Canonet G-III 17 as a first time RF?

[ryan_d]

I'm starting to look around for my first rangefinder camera. I had a few older Minolta film SLRs for a bit but never got a whole lot of experience with film in general. I was wondering what the consensus is on picking up a Canonet as a first time rangefinder. I'm trying to keep the total costs low as I would also like to try my hand at processing the film myself and would have to purchase equipment for that as well.

Just for some background I would say that I am more of a street photographer than anything else but am very much new to photography in general.

[Brian Legge]

I think its one of the best 'testing the waters' rangefinders if you can find a working one at a good price.

- The lens is a fine performer.
- Its well built
- It has a better than average finder for rangefinders in its class
- Its more compact than some of its larger competitors which are closer to SLR size
- Nice handling (nothing too eccentric)

As someone who obsessively explored the 'cheap rangefinder' space, I found it to be a perfectly fine camera. Others beat it in a particular attribute but usually at some other cost (price if nothing else).

[pinkarmy]

Originally Posted by ryan_d

...I had a few older Minolta film SLRs...

...why not a Minolta Hi-matic 7ii? (or, cheaper but bigger, Hi-matic 7 or Hi-matic 9)

anyway, i have a QL17 Giii.
it is a lovely camera, easy to use, sharp image,
one of the perfect starter RF cameras if you are not looking for total (manual) control.

[Brian Legge]

The Minolta 7sII is a great camera as well. From a handling perspective, its the only one that beat the Canonet 17 GIII for me (though ergonomics are really personal - I like small cameras and the aperture lever put it in a class of its own).

It took me several tries to find a working one. The first few 7sIIs I picked up had fungus in the leas, broken parts, etc. Perhaps just luck but disconcerting. Aside from the price and difficulty finding a good one, it would be my other top pick personally.

[jazzwave]

QL17 III is a good choice for starter kit, small size,sharp , wide open f1.7. The most important thing you need go to street for practice;focusing on still and moving object, close to object, feel it.

Good luck..

[Twigs]

It's a lovely camera.

The QL17 GIII was also my first rangefinder camera. I paid about USD 40 for mine six years ago. Once I replaced the light seal and cleaned the shutter blades of gunk it was good to go. It had gotten me so deep into film that after a couple rolls of C41 I started developing my own BW film.

I have since moved onto other rangefinders like the lovely Yashica GT and GSN, the Voigtlander Bessa T and R2, and eventually the M9. I don't shoot the Canonet or any 35mm film anymore but I still shoot and process medium and large format film. It's been a long and exciting journey for me. Every time I look at my dehumidifier I see the little Canonet sitting next to my 4x5 lenses and remember how it all started for me.

[cosmonaut]

I went down the same road as twigs but ended up with the M6/M3 and not the M9. But I replaced the seals, cleaned the shutter blades and battery compartment on more than one Canonet. I have one in the works right now I found at a junk sale fot $15.00.
I think you should just bite the bullet and get a nice one already fixed up though if you are not adventurous at heart.
PS, not to mention it is one of the easiest loading cameras ever.

[ColSebastianMoran]

Bought a Cannonet QL17 G-III early in my RF exploration. Trying to use it with auto exposure, I put it aside: I prefer aperture-preferred instead of shutter-pref, and in my case the auto exposure was not reliable (camera indicated bad exposure and would not fire).

Then I put the camera on manual, added a Voigtlander VC-II meter on top, and it's a terrific package, very compact, good looking, and handles well. I especially like the short-throw tabbed focusing. Not the easiest camera to change the shutter speed ring, but overall very nice handling.

(Of course, the VC meter takes this out of the "cheap" category.)

Now I am a "happy camper," using one of my Yashicas for aperture preferred and the Cannonet for manual.

[Steve Bellayr]

A usable Canonet will run close to $200. A usable Yashica GSN under $100. Finding a hood for either is not easy. Both will provide you with the experience that you are looking for but eventually, if you continue, you will ultimately look at a Leica.

[ryan_d]

So it sounds like a good list of cameras to start looking at are the Canonet, the Yashica GSN, and Minolta Hi-Matic 7ii. How about the Olympus XA? That's another one that I've had recommended to me.

Originally Posted by Steve Bellayr

A usable Canonet will run close to $200. A usable Yashica GSN under $100.

Thanks Steve, I was wondering about this. I was looking at the prices on KEH and wasn't sure if the $200+ prices they have on their site for a nice conditioned Canonet was too high or not.

[btgc]

Originally Posted by Steve Bellayr

A usable Canonet will run close to $200.

I guess black QL17 hits this price. For some reason.

[Basset]

Originally Posted by Steve Bellayr

A usable Canonet will run close to $200. A usable Yashica GSN under $100. Finding a hood for either is not easy. Both will provide you with the experience that you are looking for but eventually, if you continue, you will ultimately look at a Leica.

I found a nice lens hood for my Yashica GSN here for $7.60 shipped. Partially visible in the lower rt corner of the finder window, but not an issue for composition or use.

[Frontman]

Originally Posted by Steve Bellayr

A usable Canonet will run close to $200. A usable Yashica GSN under $100. Finding a hood for either is not easy. Both will provide you with the experience that you are looking for but eventually, if you continue, you will ultimately look at a Leica.

Those prices are a bit steep. I often service and sell these cameras, and I usually get about $100 for a ready to use silver QL17. I usually charge about $200 for a black version. I sell serviced GSN cameras for $100 to $150, depending on the condition and accessories included.

