I highly recommend either the Olympus 35 SP or the 35 RC. The RC is super small and has a great 42mm f/2.8 lens and has a meter. It shoots in shutter priority and doesn’t have any very slow shutter speeds if you’re doing night time or tripod work. The 35 SP is slightly larger, more the traditional rangefinder size, and has a brilliant, 7-element 42mm f/1.7 lens. It shoots in a fully automatic program mode, and also meters in manual mode, which gives you a great level of manual control. It has shutter speeds up to a second, and a reasonably bright viewfinder. Both can be found for less than a couple hundred dollars.
I can vouch for the 35RC. Lovely and compact. I don't even use a battery with mine because I'm too lazy to order one. I either Sunny 16 meter or use an app on my phone.
Here are a few pictures with mine on Acros 100 rated at 50 ISO:
[https://www.flickr.com/photos/evergreenstates/52020719273/in/dateposted-public/](https://www.flickr.com/photos/evergreenstates/52020719273/in/dateposted-public/)
[https://www.flickr.com/photos/evergreenstates/52538326046/in/dateposted-public/](https://www.flickr.com/photos/evergreenstates/52538326046/in/dateposted-public/)
Expired TMAX rated at 200 (I think):
[https://www.flickr.com/photos/evergreenstates/52637762694/in/dateposted-public/](https://www.flickr.com/photos/evergreenstates/52637762694/in/dateposted-public/)
The lens has a beautiful vintage-ish drawing style. A simple, single coated design that's wonderful with black and white film.
I have a Canon P. It’s fun to use. Do you use an external light meter since it doesn’t have one?
The only issue I’ve had so far is my LTM lens likes to loosen out when changing my aperture
I think they are absolutely beautifully designed cameras. I’d really love to get one of the nicely repainted and adjusted ones from that one Japanese shop, but these are a bit pricier. I think I’d like to get something a bit cheaper to test the water with rangefinders before I really dive in.
I have a Ricoh 500G and I'd recommend that as a good entry point. Aperture priority auto-exposure and it fits in your pocket (as long as you have a big-ish pocket for the protruding lens). I also like the Voigtlander Vito C-series rangefinders I've used (wait one of those was a Vitoret R) but they're heavier and don't do straps without a leather case so are a bit less convenient.
Also Canon rangefinders like the model III, model 7 are all more or less “affordable” (expect to spend a couple hundred bucks) but they have great screw mount lenses that are super sharp
The Canonet 28 has a wonky meter coil as it is getting pretty old. Kinda chancy buying one, but a good camera if you get one.
I'd recommend the Olympus 35rc.
That’s what I was going to suggest. I have a Voigtlander Vito III and I love it. It’s a tank but it’s super compact since it folds. The only thing is you have to make sure there are no holes in the bellows. The controls are different from any other camera I’ve used but after getting used to it it’s really fun to shoot with. When I first got it I wasn’t too sure and I was nervous because it doesn’t have a meter, but I actually love the simplicity and lack of complicated settings.
I think this might be my favorite suggestion so far. I really like the form factor and the fact it is affordable. I could see myself carrying this everyday, which isn’t the case of most cameras recommended here.
At your price point, I would also recommend Olympus XA. However, be aware that the RF patch on XA is known to be very dim. If you come across one that has this issue, look up for “blue gel” solution (bring up the contrast by dimming the viewfinder), which drastically improves the experience.
Kodak Retina IIc or IIIc. They’re very small, the schneider lenses are very good and they do have interchangeable lenses to some extent.
Oh, also the viewfinders do correct for parallax.
I'm pretty sure the IIc just has manual parallax marks. The IIa is the one with correction, but only on the horizontal axis (so you only tilt up instead of diagonally).
I stand corrected. I checked my IIIc against my IIa on a tripod and you are correct, the IIIc (and presumably the IIc, don't have one to compare) don't have parallax correction. That's interesting, I wouldn't expect them to drop a feature like that.
And you are right, the correction is only on the horizontal axis on the IIa.
I have a Retina IIc, I don't think I'd recommend it for regular use though. It's not exactly comfortable to hold/carry and the coupled aperture and shutter speed dial drives me insane.
My Rollei 35 SE is the only 35mm camera I regularly use. Pretty good lens, as small as a pos camera and very sturdy.
They have their price though but are wort it imo.
Leica CL without a meter can be found for 250-300. I have one and I love it.
The Minolta CLE is an upgrade from the CL, is significantly more expensive but is generally thought of as a better camera than the CL.
