Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Coffee With Mentors > Canon Rangefinders - Peter Dechert and Peter Kitchingman

Canon Rangefinders - Peter Dechert and Peter Kitchingman Peter Dechert is best known for his Canon Rangefinder, Canon SLR, and Olympus Pen books, the latter two long out-of-print. He was a monthly columnist for many years for SHUTTERBUG magazine, and has contributed to many others. Most recently he has written about the pre-WW2 Zeiss 35mm cameras, but his interests in camera equipment and optics are many and varied. As a pro protographer and honorary life member of ASMP, Peter is also expert in using the gear! Peter Kitchingman - author of Canon Rangefinder Lens book Peter Kitchingman's 'Canon M39 Rangefinder Lenses 1939-71' book is the definitive source on these very interesting optics. His interests also go to the entire Canon Rangefinder system and beyond.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Smallest ltm canon
Old 3 Weeks Ago   #1
Tsheltry
Registered User
 
Tsheltry is offline
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 14
Smallest ltm canon

Does anyone know what the smallest ltm mount canon(or other brand if it's that much better) rangefinder? I'm wanting something very small as a second body.
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #2
nasmformyzombie
Registered
 
nasmformyzombie is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 249
Take a look at the Canon camera museum here.

The open back film loading Canons are about the same size except for the 7 series, which is larger. The models with built in trigger winders are taller. In the Canon museum there are dimension and weight specifications for all models.

The older bottom loaders are a bit smaller, some not by much. The smallest are the oldest models and are the least user friendly.

I've not owned a Leica Barnack camera. Too fiddly for my taste.
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #3
CameraQuest
Head Bartender
 
CameraQuest is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: over the hills from Malibu
Posts: 5,282
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tsheltry View Post
Does anyone know what the smallest ltm mount canon(or other brand if it's that much better) rangefinder? I'm wanting something very small as a second body.
The Leica CL.

Add a LTM to M adapter and it becomes a LTM camera,
WITH TTL metering !
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #4
Steve M.
Registered User
 
Steve M. is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,384
That's an excellent suggestion. I had one w/ a collapsible 50 Summicron (which you couldn't collapse on the CL) and it was tiny and light. You can usually pick up a nice one w/ a dead meter at a good price, which is my preferred type of CL. Compared to this, the M3 DS w/ a 50 DR that it replaced felt closer to a medium format camera in weight and size.
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #5
Mackinaw
Think Different
 
Mackinaw is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: One hour south of the Mackinaw Bridge
Posts: 2,745
Owning a bottom load Canon III-A, I’ve always been impressed how much smaller it is the a Leica M. Make that substantially smaller. My III-A, and a 25mm lens, fits neatly inside my pocket. Great combo too.

Jim B.
__________________
My fancy-schmancy gallery:

http://snowcountryphotography.com

My RFF Gallery:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/phot...user=1453&sl=m
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #6
Steve M.
Registered User
 
Steve M. is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,384
Here's a nice little CL w/ a working meter for a sweet price. I never had one w/ a meter that worked, so have no idea how that even works. This one will be gone very quickly at this price.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Leica-Leitz-...UAAOSwubRXIa1x
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #7
nasmformyzombie
Registered
 
nasmformyzombie is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mackinaw View Post
Owning a bottom load Canon III-A, I’ve always been impressed how much smaller it is the a Leica M. Make that substantially smaller. My III-A, and a 25mm lens, fits neatly inside my pocket. Great combo too.
Canon III-A: 136 x 72.2 x 30.5 mm.
Leica M3: 138 x 77.0 x 33.5 mm.

Substantially smaller? The Canon is not as tall, not quite as wide, almost the same length, but to me it's splitting hairs. An M3 is tiny compared to a modern SLR.

The previously suggested Leica CL is 121 ◊ 76 ◊ 32 mm.
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #8
Tsheltry
Registered User
 
Tsheltry is offline
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by CameraQuest View Post
The Leica CL.

