What entry-level analogue 35mm rangefinder camera should I get?

[Olumin]

I know that I would probably be better off looking for a different forum to post this, But I'm to lazy so I thought I give it a shot, perhaps some photo-geeks can help me out. I'm looking into getting my first fully analogue (fully mechanical) 35mm rangefinder camera with interchangeable lens. Right now I only have a Rollei 35, which is a viewfinder camera with a fixed Tessar 40mm lens, it does a good job but I want to get into more professional rangefinders with interchangeable lens which give me more control over what I am doing.

I am looking for a entry level, "low cost" (ideally WELL under 500 EUR for body only) camera, with ideally at least 1/1000th shutter speed. Light-meter is not a must have (that means It doesn't still need to work), since I don't really use a light meter on a point and shoot (for me a 35mm range finder is a point and shoot or snapshot camera, I use medium format for more pretty pictures), I have a little slide-rule scale with what shutter speeds and aperture to use on what light-situation, it works very well. The camera should be well build and not overly hard to find, it should also be pretty compact. I am very intrigued by the Voigtländer Bessa R, and EVEN MORE intrigued by the Leica CL, would that be a good choice? Regarding the lenses, I should be able to use a 50mm on the camera without problem, since that's what I am going to almost exclusivity use.

Again to make it clear, I am looking for a fully mechanical camera (apart from the light meter and viewfinder), I should be able to use the camera without a battery, no electronically controlled shutters please. Thanks.

[shrubkeys]

It really doesn't matter. As I'm sure you know, unlike with digital models, the body is the least important part of the camera. It does lock you in to a specific lens mount - but there are excellent lenses for every mount, and converters to change as needed. You're on a budget, which means you're going to make compromises no matter what - so why also burden yourself with the "hidden cost" of collectability for Leica? The Bessa R is well-liked for a reason. Spend the extra money on glass - or at least not on the Leica name. Ultimately, I wouldn't worry about it; everything you're looking at is widely available both to buy and sell on eBay. If you decide to change, you can always get rid of it in a year, and consider the eBay fee a cheap "rental cost".

And Rollei 35s are great! Biggest problem, actually, you didn't list - the zone focus. When I last used one, I just shot 3200 ISO film and stopped down. I'm almost exclusively digital now - or else with a MF TLR - but a pocketable RF might be a fun pickup. If you want to get rid of yours, let me know.

(Rather than guess, don't forget your cell phone is a great light meter; should be free apps for any platform for both spot and incident - or frankly, you can even just use the photo app and see what exposure it chooses.)

[Olumin]

It really doesn't matter. As I'm sure you know, unlike with digital models, the body is the least important part of the camera. It does lock you in to a specific lens mount - but there are excellent lenses for every mount, and converters to change as needed. You're on a budget, which means you're going to make compromises no matter what - so why also burden yourself with the "hidden cost" of collectability for Leica? The Bessa R is well-liked for a reason. Spend the extra money on glass - or at least not on the Leica name. Ultimately, I wouldn't worry about it; everything you're looking at is widely available both to buy and sell on eBay. If you decide to change, you can always get rid of it in a year, and consider the eBay fee a cheap "rental cost".

And Rollei 35s are great! Biggest problem, actually, you didn't list - the zone focus. When I last used one, I just shot 3200 ISO film and stopped down. I'm almost exclusively digital now - or else with a MF TLR - but a pocketable RF might be a fun pickup. If you want to get rid of yours, let me know.

(Rather than guess, don't forget your cell phone is a great light meter; should be free apps for any platform for both spot and incident - or frankly, you can even just use the photo app and see what exposure it chooses.)

Thanks, yea, I kinda thought about it similarly. By the way, the Leica CL isn't very expensive at all, about 200 EUR for Body only, that's really affordable (especially for a Leica), that makes it a great option... because... M mount, looks good, and you know, just leica  ). The downside is that it doesn't really make any sense to use anything else but the Summicron 40mm which it mostly comes with, and bundled with that its like 700 dollars. The CL isn't very popular, I don't exactly know why, but it most probably has something to do with the fact that its actually made by Minolta in Japan for leica, and not by Leica itself in Germany, therefore the quality isn't considered to be as high, also the light meter is weird and unreliable, but that's not big deal for me. And with the Rollei 35, yea, I still need to get used to the focusing, many of my pictures are still slightly out of focus, but its doable.