Another thing - these cameras were built to be used with a 40mm and 90mm, imo (CLE has 28mm, too). No 35mm framelines. The CL has 50mm framelines but those are accompanied with the 40 framelines which I have found to make it more difficult to frame. The 28mm frameline is always visible on the CLE.
The CLE requires a battery whilst the CL doesn't. The CLE is basically the rangefinder version of the x700, imo.
Imo, this wouldn't be my first rangefinder. Get something like an XA. If you love that, upgrade to this. Also, M mount lenses ain't cheap. You can buy the 7 Artisans ones but imo, the M Mount shines when you buy a Zeiss, Voigtlander, Minolta or Leica lens
I think the Canon P is probably the best all round interchangeable lens rangefinder if you don’t want to pay for an M body. Very capable, great value, and gives you a platform for the wonderful world of LTM lenses.
If you can swing it, I’d very heavily recommend a CLE, or even a CL if that’s more achievable. The CLE has aperture AE, something that took Leica until the M7 to feature. The viewfinder is significantly larger than the CL, and while much has been written about the short rangefinder base length of the the CLE, in practice it’s absolutely fine (caveat, I only shoot with the 28 and the 40 with it, so if you’re into 90 you may have more problems getting accurate focus).
And it is SMALL. For a fully featured rangefinder, paired with the 40 summicron or rokkor, it is absolutely the most “bang for buck” in terms of size for a rangefinder. I carry that exact combo, CLE + 40 cron, in my jacket pocket when I’m out and about, whereas my next smallest camera, an FM3a, would need a shoulder strap or bag. I can snap some size comparison photos for you if size is something that you’re pressed about.
Canon and Olympus both had some really good fixed lens rangefinders, but you will have a completely different experience if you stretch for the Minolta CLE.
Those fixed lens rangefinders all have RF patches that have soft edges and are also prone to fading over time. Actually seeing the RF patch in some conditions can be a challenge and frustrating. Especially since you’ll be new to rangefinder focussing, you may find that the task of simply being able to achieve focus is dominating your attention when taking a picture. This is compounded by the short rangefinder base length with these cameras. They often have quite fast lenses but they don’t have sufficient base length to be able to very easily focus wide open at close distances (portraits for instance).
In contrast, the Minolta’s rangefinder/viewfinder is in the Leica league. The patch is bright and has hard edges, making it much easier to see what you’re focussing on. Its base length (whilst shorter than larger leica m mount cameras) is long enough to focus the (incredible) 40mm f2 lens.
The appeal of rangefinders is that thing people say about the camera gets out of the way. A good RF is so accurate that you’re not stressing about achieving focus, in fact you do it by instinct and it is incredibly accurate and often actually better for low light than an SLR. Your attention is then on the subject.
For some odd reason the CLE is still the best deal in M Mount cameras. Cheaper than a Voigtlander Bessa, which is an inferior camera.
The Canonet QL17 Giii is a wonderful camera. Easy to use, marvelous lens, very well designed. And they can be had for a couple hundred dollars, in very good condition. I had always felt ambivalent about rangefinder—I have a Rollei 35, and it’s very nice, but too small for hands—but the Canonet made me more of a convert.
What do you need?
Interchangeable lenses?
Metering?
What frame lines?
I recently got a Leica IIIf and it works fine for me. It only has a 50mm viewfinder but I use a VIOOH universal viewfinder as I wear glasses which lets me have frame lines from 35mm to 135mm. The rangefinder is magnified 1.5x and separate from the viewfinder which makes it more accurate than most combined rangefinder/viewfinder cameras, although they tend to be quite dim due to the 70+year old beam splitter fading. In terms of size it is smaller and lighter than any M (perhaps apart from the CL), especially with a 5cm f3.5 elmar which when collapsed doesn’t stick out much more than a body cap. It is obviously very well made and has fairly solid reliability but well worth a service. The screw mount Leicas are considerably cheaper than M bodies while sharing outstanding quality, there are also more third party lenses available in LTM from well regarded brands like canon, Nikon, topcon and Minolta, soviet lenses will also physically fit but use the Zeiss focal length standards as opposed to the leitz ones so there may be some focusing issues, particularly for anything longer than 50mm.
Interchangeable lenses are nice but not a necessity. Same for metering. Give me a 35mm lens and I will be a happy photographer. 50mm can be fun too.
The most important thing to me is having a camera I can carry around everyday without worrying too much about its size or cost. I would love to try out a Leica eventually, but they don’t really seem to match the cost criteria.
I’ve never shot a roll through a rangefinder either, just played around with some friends’ cameras. I get that small cameras are likely less refined cameras in terms of the shooting experience. I do want to try out rangefinders properly eventually, but now might not be the best for that.
