QL17 GIII Vs. Interchangable Lens RF

[pcfranchina]

How do you guys feel the GIII stands up to other interchangable RF cameras, like older Zorkis or FEDs? I fear I will miss the meter, the fast lens and the advance lever......

[JoeFriday]

do you mean, how do the FSU cameras hold up against the Canonet? there are pros and cons

obviously there is the interchangeable lens factor.. and a Canonet is possibly the easiest RF on the planet to load film into.. the meter is nice, but having a meterless camera can be good, too

I would say the Canonet is better for a travel camera where you anticipate a lot of 'grab shot' opportunities.. but an FSU is a unique and fun system that has to be experienced to understand.. I wouldn't give up my Canonet, but I'm not planning to give up my Kiev any time soon, either.. they complement each other quite well

[pcfranchina]

I may abandon my GIII for a FED or Zorki to use as a #2 in the bag next to my Bessa r3a. Kievs look great but can't share lenses with my Bessa.
But dam the GIII is so easy to use.

[Wayne R. Scott]

I have two rangefinder kits in Lowe-Pro bags that I just grab and go.

One kit has two Canon P bodies with 50mm f1.8 lens, 35mm CV Color SKopar f2.5 and a Canon QL-17 GIII.

The other kit has a Contax IIa, Contax IIIa, with 50mm Sonnar f1.5, Biogon 21mm f4.5, and a Canon QL-17 GIII.


My 35mm SLR Kit has a couple of Nikon F3HP's with 24mm, 55mm Micro, 85mm and 180mm f2.8 and a Canon QL-17 GIII.

My next kit will have a Zorki 4 with 50mm and a Canon QL-17 GIII Both of these are going to have new red leather covers to help them take better pictures .

My coat pocket cameras are a Canon QL-17 GIII and a Rollei 35S.

Just in case you can't tell, I like the QL-17 GIII. I like being able to shoot infrared film in one with a 25A filter and being able to see to compose my photo.

I have never once uttered the phrase "Umm, here hold this while I try to load film into this camera", when using a QL-17 GIII. It is just drop the film in and go!!


My theory is if you have something that works, stay with it. The QL-17 GIII's are better cameras than I am a photographer.

Wayne

[BrianShaw]

I quite agree with what Brett said, but my Canonet is currently gathering dust in a drawer. I'm now prefering to use a Kodak Retina IIIc as my everyday rangefinder camera. I like the quality and the interchangeable lens system. There are some drawbacks -- the accesory lens system is a complete PITA to use and film loading isn't quite as easy as the Canonet. But other than those minor inconveniences, it's small, durable, quick to use (with normal lens), and produces excellent neg/slide quality.

[dmr]

Originally Posted by Wayne R. Scott

I have never once uttered the phrase "Umm, here hold this while I try to load film into this camera", when using a QL-17 GIII. It is just drop the film in and go!!

Call me the odd one out here, but it wasn't until I joined this forum that I realized that not all 35mm cameras load with a hinged rear door. All of them I've ever had did, but I guess I've led a sheltered life, camera-wise that is.

I can't imagine having to load film by taking the bottom assembly out, let alone specially cutting the leader, as I've been told you have to do on some cameras that are popular here. Kinda reminds me of loading the Brownie Starflash in a way. (Please don't take that last sentence the wrong way.)

I admit that the QL mechanism of the QL17 GIII has me spoiled. I estimate it saves me about a minute in changing film, compared to the Pentax or the Mamiya.

The QL-17 GIII's are better cameras than I am a photographer.

When I hear people here talk about the Leicas and Bessas, I wonder if I could really use such a thing to its full capacity. Would I take better photos if I quit using the admittedly cheaper fixed-lens RFs I have?

[kaiyen]

The only photos I would take "better" with an interchangeable lens RF are the ones I can't take at all because the lens on the Canonet isn't wide enough. That's the only reason I why I'm looking to get a bessa.

allan

[anaanda]

I like the simplicity of the Canonet, one small camera, one great lens and you do the rest...Too much choice can be a detriment to creative expression...

[dmr]

Originally Posted by kaiyen

The only photos I would take "better" with an interchangeable lens RF are the ones I can't take at all because the lens on the Canonet isn't wide enough. That's the only reason I why I'm looking to get a bessa.

Actually, one thing I like about the GIII is the slightly-wider normal lens.

When I think of what it would be like to have a RF with interchangeable lenses, I think back to when I had the Spotmatic with 28, normal, and 135. When I needed one, I always had another one on the camera. That's one reason I like the zoom on my current SLR. There really isn't a practical zoom for a RF.

[JoeFriday]

yeah.. just look at what Pecker did with his... full torso closeups through a basement window, for one

[kaiyen]

Well, I didn't mean that I don't like the 40mm. In fact, I love that it's not only wider than "normal" but just wide enough to be different (whereas the GSN's 45mm is a bit too close to 50mm, for instance).

However, there are times when I'd like someting wider, that's all. And if the issue is that I cannot get the shot I want because 40mm isn't wide enough, then I'd like to have a wider lens.

Personally, I'd almost always carry two cameras. One with a wider lens and one with a more normal one. I don't shoot much telephoto with my RFs.

allan

[pcfranchina]

Thats what I love about walking around town with my Bessa Kit. I have a 40mm and the 75mm. Don't think I would want to get any closer then that. Can you put a converter on the the GIII to go tele or wider? obviously the framelines won't be there.

[leica M2 fan]

That is an outstanding case for an outstanding camera. I am soooooo glad that I found mine in pristine shape and it takes wonderful pictures with great contrast and sharpness and the colors are some of the best I have ever experienced with any of my many cameras.

[ruben]

Originally Posted by JoeFriday

do you mean, how do the FSU cameras hold up against the Canonet? there are pros and cons

obviously there is the interchangeable lens factor.. and a Canonet is possibly the easiest RF on the planet to load film into.. the meter is nice, but having a meterless camera can be good, too

I would say the Canonet is better for a travel camera where you anticipate a lot of 'grab shot' opportunities.. but an FSU is a unique and fun system that has to be experienced to understand.. I wouldn't give up my Canonet, but I'm not planning to give up my Kiev any time soon, either.. they complement each other quite well

Short and accurate.

PS: Minor adjustment. If life forces me to choose between mommy and daddy (and sometimes it happens), I go for the exchangeable lens stuff, provided a hand meter is in my pocket.