digi cams are set up for colour imaging B&W is an after thought an "option" to get excellent B&W you have to use film and its fun!
Today film cameras are cheep in general. I would recommend a pentax ME or MV & new battery! with a 40mm pancake lens its a very small camera take excellent images & its only fault is the foam that keeps the mirror quite or used to,if its perished,without its still very quite
A pentax wont cost more than an XA less than minox or rollie & its more reliable
The very best and just a bit bigger would of course be an Olympus OM2
Have a good holiday
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