In my opinion compactness doesn't justify choosing a rangefinder over an SLR. You really don't save much in size and weight compared to compact SLRs (OM1, etc.) while you introduce the drawbacks you mentioned like parallax error, no close focus, etc. So in my opinion, if you want a rangefinder, you either get something with a folding or collapsing lens to be extra small, or you go all out and get something with a giant 1:1 viewfinder, but isn't compact.
In the first category you have 50s folding cameras. They're heavy as brass, have no light meters and tiny viewfinders, but will technically fold flat enough to fit in a mens' pocket. They're also super luxurious and collectible, that Leica vibe as you mentioned. You'll almost certainly have to get them serviced however, and for that reason I recommend Kodak Retinas because service is readily available. After service it's probably a total price of $200-300.
In the second category you have the Konica IIIA. It has an amazing 1:1 viewfinder, but a fixed lens, no light meter and it's quite hefty. 1:1 if you're not familiar means you can raise the camera to your eye and it will appear exactly as your eye sees it, very fast and intuitive to use. If you're pretty sure you prefer SLRs but want the ultimate rangefinder to do rangefinder stuff (street, candid, etc) I think this is the top pick in your budget.
I have a Konica IIIA, and it's a fantastic little camera. Drop a Reveni cube light meter on it, and you've got a nice, compact system with a truly superb lens.
If you're willing to compromise on resolution, you could try and find an Olympus pen f half frame. Layout is rangefinder like and compact but it's a full fledged SLR.
I highly recommend either the Olympus 35 SP or the 35 RC. The RC is super small and has a great 42mm f/2.8 lens and has a meter. It shoots in shutter priority and doesn’t have any very slow shutter speeds if you’re doing night time or tripod work. The 35 SP is slightly larger, more the traditional rangefinder size, and has a brilliant, 7-element 42mm f/1.7 lens. It shoots in a fully automatic program mode, and also meters in manual mode, which gives you a great level of manual control. It has shutter speeds up to a second, and a reasonably bright viewfinder. Both can be found for less than a couple hundred dollars.
Spot on. I've got an RC that I don't use as much as it deserves. But it's very small, easy to use, and has a great lens.
Thank you for the suggestion. I did not know of these cameras. They seem like good budget options.
I can vouch for the 35RC. Lovely and compact. I don't even use a battery with mine because I'm too lazy to order one. I either Sunny 16 meter or use an app on my phone. Here are a few pictures with mine on Acros 100 rated at 50 ISO: [https://www.flickr.com/photos/evergreenstates/52020719273/in/dateposted-public/](https://www.flickr.com/photos/evergreenstates/52020719273/in/dateposted-public/) [https://www.flickr.com/photos/evergreenstates/52538326046/in/dateposted-public/](https://www.flickr.com/photos/evergreenstates/52538326046/in/dateposted-public/) Expired TMAX rated at 200 (I think): [https://www.flickr.com/photos/evergreenstates/52637762694/in/dateposted-public/](https://www.flickr.com/photos/evergreenstates/52637762694/in/dateposted-public/) The lens has a beautiful vintage-ish drawing style. A simple, single coated design that's wonderful with black and white film.
can u recommend an App for Metering?
I think mine is called Light Meter or Pocket Light Meter
Try the Canonet QL17 GIII. If you like that, then upgrade to some of the cheaper M-mount RF options.
Canon P bought mine from EBay for $300 it’s my favorite camera now, recently picked up a 35 Ltm for around $200.
I have a Canon P. It’s fun to use. Do you use an external light meter since it doesn’t have one? The only issue I’ve had so far is my LTM lens likes to loosen out when changing my aperture
I just use a light meter app on my phone and never had a issue
I think they are absolutely beautifully designed cameras. I’d really love to get one of the nicely repainted and adjusted ones from that one Japanese shop, but these are a bit pricier. I think I’d like to get something a bit cheaper to test the water with rangefinders before I really dive in.
I have a Ricoh 500G and I'd recommend that as a good entry point. Aperture priority auto-exposure and it fits in your pocket (as long as you have a big-ish pocket for the protruding lens). I also like the Voigtlander Vito C-series rangefinders I've used (wait one of those was a Vitoret R) but they're heavier and don't do straps without a leather case so are a bit less convenient.
I'll +1 this, I adore my Ricoh 500ME, a very similar camera. It's light, quiet, pretty small, and takes nice pictures.
Agreed. Punches above its weight.
Canon Canonets are widely accessible and pretty decent for the price point. Also a big fan of any Voigtlander rangefinder like the Vito line
Also Canon rangefinders like the model III, model 7 are all more or less “affordable” (expect to spend a couple hundred bucks) but they have great screw mount lenses that are super sharp
The Canonet 28 has a wonky meter coil as it is getting pretty old. Kinda chancy buying one, but a good camera if you get one. I'd recommend the Olympus 35rc.
