Adding another AE M-mount Body

[wjlapier]

I'm seriously considering another AE M mount body to my M7 kit. Read alot on the Konica today and will do some more reading on the Ikon. I'm wondering what some of you think about the Konica and using Leica lenses. And the durability and robustness. My M7 feels solid and I really like how it takes pictures. Another M7 might be what I could do, but if the Konica or Ikon are similar build I might consider one of them. One thing I do like about the Konica is the film advance and rewind. 1/4000 is nice to have too. I read about it mainly on Gandy's website. How would you compare build quality of either Konica and Ikon to the M7, or even the Contax G1, another AE body I really liked. I shoot primarily 28/35. My M7 is .58 BTW.

Thanks for any insights to help make this next purchase. I'd really like to hear from those who use both a M7 and either the Konica or Ikon.

[segedi]

Because you shoot wides and because I don't have experience with the Konica, I recommend you try out a Voigtlander Bessa R4A. It has 21, 25, 28, 35 and 50mm framelines. The 50 is a bit tiny, but it is brilliant for 25/28. And I have used it for 35mm as well with good success.

I hauled it with me on a few trips. The battery lasts a long time and are cheap and easy to find. It is much lighter than the M7 but I never thought the build quality was very inferior. I also like the grip. Feels nice in the hand - especially with the accessory grip. And best of all, even new, it's much less expensive of an investment.

My only other recommendation is to consider a .72 M7. Less expensive and easier to find then the .58. And it works very well with a 35mm lens.

[digitalintrigue]

I have owned the Hexar RF 2 or 3 times. It's essentially a Contax G2 with a rangefinder and M mount. .6x finder, almost identical to the 0.58 Leica.

I found the build quality very similar to the G2. They might have even come out of the same factory. :)

The Ikon viewfinder is superb, probably the best of any. Body is less solid, but this probably doesn't matter in practice and may even be a benefit due to lighter weight. Of course it's a current model so service is not a question.

[mfunnell]

The Ikon viewfinder is superb, probably the best of any. Body is less solid, but this probably doesn't matter in practice and may even be a benefit due to lighter weight. Of course it's a current model so service is not a question.I've not used the Ikon but have and use the Hexar RF, which I love dearly. The viewfinder is almost-but-not-quite as good as the equivalent Leica (so probably well behind the Ikon). But the last point about service might be critical. I have two Hexar RFs, just in case one of 'em breaks.

...Mike

P.S. There's a Hexar RF (and M-Hex 50) in the classifieds right now:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost-classifieds/showproduct.php/product/32631/title/m-hex-50-hexar-rf/cat/2

No connection to the seller; I'm just pointing.

[kzphoto]

I had a Hexar RF which I sold to a friend. I decided I didn't need a camera with 28mm frame lines. I was wrong. He, however is cackling away with a shiny, working Hexar RF.

[sepiareverb]

I'd avoid the Hexar. Too many stories (mine included) of permanent VF alignment failures. The Ikon is a very fine body- I disliked the wind-on compared to my M bodies, but that was all.

[BillBingham2]

What about a CLE?

A lot depends upon what you want to do with it and the styles of glass you use/want to use. The CL/CLE is a body style that I've lusted after for years.

B2

[digitalintrigue]

CLE :) Really nice with a small 28mm.

[wjlapier]

Oh yeah. The CLE looks compact and a great match for my 28/2.8 ASPH, and that tiny MS Triplet! Sheesh, all I need is another 28mm camera ( Fuji Klasse W and Nikon Ti28 ). I like the idea of using my CV 21 with this camera.

So, who is the best most reliable tech for these cameras? What should one look for when buying one?