Don'tknowmuch Posted May 17, 2009 Share #1 Posted May 17, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Good afternoon (well, it is here). I'm a bit worried about posting this question, but am presuming on the previously demonstrated generous tolerance of group members. I'm thinking of getting an Olympus 35SP. Possible heresy to mention it here, but I'd like to pose this as a Leica question as I am thinking of a CL, but there are obviously HUGE differences in cost. If money were no object I'd probably try to put a CL/Summaron f2.8 combination together, but it is. There is a lot of 35SP information on the net, but I don't think it wise to trust general net-trawling and I'd welcome advice/opinions from, well, from you lot!. (One of us posted some pictures from a Yashica Electro and I thought they were great, but I know less about the Electros and would love a spot meter.) Hope I'm forgiven for this, Jim. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 17, 2009 Posted May 17, 2009 Hi Don'tknowmuch, Take a look here ...Olympus 35SP (sorry). I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
ujjwaldey8165 Posted May 19, 2009 Share #2 Posted May 19, 2009 (edited) Hi I have used both the cameras so here is my view Leica lens are in a class of their own; no question. And Leica makes sturdier bodies (though some say CL is not in the same class since its really Minolta manufactured etc). Leica is a legend; and nothing can beat the feeling of handling a leica ( except possibly, a Contax G, which has stunning lens as well) On the other hand SP35 ( and many RF from the 60/70) are much less expensive, easily within 100£, and even less if you are willing to live with a scuffy body. But the lens in many of them are great, especially stopped down at 8.Even at 5.6 they are absolute stunning. And some are much smaller; though some dont have RF and are scale focusing. But the lens are fixed; so you can't add a long lens for a portrait. So these are mostly useful today for carrying a small comact camera with a high quality lens for that impromptu photogrpahy. If you have other cameras, I would suggest you save up for a CL. If this is going to be your first RF, you could try a 60/70 RF for 40 -70£ ( mechanically ok, but scruffy body) to see if you like RF. I would suggest you look at Yashica electro series , Olympus SP, Petri 7, minolta hi matic, Konica S2, and among the Scale focusing cameras Rollei 35, Minox 35 . all of them have great lens Hope this helps you make a choice Edited May 19, 2009 by ujjwaldey8165 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
smb Posted May 19, 2009 Share #3 Posted May 19, 2009 The Leica cameras are far superior. I would be hesitant about the CL as I have heard that repairs to them are becoming increasingly more difficult because of the lack of spare parts. As for the Olympus SP I have used it. If you want to experiment with a rangefinder camera it is a good one to begin with but there are others, i.e. Canonet, Yashica GSN, Minolta 7s & 7sII, etc. All have their supporters and none are truly bad. If you choose that road remember these are old cameras and condition is everything. (Lens hoods are difficult or near impossible to find for these fixed lens rangefinders but a Hama Hood will suffice & is readily available.) Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NZDavid Posted May 21, 2009 Share #4 Posted May 21, 2009 My first serious camera was an Olympus 35RC. I have also used an Olympus 35RD (very similar to the SP) and a Leica CL, briefly. I now use Leica M. The Olympus is a precision instrument, no doubt. The lenses are good, but Leitz/Leica lenses have higher resolution. Other factors to consider are reliability of leaf shutters on the Olympus; basically uneconomical to repair. Also, light seals deteriorate -- in comparison, bottom-loading Leicas have lasted longer. The CL is compact, but does not have the same feel as the M. However, you do get to use wonderful Leica lenses. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michiel Fokkema Posted May 21, 2009 Share #5 Posted May 21, 2009 Why not try the http://www.rangefinderforum.com There we don't mind to talk about rf's which are not Leica. Cheers, Michiel Fokkema Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenneth Posted May 24, 2009 Share #6 Posted May 24, 2009 Why not try the http://www.rangefinderforum.comThere we don't mind to talk about rf's which are not Leica. Cheers, Michiel Fokkema But we talk here about Cosina Voigtlander so what is the difference. And yes I would second the earlier comment about the CL which I think usually comes with a 40mm lens. Your other alternative might be a Rollei 35. I don't know enough about the different models but I used one with a 35mm Tessar lens in the Alps back in the 70's and the results were equal to any rangefinder I had used until I discovered Leica. I hope you find a suitable camera and it does not need to be the best, most expensive option to produce favourable results Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.