Best fixed lens RF viewfinder?

[Kin Lau]

I have 1/2 that list. Konica S2 is my choice, but beware that many have loose barrels.

The Bessa R VF is _much_ better.

[ChrisPlatt]

AFAIK the Olympus 35RC is unique among compact 35 rangefinders
in that it displays both aperture and shutter speed within the finder.
There's never a need to look away to change an exposure setting.

Viewfinder brightness and rangefinder are pretty good too, if serviced.

Chris

[julianphotoart]

Konica IIIa has big bright clear amazing 1:1 viewfinder with parallax correction. I don't think that "Konica Hexar" in the listing means this particular Konica.

[srtiwari]

I was looking forward to trying out the camera that would win the vote for best VF, but I must admit I'm not familiar with "other".

[GeneW]

Of the ones I've owned, I find the Canonet QL17 GIII the best of the bunch -- better than the Oly 35RC I once had and better than my Yashica Electro 35. The rangefinder patch is easiest to see on the Canonet. All three are pretty good though.

Gene

[Chuck A]

I just bought an Oly RD to try out and I may get a Canonet QL17 GIII as well. When the RD comes I will let you know if it is better than the RC. I think the Yashica is too large for me. For some reason I am really attracted to smaller. There are lots of votes for other but some didn't post to tell what camera they are voting for.

I guess in the end if I am looking for a really good vf I will have to go with a Leica or a Bessa. The fixed lens viewfinders are good but not in this class.

Just out of curiosity how does the CL compare to the viewfinders on the list? I haven't seen one for 20 years and I can't remember.

[climbing_vine]

I carry the Hi-Matic 9 with me everywhere I go. The viewfinder is a bit squinty to me, but not much worse than any other I've used (very bad eyesight and very thick glasses, so viewfinders in general are a problem). The VF is clearer and the focusing is easier than on the 7sii, which I also own (both been cleaned).

I'd say that the glass is better, as well, though I know that wasn't part of the original question.

[back alley]

Just out of curiosity how does the CL compare to the viewfinders on the list? I haven't seen one for 20 years and I can't remember.


the finder on my cl is very bright and easily viewable.
i think it's brighter than the m3 i have.

joe

[back alley]

Originally Posted by ChrisPlatt

AFAIK the Olympus 35RC is unique among compact 35 rangefinders
in that it displays both aperture and shutter speed within the finder.
There's never a need to look away to change an exposure setting.

Viewfinder brightness and rangefinder are pretty good too, if serviced.

Chris

i had my original, to me, 35rc cla'd a few years ago and the finder brightened considerably.

joe

[tkluck]

Owned or fiddeled with most on the list none compare with my Minox.
...and no problem with the RF patch (the chain works, even with pasta sauce on it)

[Wimpler]

I don't want to sound like an ass, but why does everybody care that much about the viewfinder?

I have 2 minolta hi-matic 7s and 1 minolta hi-matic 7. They are my most used cameras. I have 25 rangefinders and probably 60+ cameras, so I think that does mean something.

[back alley]

not so much that i care but the question was asked...

[sf]

Originally Posted by Wimpler

I don't want to sound like an ass, but why does everybody care that much about the viewfinder?

I have 2 minolta hi-matic 7s and 1 minolta hi-matic 7. They are my most used cameras. I have 25 rangefinders and probably 60+ cameras, so I think that does mean something.

Why would someone care about the VF?

It makes shooting more pleasant when you can see things clearly. The difference between my old Fuji 35mm P&S and my RF645. . . enormous. I can't walk around with my eye in the viewfinder of the Fuji, but the RF645 is very easy on the eye. It makes composition, focusing, and just looking through the viewfinder more comfortable.

[marcus]

Voigtlander Vitomatic- bright 1:1 w/ brightlines w/ an OK spot when cleaned. No paralax compensation, though.

[Chuck A]

Originally Posted by Wimpler

I don't want to sound like an ass, but why does everybody care that much about the viewfinder?

I have 2 minolta hi-matic 7s and 1 minolta hi-matic 7. They are my most used cameras. I have 25 rangefinders and probably 60+ cameras, so I think that does mean something.

I asked because I am curious. A good viewfinder really makes the photo experience more fun for me. I know that the Leicas and Bessas have better viewfinders but I am curious whether these less expensive cameras have viewfinders that can come close.