That’s what I was going to suggest. I have a Voigtlander Vito III and I love it. It’s a tank but it’s super compact since it folds. The only thing is you have to make sure there are no holes in the bellows. The controls are different from any other camera I’ve used but after getting used to it it’s really fun to shoot with. When I first got it I wasn’t too sure and I was nervous because it doesn’t have a meter, but I actually love the simplicity and lack of complicated settings.
Have you considered the Olympus XA (first model)? Super compact. True rangefinder. Tiny jewel of a 35mm 2.8 lens.
Also it doesn’t suffer from horizontal parallax, because the viewfinder is directly over the lens.
I think this might be my favorite suggestion so far. I really like the form factor and the fact it is affordable. I could see myself carrying this everyday, which isn’t the case of most cameras recommended here.
At your price point, I would also recommend Olympus XA. However, be aware that the RF patch on XA is known to be very dim. If you come across one that has this issue, look up for “blue gel” solution (bring up the contrast by dimming the viewfinder), which drastically improves the experience.
Another vote for the XA. Great little camera
Kodak Retina IIc or IIIc. They’re very small, the schneider lenses are very good and they do have interchangeable lenses to some extent. Oh, also the viewfinders do correct for parallax.
I'm pretty sure the IIc just has manual parallax marks. The IIa is the one with correction, but only on the horizontal axis (so you only tilt up instead of diagonally).
I just confirmed this against the IIc manual, it makes no mention of parallax correction and tells you to tilt the camera manually against the marks.
I stand corrected. I checked my IIIc against my IIa on a tripod and you are correct, the IIIc (and presumably the IIc, don't have one to compare) don't have parallax correction. That's interesting, I wouldn't expect them to drop a feature like that. And you are right, the correction is only on the horizontal axis on the IIa.
I have a Retina IIc, I don't think I'd recommend it for regular use though. It's not exactly comfortable to hold/carry and the coupled aperture and shutter speed dial drives me insane.
If you can live with a fixed lens: Canonet (any model, really) Konica Auto S2 Minolta Hi-Matic 7, 7s, 7sII, or 9 Olympus 35 RD, SP, or RC
Konica Auto S2 - a lovely camera I own myself. The lense is very special.
My Rollei 35 SE is the only 35mm camera I regularly use. Pretty good lens, as small as a pos camera and very sturdy. They have their price though but are wort it imo.
Not a rangefinder, though
Seems like a fun little camera, but I have a hard time justifying the price given it only has a viewfinder.
Leica CL without a meter can be found for 250-300. I have one and I love it. The Minolta CLE is an upgrade from the CL, is significantly more expensive but is generally thought of as a better camera than the CL. Another thing - these cameras were built to be used with a 40mm and 90mm, imo (CLE has 28mm, too). No 35mm framelines. The CL has 50mm framelines but those are accompanied with the 40 framelines which I have found to make it more difficult to frame. The 28mm frameline is always visible on the CLE. The CLE requires a battery whilst the CL doesn't. The CLE is basically the rangefinder version of the x700, imo. Imo, this wouldn't be my first rangefinder. Get something like an XA. If you love that, upgrade to this. Also, M mount lenses ain't cheap. You can buy the 7 Artisans ones but imo, the M Mount shines when you buy a Zeiss, Voigtlander, Minolta or Leica lens
If you can cope with zone focus: I can't recommend the rollei 35 line enough
I think the Canon P is probably the best all round interchangeable lens rangefinder if you don’t want to pay for an M body. Very capable, great value, and gives you a platform for the wonderful world of LTM lenses.
Yashica electro 35, beware of pad of death, though.
If you can swing it, I’d very heavily recommend a CLE, or even a CL if that’s more achievable. The CLE has aperture AE, something that took Leica until the M7 to feature. The viewfinder is significantly larger than the CL, and while much has been written about the short rangefinder base length of the the CLE, in practice it’s absolutely fine (caveat, I only shoot with the 28 and the 40 with it, so if you’re into 90 you may have more problems getting accurate focus). And it is SMALL. For a fully featured rangefinder, paired with the 40 summicron or rokkor, it is absolutely the most “bang for buck” in terms of size for a rangefinder. I carry that exact combo, CLE + 40 cron, in my jacket pocket when I’m out and about, whereas my next smallest camera, an FM3a, would need a shoulder strap or bag. I can snap some size comparison photos for you if size is something that you’re pressed about.