Personally, I think the Yashicas are better picture takers. The GSN cameras are a bit large and clunky, but the Yashica GX is smaller and better handling. The Yashicas tend to have better meters than the Canon QL17, and do not have the sticker shutter/aperture blade problems common with Canonets.

The best of the fixed-lens rangefinder cameras is probably the Olympus SP.

[kuzano]

Originally Posted by Frontman

Those prices are a bit steep. I often service and sell these cameras, and I usually get about $100 for a ready to use silver QL17. I usually charge about $200 for a black version. I sell serviced GSN cameras for $100 to $150, depending on the condition and accessories included.

Personally, I think the Yashicas are better picture takers. The GSN cameras are a bit large and clunky, but the Yashica GX is smaller and better handling. The Yashicas tend to have better meters than the Canon QL17, and do not have the sticker shutter/aperture blade problems common with Canonets.

The best of the fixed-lens rangefinder cameras is probably the Olympus SP.

The Olympus 35SP has all of the features mentioned in every example listed in this post, plus
a great lens, good rangefinder, great exposure system. It also has one of the first functional Spot Metering systems in early rangefinders. Can be found for the same price as Canonet's that are overpriced. No GIII is worth more than $100 in my opinion, unless it is black OR recently rebuilt... not CLA,,,, rebuilt. Then it can run to $300 to $400... same as a black oLY 35sp.

[PMCC]

Originally Posted by Frontman

Yashica GX is smaller and better handling. The Yashicas tend to have better meters than the Canon QL17, and do not have the sticker shutter/aperture blade problems common with Canonets.

What is the current price range for the GX?

[Frontman]

Originally Posted by PMCC

What is the current price range for the GX?

The GX is a rare bird, not so many were made, and even less were exported from Japan, they usually sell on eBay for $150 and up.

[oftheherd]

As others have said, the Canonet is a good camera, but others are as well. Also, Canonet came in a f/1.9 and f/2.8 modern version with the CDS cell window in the lens housing. Oh, the f/1.9 came in two sizes. I don't know about others. One was the size of the Canonet 17, and the other was about the size of the Yashicas.

Egonomics aside, there are many fixed focal length cameras of that era that you should find fun to use, and that will produce fine photos.

[stompyq]

The XA is a completely different experience to the other RF cameras (my opinion!!) I went down a similar road and like Steve Bellayr said now have a Leica. I went through a Canonet QL17 GIII, A minolta Himativ 7SII and a Himatic 9, Konica S2, Olypmus 35RC, Olympus XA and very briefly a Yashica GSN (was very rough). Aside from the Yashica I used the other camera for several months on a self imposed project. I still have the canonet. The rest I sold.

Do yourself a favor and buy the Canonet. I still take it out when the Leica is too much of a pain to carry. It does everything well and is a consistent performer. In terms of sheer image quality I felt the Himatic 7sII was better. The most fun camera to use was the oly 35RC. The only reason I got rid of it was the f2.8.

[ColSebastianMoran]

Ryan, what are your needs/desires? In particular, do you want auto-exposure, and do you care which flavor.

And, for overall reference, go to CameraQuest's page on compact rangefinders.

[Aristophanes]

Canonet has battery issues. Resolving adds cost or high turnover.

Great camera, though. Very solid and compact. Terrific loading of film.

[Jack Conrad]

I recently found a GIII at a thrift store for $5, but the battery had badly corroded the circuits inside...
However, after cleaning all the green nastiness out and replacing the seals,
it was still a very nice sharp handsome little manual user camera. I just sold it for $20.

An XA is all electronic and if a circuit goes, it's a door stop. But if it still shoots
and doesn't have fungus in the lens, arguably it has a sharper lens than the GIII.
Overall, I'd say the GIII is a pretty good choice if you can find a nice one cheap.
XA's and Stylus' can still be found in thrift stores quite often for very little.

I currently have two XA2's... PM me if you're interested. I live in Florida.

[Brian Legge]

People sell here and at APUG regularly sell Canonets for $40-70 - ones they'll vouch for as working. I've sold two in that range which were in wonderful condition, new light seals, etc.

$200 is very high for the camera. Thats closing in on Bessa R + FSU lens range.

[stewmander]

Originally Posted by Brian Legge

People sell here and at APUG regularly sell Canonets for $40-70 - ones they'll vouch for as working. I've sold two in that range which were in wonderful condition, new light seals, etc.

$200 is very high for the camera. Thats closing in on Bessa R + FSU lens range.

This. I bought 2 Canonets on RFF for $60 each. I was amazed to see prices of $200 on some places and again in this thread, but if someone offered that I would take it =P I am trying to see if i can trade the nicer one of set as I dont use both...

The battery is a bit of an issue, if the Canonet isnt modified you might need to use an adapter...One of my Canonets can use hearing aid batteries and is modified so the battery fits, the other cannot use the hearing aid battery because the battery is too small to fit and make contact in the battery slot. You can use some aluminum foil to wedge the batter in, but I never got it to work for longer than a few min before the foil shifted and the battery was disconnected.

[2WK]

My friend has a black canonet with the f-1.7. It is a super camera. He always gets amazing shots and they are super sharp. The black paint is starting to wear and show the brass underneath and it looks soo good. The only downside I can see is the max 800 iso setting.

[Dana B.]

You might also consider a Canonet QL rangefinder, my first camera, and still on my shelf. Auto for shutter. 43/2.5 lens. Cheap cheap. And made for the street.