I have an RC with a cleaned viewfinder and I am not totally happy with it. It is pretty good but not great. So I figured I would ask those who own the other fixed lens rf cameras to help compare the quality of the finders. Most of the fixed lens rf cameras are smaller and quieter than their larger cousins.

I didn't ask about these so that things wouldn't get too confusing. The other qualities of a camera that are important to me are shutter noise and size. These are 2 things that I love about the RC. The Bessas seem to fall short here, but I am only speculating as I have never handled one. I owned an M2 (sold it in a moment of weakness years ago.), but the RCs shutter is a whisper compared to the Leicas. I live in a small town pretty far from any large camera shops that might have rf vameras on hand. So I am relying on the good folks here to help.

Sorry for rambling. Have a lovely day.

[ChrisPlatt]

The viewfinder matters. For me it's a dealbreaker with some cameras.

While I think the Kodak Retina IIa is an otherwise wonderful camera,
I would never own one because of the pinhole they call a viewfinder.

"Excelsior, you fathead!"
-Chris-

[ErnestoJL]

I have/had/tested some RFs with different features, like fast lenses, shutter or aperture priority automation, etc. but none of those are in the vote for list.
My personal choices and the reasons why are the following (not in order of preference):

Contax II / Kiev 4 : great baselenght and accurate as none other.
Canonet Ql17 (old type) and Mamiya Super Deluxe: far from but closest to a Leica VF.
Vitoret DR: 1:1 ratio and very bright.
GSN: That´s what comes with the camera (but the camera deserves something better).

Fact is that once I had an M6 in my hands, no other VF can compare, but for the price I´ve payed for my RFs... no complaints!

Ernesto

[nemjo]

Voted on the Hexar AF.
But the race is very close. There are a lot of good/excellent fixed lens cams.
To me the winner option is that that's the only cam that I could use handheld down to 1/8 sec.

nemjo

[Bill58]

Also a big vote for the Yashica GX!

[chris91387]

not sure how to define "best" but of the three i own, i always seem to grab the ql17 first.

- chris

[ruben]

Hi Chris,
I don't know where I 'catch' you in your camera detour, but I can speak a bit about mine:

a) Among the cheapo category, there is no overall absolute winner. Thus, for example, cameras with almost all of it have garbage like viewfinders. Cameras with superb viewfinders, like the Yashica GX, miss other very basic features like manual exposure control, without which you cannot use them in bright sunny days.

b) But I arrived to MY best compromise, only after achieving to clear cut define my specific purpose for the camera. Perhaps this may work for you, and save some bucks too.

Cheers,
Ruben

[thawkins]

I agree with ChrisPlatt about the "pin-hole" view finder on the Retina 2a. However once one gets beyond that small irritation there is a wonderful F2 Xenon lens. I use Delta 100, TRI-X, Velvia and Agfa films all to a super result.
What a fun camera; the lens is much sharperthat the 40mm F1.7 on my Canon QL17.

Tom Hawkins

[FrankS]

A 50mm external finder mounted in the accessory shoe makes a world of difference on cameras that I have with squinty finders.

Also, if the Hexar AF is a possibility, it is hands down the best of the cameras listed. It has a fantastic lens, and it is virtually silent. The viewfinder isn't like a Bessa or M-Leica, but since it is auto-focus it doesn't have to be, and it is better than the other cameras listed. Buy this camera.

[CameraQuest]

Originally Posted by back alley

Just out of curiosity how does the CL compare to the viewfinders on the list? I haven't seen one for 20 years and I can't remember.


the finder on my cl is very bright and easily viewable.
i think it's brighter than the m3 i have.

joe

if in good shape, the CL's RF/RF is better than anything on the list
predictable since it was a much more expensive RF

However my fixed lens vote goes to the magnificent Konica IIIM. built like a tank and about as heavy, great lens, great VF with projected parallax brightlines AND adjusted to the focus distance to show the proper field of view! You don't get that with your $3600 Leica MP or M7!

Stephen

[FrankS]

Originally Posted by CameraQuest

if in good shape, the CL's RF/RF is better than anything on the list
predictable since it was a much more expensive RF

However my fixed lens vote goes to the magnificent Konica IIIM. built like a tank and about as heavy, great lens, great VF with projected parallax brightlines AND adjusted to the focus distance to show the proper field of view! You don't get that with your $3600 Leica MP or M7!
Stephen

But you do get it with the Konica Hexar AF.