Add a LTM to M adapter and it becomes a LTM camera,
WITH TTL metering !
I've considered it. I'm just worried about the meter dying on me. My localish camera store has one with the 40mm for $500 I think. Is that a good price?
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #9
B-9
Devin Bro
 
B-9's Avatar
 
B-9 is offline
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,414
That's a great price for a body with lens...

Especially if it has a working meter, the 40mm Rokkor/Summicrons are fetching 400+ usd these days.
__________________
Made in Michigan

RangefinderGuy @ Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #10
Mackinaw
Think Different
 
Mackinaw is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: One hour south of the Mackinaw Bridge
Posts: 2,745
Quote:
Originally Posted by nasmformyzombie View Post
........Substantially smaller? The Canon is not as tall, not quite as wide, almost the same length, but to me it's splitting hairs. An M3 is tiny compared to a modern SLR.......
Numbers on paper donít tell the entire story. Besides the Canon III-A, I also own a Leica M3 and MP. The III-A is much smaller than an M-series Leica. No contest really. Hold one in your hand and youíll see what Iím talking about.

Jim B.
__________________
My fancy-schmancy gallery:

http://snowcountryphotography.com

My RFF Gallery:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/phot...user=1453&sl=m
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #11
Tsheltry
Registered User
 
Tsheltry is offline
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mackinaw View Post
Owning a bottom load Canon III-A, Iíve always been impressed how much smaller it is the a Leica M. Make that substantially smaller. My III-A, and a 25mm lens, fits neatly inside my pocket. Great combo too.

Jim B.
Is the canon III much different than the IIIa? I found one with a 50mm 1.9 for a decent price. I've never used a camera with a winding knob before so that turned me off of it a little
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #12
Livesteamer
Registered User
 
Livesteamer is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Winston Salem North Carolina
Posts: 1,260
The Canon III and IIIa are similar. Canon made many different models with only slight differences. If you want a Canon bottom loader I would suggest the very last few, easily identified by the shutter dial have an arrow in the center of the dial to set speed by. These models have an improved finder that is better than the earlier ones. I have a Canon IVSB2 with that finder and I think it's better than my Leica IIIc's. Joe
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #13
Tsheltry
Registered User
 
Tsheltry is offline
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Livesteamer View Post
The Canon III and IIIa are similar. Canon made many different models with only slight differences. If you want a Canon bottom loader I would suggest the very last few, easily identified by the shutter dial have an arrow in the center of the dial to set speed by. These models have an improved finder that is better than the earlier ones. I have a Canon IVSB2 with that finder and I think it's better than my Leica IIIc's. Joe
The finder on my L3 is excellent, I'd like to find something similar quality to that but with 50 and 100 finders instead of the 35 and 50 on the L3
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #14
johannielscom
Leica II is The One
 
johannielscom's Avatar
 
johannielscom is offline
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Universitas Terre Threntiae
Posts: 6,922
Like Stephen said, the CL (or CLE). With a 28mm 2.8 LTM lens on there it's as small as you can get.
__________________
www.johanniels.com | flickr | instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #15
nasmformyzombie
Registered
 
nasmformyzombie is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tsheltry View Post
The finder on my L3 is excellent, I'd like to find something similar quality to that but with 50 and 100 finders instead of the 35 and 50 on the L3
The IV series has a switchable magnification finder at 50mm (F-0.67x), 100mm (1x), and 135mm (1.5x). This is a bottom loader/Barnack copy which means the viewfinder will be smaller than on your L3. Not sure about mag finders on other bottom loaders.

I have a Canon VI L, which is something of an updated version of your L3. There are several differences with the VI L, including a larger shutter speed dial than the L3. The VI L also has built-in automatic parallax correction with projected frames for 50mm and 100mm lenses. The VI L is an upgrade over the L3 and is priced accordingly. I am otherwise unfamiliar with the particulars of the L3.

The bottom loaders are smaller than the rear loaders, but for me too fiddly with film loading and with viewfinders that are too squinty. If you can live with the slightly larger footprint of the rear loaders, and you share these concerns, they are much better shooters than the bottom loaders.