Which 50mm m39 mount Lens would you suggest for the Bessa?

[Spopepro]

This is as good a place as any to ask... and since I'm waiting on the imacon here to finish scanning...

The bessa is great. I've never seen a CL in person, but it's probably also really good. But the choice I would make is an Olympus 35rc. It's tiny, really inexpensive, the provided lens is way better than they have any right putting on the thing, and it's got all the settings you need and none you don't want.

[Olumin]

This is as good a place as any to ask... and since I'm waiting on the imacon here to finish scanning...

The bessa is great. I've never seen a CL in person, but it's probably also really good. But the choice I would make is an Olympus 35rc. It's tiny, really inexpensive, the provided lens is way better than they have any right putting on the thing, and it's got all the settings you need and none you don't want.

Show Image

Yes, you are right, it's a great performer, but, no interchangeable lens, which is the system I originally wanted to get into. However, it's still a great step up from my current Rollei 35! BUT, it uses PX-625 mercury battery's, which are no longer made (here in Germany), so that's a deal breaker. So far as I know there are no affordable alternatives out there (in Germany), there are only these utterly expensive Wein EPX-625, which are no real option since, again really expensive (10 - 15 EUR for ONE battery!), but also don't last very long. If you know another alternative, please let me know.

Besides all that, U sure it's not witchcraft? U sure it doesn't run on magic? U sure its fully mechanical? Because I'm not sure about that, enlighten me.

[Spopepro]

Yikes. That's like 3 times the price of the zinc-air replacement here in the states.

The Olympus only needs the battery if you want the meter to do some of the work. If you run it full manual then you don't need to have a battery in the camera, and from what I can find, it won't refuse to work unless you set something to auto.

But since you want a replaceable lens, I'd go with the bessa. The one I held had one of the best rangefinders I've ever looked through. Know that you're technically in the entry level rangefinders here, but you're very quickly going to be dropping serious coin on good lenses. But a 39mm screw mount lens will pretty much always be a useful tool.

[Olumin]

Yikes. That's like 3 times the price of the zinc-air replacement here in the states.

The Olympus only needs the battery if you want the meter to do some of the work. If you run it full manual then you don't need to have a battery in the camera, and from what I can find, it won't refuse to work unless you set something to auto.

But since you want a replaceable lens, I'd go with the bessa. The one I held had one of the best rangefinders I've ever looked through. Know that you're technically in the entry level rangefinders here, but you're very quickly going to be dropping serious coin on good lenses. But a 39mm screw mount lens will pretty much always be a useful tool.

I have fond that Olympus made 3 of these compact 35mm range finders, the Olympus 35rc (whish you recommended), whish is the smallest of the 3, the 35RD, whish is bigger and has a better lens? (not sure), and then there is the Olympus 35 SP, whish has the best lens in its class! (outstanding 7 element!). Sure, the 35rc is the most inexpensive and compact, but the 35 SP is still around 200 EUR and well within my budget, why shouldn't I get it instead?

There is also the Minolta Hi-Matic 7S II, whish is basically the same deal, not sure about this one.

[Spopepro]

, why shouldn't I get it instead?

Now it depends on what makes you happy about photography. You've mentioned gear so far, but nothing about what you plan on doing with it. Are you into collecting old photography gear, for the sake of collection*? Are you looking to do street photography? Travel photography? Fine art? Photojournalism? Are your photos going online, clipped and pinned to the wall, or matted and framed? Are you looking for a fully analogue workflow (film to silver print) or digital (film to scanner to pigment print)?  And if digital, do you have access to a suitable scanner?

I love the baby Olympus because it's exactly what I think a rangefinder should be. A non-fussy, inexpensive, reliable tool that is small enough to take everywhere with you and won't draw attention. But that's what would fit into my life, since I already have a nice 35mm slr with a great selection of glass, a couple of medium format old manual cameras, and some large format pinhole cameras. My use is not necessarily your use.

So if you're into gear, get the one that sounds most exciting now. If you're into making big prints and want to eventually mat and frame them, probably get the bessa or Leica, as once you get around 8x10" you'll see the difference in lens sharpness. If you're looking for a camera that will go everywhere with you for documenting and exploring the artistry around you, the baby Olympus might be more rewarding than the "better" one.

* this kind of sounds like a pejorative, but I don't mean it that way. Gear collection can be fun! And I shouldn't have to say that on geekhack...