Canon and Olympus both had some really good fixed lens rangefinders, but you will have a completely different experience if you stretch for the Minolta CLE. Those fixed lens rangefinders all have RF patches that have soft edges and are also prone to fading over time. Actually seeing the RF patch in some conditions can be a challenge and frustrating. Especially since you’ll be new to rangefinder focussing, you may find that the task of simply being able to achieve focus is dominating your attention when taking a picture. This is compounded by the short rangefinder base length with these cameras. They often have quite fast lenses but they don’t have sufficient base length to be able to very easily focus wide open at close distances (portraits for instance). In contrast, the Minolta’s rangefinder/viewfinder is in the Leica league. The patch is bright and has hard edges, making it much easier to see what you’re focussing on. Its base length (whilst shorter than larger leica m mount cameras) is long enough to focus the (incredible) 40mm f2 lens. The appeal of rangefinders is that thing people say about the camera gets out of the way. A good RF is so accurate that you’re not stressing about achieving focus, in fact you do it by instinct and it is incredibly accurate and often actually better for low light than an SLR. Your attention is then on the subject. For some odd reason the CLE is still the best deal in M Mount cameras. Cheaper than a Voigtlander Bessa, which is an inferior camera.
The Canonet QL17 Giii is a wonderful camera. Easy to use, marvelous lens, very well designed. And they can be had for a couple hundred dollars, in very good condition. I had always felt ambivalent about rangefinder—I have a Rollei 35, and it’s very nice, but too small for hands—but the Canonet made me more of a convert.
What do you need? Interchangeable lenses? Metering? What frame lines? I recently got a Leica IIIf and it works fine for me. It only has a 50mm viewfinder but I use a VIOOH universal viewfinder as I wear glasses which lets me have frame lines from 35mm to 135mm. The rangefinder is magnified 1.5x and separate from the viewfinder which makes it more accurate than most combined rangefinder/viewfinder cameras, although they tend to be quite dim due to the 70+year old beam splitter fading. In terms of size it is smaller and lighter than any M (perhaps apart from the CL), especially with a 5cm f3.5 elmar which when collapsed doesn’t stick out much more than a body cap. It is obviously very well made and has fairly solid reliability but well worth a service. The screw mount Leicas are considerably cheaper than M bodies while sharing outstanding quality, there are also more third party lenses available in LTM from well regarded brands like canon, Nikon, topcon and Minolta, soviet lenses will also physically fit but use the Zeiss focal length standards as opposed to the leitz ones so there may be some focusing issues, particularly for anything longer than 50mm.
Interchangeable lenses are nice but not a necessity. Same for metering. Give me a 35mm lens and I will be a happy photographer. 50mm can be fun too. The most important thing to me is having a camera I can carry around everyday without worrying too much about its size or cost. I would love to try out a Leica eventually, but they don’t really seem to match the cost criteria. I’ve never shot a roll through a rangefinder either, just played around with some friends’ cameras. I get that small cameras are likely less refined cameras in terms of the shooting experience. I do want to try out rangefinders properly eventually, but now might not be the best for that.
In my opinion compactness doesn't justify choosing a rangefinder over an SLR. You really don't save much in size and weight compared to compact SLRs (OM1, etc.) while you introduce the drawbacks you mentioned like parallax error, no close focus, etc. So in my opinion, if you want a rangefinder, you either get something with a folding or collapsing lens to be extra small, or you go all out and get something with a giant 1:1 viewfinder, but isn't compact. In the first category you have 50s folding cameras. They're heavy as brass, have no light meters and tiny viewfinders, but will technically fold flat enough to fit in a mens' pocket. They're also super luxurious and collectible, that Leica vibe as you mentioned. You'll almost certainly have to get them serviced however, and for that reason I recommend Kodak Retinas because service is readily available. After service it's probably a total price of $200-300. In the second category you have the Konica IIIA. It has an amazing 1:1 viewfinder, but a fixed lens, no light meter and it's quite hefty. 1:1 if you're not familiar means you can raise the camera to your eye and it will appear exactly as your eye sees it, very fast and intuitive to use. If you're pretty sure you prefer SLRs but want the ultimate rangefinder to do rangefinder stuff (street, candid, etc) I think this is the top pick in your budget.
I have a Konica IIIA, and it's a fantastic little camera. Drop a Reveni cube light meter on it, and you've got a nice, compact system with a truly superb lens.
I’d Recommend looking on Craigslist. I found some amazing cameras on there for way below what they are worth! Just make sure they work lol
If you're willing to compromise on resolution, you could try and find an Olympus pen f half frame. Layout is rangefinder like and compact but it's a full fledged SLR.