Lastly, as a Leica owner I could be burned at the stake for stating this, but the screwmount Canons are far better values for the money than their Leica counterparts. The only advantage the Leicas have is they are smaller than the Canons.
  Reply With Quote

Not LTM, but...
Old 3 Weeks Ago   #16
wjlapier
Registered User
 
wjlapier's Avatar
 
wjlapier is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,380
Not LTM, but...

Might be a tiny as you can get with a 28mm.

  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #17
peterm1
Registered User
 
peterm1's Avatar
 
peterm1 is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,975
If you are happy to go really old school I would suggest something like a Leica 111a. I had one for several years and really liked it. Although its serial number dated to 1936 (and the Elmar 50mm f3.5 lens to 1934) it had been factory updated after the war to have flash sync and coating on the lens. It performed nicely. Its small but not so small that it is hard to handle. The Leica 111c is only slightly larger. Both are smaller than any Canon LTM camera I ever owned. Of course having a lens that slides into the camera body helps and it is readily possible to slip such a camera into a pocket for carrying.
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #18
nasmformyzombie
Registered
 
nasmformyzombie is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mackinaw View Post
Numbers on paper don’t tell the entire story. Besides the Canon III-A, I also own a Leica M3 and MP. The III-A is much smaller than an M-series Leica. No contest really. Hold one in your hand and you’ll see what I’m talking about.
The numbers do tell most of the story, unless you believe in alternative facts. The remainder of the story to me is in looking at the experience of the individual user. I started with Contax SLR's, built like proverbial tanks, and accordingly large and heavy. When I pick up my M3 I can never get over how small it is compared to Contax SLR's. My perspective on the size of a Leica M is informed by my use of those beastly cameras from Contax.

I can't imagine wanting a camera any smaller than the M3. I don't know if I could properly operate a camera any smaller. This assumes I can operate any camera properly but that's another story.
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Weeks Ago   #19
goamules
Registered User
 
goamules is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,597
My M3 weighs 2 lbs, 5 oz. My Canon IVSB weighs 1 lb, 7 oz. That extra pound (almost twice as heavy) is a big difference around your neck. The depth of the Canon with this lens you'll note is less than half what the M3 is too. All that weight tipping forward on the strap is a hassle.

Back to the OP, why do you want a smaller camera? I'm assuming to pocket one at some times? And why LTM, so you can use your lenses right? Then get a Canon IVSB, and report back to us after 4 rolls through it. If you get a Canon P or L series, you are getting basically the same size and viewfinder brightness of the M3, i.e. about the same camera. You wanted smaller right?



__________________
Garrett

My Flickr Photos
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Weeks Ago   #20
Peter Jennings
Registered User
 
Peter Jennings's Avatar
 
Peter Jennings is offline
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Seoul
Posts: 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by nasmformyzombie View Post
The IV series has a switchable magnification finder at 50mm (F-0.67x), 100mm (1x), and 135mm (1.5x).
This is not entirely accurate. The 1x and 1.5x magnifications do roughly equate to those focal lengths, but what you see through the finder is not a rectangular frame. The image is circular and what you see is only a rough estimate of what will be in the frame. I'd highly recommend an external finder for shooting long focal lengths on a III, IV, and V series Canon RF.
__________________
Peter
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Weeks Ago   #21
presspass
filmshooter
 
presspass is offline
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Lancaster County, Pennsylvania
Posts: 885
I have both Leica IIIa cameras and a Canon IVSB2. The Leicas are smaller and, with a 35mm Elmar or collapsible Summar 50, very pocketable. The Canon has a brighter viewfinder, a much more user-friendly rangefinder, and both share the same viewfinder window. If size is the controlling factor, a IIIa Leica is hard to beat. If you want a better rangefinder and a viewfinder that can be adjusted for 50, 100, and 135 lenses, the Canon is the obvious choice.
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Weeks Ago   #22
splitimageview
Registered User
 
splitimageview is offline
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,112
I have owned many Ms, and I find them heavy for their size. Brickish, even.

As much as I enjoy the feel of an M, the small size and weight of a barnack is preferable. There are tradeoffs of course, and everyone has their personal preferences.

If there is a barnack style Canon with a better vf than a Leica screw mount body I'd like to hear more about it.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 14:46.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.