[shrubkeys]

I seem to remember, other than the rf-specifc forums on every photo site, photoethnography.com and cameraquest had good articles on - and specific recommendations of - classic rangefinder models. It's been, like, 10 years since I've browsed them - but by definition there's probably little that needs updating.

[Olumin]

, why shouldn't I get it instead?

Now it depends on what makes you happy about photography. You've mentioned gear so far, but nothing about what you plan on doing with it. Are you into collecting old photography gear, for the sake of collection*? Are you looking to do street photography? Travel photography? Fine art? Photojournalism? Are your photos going online, clipped and pinned to the wall, or matted and framed? Are you looking for a fully analogue workflow (film to silver print) or digital (film to scanner to pigment print)?  And if digital, do you have access to a suitable scanner?

I love the baby Olympus because it's exactly what I think a rangefinder should be. A non-fussy, inexpensive, reliable tool that is small enough to take everywhere with you and won't draw attention. But that's what would fit into my life, since I already have a nice 35mm slr with a great selection of glass, a couple of medium format old manual cameras, and some large format pinhole cameras. My use is not necessarily your use.

So if you're into gear, get the one that sounds most exciting now. If you're into making big prints and want to eventually mat and frame them, probably get the bessa or Leica, as once you get around 8x10" you'll see the difference in lens sharpness. If you're looking for a camera that will go everywhere with you for documenting and exploring the artistry around you, the baby Olympus might be more rewarding than the "better" one.

* this kind of sounds like a pejorative, but I don't mean it that way. Gear collection can be fun! And I shouldn't have to say that on geekhack...

Street photography! Like you put it: "a camera that will go everywhere with me". But its also for collectors and Gear's sake, I am collecting typewriters and old mechanical calculators, I am now just getting into manual film cameras after I've found a old Agfa isolette III folding camera (as you already know), but since medium format is too much of a hassle (and too expensive) for every day use, I'm looking into 35mm compact cameras, but despite being compact it should also be very capable.  I love mechanical engineering, so the more bells and whistles a camera has and the more over engineered it is, the better! But unlike most of my typewriters and calculators, I actually want to use my cameras. I don't have acsess to a scanner, so I'm not planning to do something specific with my photos at this point in time. Right now I am still looking at the 35RC and the Minolta Hi-Matic 7S II, both are in the same class, the Hi-Matic 7S II offers a better lens and more settings for shutter speed and aperture, but perhaps I'm missing something, what do you think?

[Spopepro]

Yeah, that Minolta looks really sweet. The two things that will be tough to know until you get it in your hands is if a) the rangefinder agrees with you (some are way easier for me to use than others) and b) if the coatings on the lens are good. At those prices though, I might just pick one up for myself and see how it goes.

[CPTBadAss]

I've been looking into this myself in the last couple of weeks. Just discovered that rangefinders were a thing and I really wanted to try one. I managed to grab two Minolta hi-matic 7 for cheap  but they also both came broken and unusable. The parallax line up mechanism was really cool though so I'd still love to try a rangefinder out. But I'm no longer willing to take the chance on under $30 hi matics on eBay.

Would love to know where else I can go to find rangefinders or how to fix them up... And more suggestions on models to hunt for.

For what it's worth, I had the same idea as the OP. I wanted to get into film photography. For slr cameras, I narrowed my hunt to Canon AE-1, AE-1 program, and Nikon FE. I'm extremely happy with my FE and have been happily shooting with it for 2 weeks. Can't wait to see the developed prints.

[Spopepro]

Yeah, the rangefinder is usually the first thing to get gummed up or broken on rangefinders. It's always a risk buying on eBay for that reason, and the people who actually test the things and run a roll through do get a premium. I'm fortunate to have a shop in town that deals in old cameras, so I have an opportunity to poke at them, although it requires patience if there's something in particular I'm looking for. Fixing is probably tough. The mechanisms make it more like watch repair than anything else, especially on small cameras. Rangefinderforum is the dedicated up of the Internet for such things, but they do skew towards the fancy side.

You'll have to tell us how the first rolls turned out. The only bummer about film is that it's hard to share on the internet if you get something good.


(My work from today. 35mm shot on Nikon FM3a, imacon scan, digital negatives printed on a Epson 7890, platinum/palladium prints)

[Olumin]

I've been looking into this myself in the last couple of weeks. Just discovered that rangefinders were a thing and I really wanted to try one. I managed to grab two Minolta hi-matic 7 for cheap  but they also both came broken and unusable. The parallax line up mechanism was really cool though so I'd still love to try a rangefinder out. But I'm no longer willing to take the chance on under $30 hi matics on eBay.

Would love to know where else I can go to find rangefinders or how to fix them up... And more suggestions on models to hunt for.

For what it's worth, I had the same idea as the OP. I wanted to get into film photography. For slr cameras, I narrowed my hunt to Canon AE-1, AE-1 program, and Nikon FE. I'm extremely happy with my FE and have been happily shooting with it for 2 weeks. Can't wait to see the developed prints.

I've made that experience more then a couple times when buying typewriters on eBay, your best bet would probably be garage sales, flea markets or craigslist and eBay-classifieds, just buying stuff locally where you have the opportunity to take a look at it in person and test it out, and without the risks of shipping (and you are also going to pay much less most of the time). Repairing is fiddly and requires a lot of patience (and knowing what you are doing), but it is possible if you have somebody who explains it to you. I just recently repaired the focusing ring on my agfa isolette III, but that thing just needed to be unscrewed and cleaned, the range-finder mechanism is much more delicate.

[menuhin]

You can't go wrong with a Leica M5, and you can find them in a just slightly higher price range.
But then the lenses are the more expensive investment in the long rest as some said.

[Spopepro]

You can't go wrong with a Leica M5, and you can find them in a just slightly higher price range.
But then the lenses are the more expensive investment in the long rest as some said.

We must have very different ideas about what a "slightly higher price range" is.

Besides, an m5 is a really big and rather heavy camera for a 35mm rangefinder. The m3 is way, way more manageable; it baffles me how big leicas became.

[CPTBadAss]

Yeah I was going to try to repair one of the Hi-Matics myself but when I received the broken one, it looked *really* complicated so I held off.

And Spopepro, I managed to thrift an Epson V600 so I'll at least be able to get some decent scans of the prints . I'm excited to see how the rolls turn out as well.

Thanks for all the info, I'll have to keep an eye on the thread and check out more stuff IRL.

[Olumin]

Well, since I just got offered a Olympus 35 SP in perfect condition at a very fair price, aaaaand since I missed the auction on the Olympus 35rc I originally wanted to buy by 2 minutes, I am now owner of a Olympus 35 SP... in a couple of days when it arrives, which is great, since that's the one which sounded the most existing to me anyway! I let you know what my first impressions are when I get it!

Now its time for a SLR  )! Nikon FM2n here I come. Any lens recommendations  ?

I'm serious...

[Olumin]

OK, so the Olympus 35 SP arrived today! Luckily everything as described and nicely packed so everything works, a rarity nowadays. It even came with a UV filter attached, which wasn't even mentioned by the seller (he probably didn't know that), whish is awesome too (protects the lens)!

Very solid camera, a lot more heavy then I thought (625g with film in it), and a lot bigger too (L/H/W 13cm, 7,5cm, 3.2cm). Viewfinder is bright (has a blue tint to it), and is nice to use even in low light conditions. Rangefinder is also quite quick to use (camera has a small lever to focus), how accurate it is will show when I get my first pictures back, but it seems to be well adjusted. Shutter is a bit loud and sounds a little rattly, but works fine. The Camera seems to be very high quality, only thing is that a few segments (rings) on the lens assembly have a bit of play, but that doesn't effect the functionality in any way. Focusing is very smooth, turning the aperture and shutter speed rings requires a bit of force, hard (or impossible) to do with only one finger, but its quite snappy.
Loading the film is quite quick and easy (black folds open), much faster then on a Leica M for example. How good the Lens is will, again, show when I get my first pictures back. Lens is a 42mm, 7 element, 5 group, f1,7. The Camera has a self timer, but I haven't used it jet. Foldable rewind crank on the top, frame counter and hot shoe is also located on the top of the body.

The most prominent feature of this camera is that is has a optional automatic mode (sets aperture and shutter speed itself), just turn the aperture ring to the red A and the shutter speed ring all the way to the right and, voilà, its in automatic. However I haven't had the opportunity to test this yet, since this, as well as the light meter require a PX 625 1,35v mercury battery, these are no longer made. In the states you can get zinc-air replacements, however this is not as easy here in Germany. I will need to order a Weincell replacement.

Overall this seems to be a convenient, well build and most of all very capable compact range finder, there is a reason why some rate it even higher then the Leica M's. Very good as a vacation camera, also good for street photography, however a little big for that if you ask me. I also wouldn't use it as a snap shot camera a and carry it around all day, for that its just too big and heavy, however still smaller and lighter then a M. Certainly something to consider.

[tp4tissue]

Sniping fotos of Pretty girls from far away eh?

/Tp4 Approved.. 

Please share fotos..

[Olumin]

Sniping fotos of Pretty girls from far away eh?

/Tp4 Approved.. 

Please share fotos..

Show Image

From far away heh? For that I would need a zoom, that's luxury for me. To use that I would need a SLR or rangefinder with interchangeable lens mount, but no lens is going to provide effectively higher sharpness, significantly wider aperture and less distortion then the one already on my Olympus. Only drawback of that G.Zukiro is that it's fixed focal length.

I of cause prefer a zoom for convenience, but zooms rarely reach the quality (sharpness, wide aperture and level of distortion) provided by fixed focal length lenses, at least not at a reasonable cost. My Olympus is a fixed lens rangefinder, for a interchangeable lens mount system I would need a Bessa or Leica, or some SLR (like the Nikon, like mentioned in one of my posts here), that's costly, and as for now I don't feel like putting that amount of money into this hobby. For what I am doing with my cameras, the Olympus is more than sufficing. Besides, SLR's are heavy, loud and clunky compared to rangefinders, and therefore not really suited for me who is mainly doing street photography and snap shots.



I am thinking about getting a digital backup camera with manual controls and zoom for video and some convenience, I had a look at the Panasonic DMC-LX100 from my grandpa (who also does photography, since 60 years). It is pretty much the digital equivalent to my 70's Olympus 35 SP, with a very much comparable lens (also f1.7 to 16), just that its zoom (24 - 75mm). It is (still) a excellent, solid camera, but again, not cheap by any means. For that money I would put into getting a used LX100, I might as well just get the Nikon FM2n with 3 or so lenses, and I would still have spare cash.

[Photekq]

How about a Nikon F3? Very cheap, great lens compatibility.

[Olumin]

How about a Nikon F3? Very cheap, great lens compatibility.

When it comes to film, I want a fully mechanical camera or ideally a Camera with fully manual override. A camera I can use without a battery in any case. The F3 is electronically controlled. The Nikon Fm3a would be ideal, but its still to expensive. The Fm2n does all the FM3a does, just fully manual, which I'm fine with. The FM2 also has great lens compatibility, it only won't mount non ai lenses, and of cause wont work with lenses without an aperture ring. These manual focus lenses tend to be also very cheap, in general at least. Newer lenses like the AFs lenses won't work of cause with the fully manual FM2 (lack of aperture ring).

I have taken a quick look at your flickr page, great pictures! Seems like you know a thing or two about digital photography (I do not). What do think about getting the LX100 as a backup all-round camera to carry with me at all times instead of a film SLR like the Nikon? I do not even own a proper digital camera at this point, only my smartphone and that is an old Iphone 4s.

[Olumin]

Does anybody know of a adapter that allows for manual aperture control on Nikon F mount lenses like AFs ones? Since my sister owns a Nikon DSLR with these lenses I thought it would be great if I could find a way to use them on my Nikon FM2n, but without a aperture control ring that is not possible.

[Spopepro]

Not possible. The same way that non-Ai lenses can't be used on new cameras.

[Olumin]

Not possible. The same way that non-Ai lenses can't be used on new cameras.

What is the reason for that? I have seen several adapters with aperture rings and "aperture enablers", but all either are for macro or are some kind of adapter to another mount like Nikon to cannon, which is not what I am looking for. 

[Spopepro]

It's because to add space for the mechanism you will change the distance from the elements to the film plane. So you either have to work with space that is created by differences in mounting specs, or you have to add another element to correct for the increased distance. I guess it would theoretically be possible for an F-mount to F-mount with controls to use the aperture on G lenses, but it would require another element, possibly change the focal length, have a loss in image quality, and it would be expensive. And as far as I know, Nikon still includes the aperture ring on their most expensive lenses. So I guess not possible wasn't exactly accurate, but so expensive and problematic as to not have been produced is a better statement.

[Olumin]

I finally got my first roll of Fujifilm superia 200 (shot with my Olympus 35 SP) back, scanned. I normally shot X-tra 400, but this 200 film together with some kodak 200 was a gift. Most exposures are off, overexposed, since I am used shorting 400 and therefore didn't took the low-light limitations of ISO 200 into consideration. I put the camera on auto about halfway through the roll. I am not going to show every of the 36 images, just a few which I think are worth sharing:

Here are some of the (sadly) overexposed images, grainy and noisy due to low light conditions my 200 couldn't handle quite like my 400 could, I think they where all done on auto:







Here are 2 of the in my opinion best images from the roll, really showing what the film and camera is capable of capturing:





There are also many images on this roll (most actually) which really should have tuned out nicely, but instead turned out blurry and noisy, perhaps this is due to development or scan. All these are still OK, but not as nice as they could have possibly turned out:




(I think the lack of colour and contrast is due to the white sky messing up the exposure)


(This is actually one of my favourites, a shame it didn't turned out as nicely as the two prime examples I listed here, and I have no idea why)


I hope that gives you an idea of the Lens on this camera. Perhaps this was insightful to one or another. Thanks. 

[CPTBadAss]

Damn those two "best shots" are really nice. I've been looking at picking up an Olympus 35 SP just because I want to shoot a 35mm rangefinder. Really wish I found one when I went shopping. Thanks for the scans .

[Olumin]

Damn those two "best shots" are really nice. I've been looking at picking up an Olympus 35 SP just because I want to shoot a 35mm rangefinder. Really wish I found one when I went shopping. Thanks for the scans .

There are so, so many 35mm rangefinder with fixed lenses. Also take a look at the Canonet QL17 GIII, minolta hi-matic 7sii and Revue Auto S22 . These are all in the same "class" as the Olympus SP. You will have to see what features are important for you personally. Also these are all quite big, perhaps you want to take a look at more compact rangefinders you can take with you anywhere at any time. In the end it really depends more on the film and the shot composition then the lens. You don't need a sharp lens with great contrast, colours and "bokeh" to make great pictures, but it can certainly open up more opportunity's and options.

[Spopepro]

Nice shots. Thanks for sharing.

For negative film a bit of overexposure is ok and maybe preferable. Granted, I only shoot B&W negatives, but I always aim to overexpose by 1/2-1 stop. The dark bits on the film will still have information but if not enough light hits you really get nothing at all. If you want down the rabbit hole search for reciprocity and specifically reciprocity failure. My guess is that you should be able to get those images (especially the one you really wanted to be better) fixed up with more careful settings while scanning. They probably just ran the same setting for the whole roll, or just let the machine go on auto. If I'm scanning for fine prints, I'm using a flextight and adjusting every frame individually. And for challenging negatives I'm making multiple scans at different brightness and combining in Photoshop.

tl;dr if you really like the composition, try getting a better scan.

***and I wrote all that and then looked more closely. Those are underexposed, and there might not be much you can do for them. If I'm shooting hand held exclusively, I'm shooting 400iso.

And for the good CPT'n, come on out to SF. We have a wonderful store that had about 40 35mm rangefinders for sale last time I stopped by.

I got a fully manual rangefinder myself recently... I need to develop the most recent rolls I shot and I'll post a couple if they're worth scanning.

[Olumin]

Nice shots. Thanks for sharing.

For negative film a bit of overexposure is ok and maybe preferable. Granted, I only shoot B&W negatives, but I always aim to overexpose by 1/2-1 stop. The dark bits on the film will still have information but if not enough light hits you really get nothing at all. If you want down the rabbit hole search for reciprocity and specifically reciprocity failure. My guess is that you should be able to get those images (especially the one you really wanted to be better) fixed up with more careful settings while scanning. They probably just ran the same setting for the whole roll, or just let the machine go on auto. If I'm scanning for fine prints, I'm using a flextight and adjusting every frame individually. And for challenging negatives I'm making multiple scans at different brightness and combining in Photoshop.

tl;dr if you really like the composition, try getting a better scan.

***and I wrote all that and then looked more closely. Those are underexposed, and there might not be much you can do for them. If I'm shooting hand held exclusively, I'm shooting 400iso.

And for the good CPT'n, come on out to SF. We have a wonderful store that had about 40 35mm rangefinders for sale last time I stopped by.

I got a fully manual rangefinder myself recently... I need to develop the most recent rolls I shot and I'll post a couple if they're worth scanning.

Eh, I don't scan these myself, they get scanned and developed at the lab, I don't own a scanner or printer, I get the negatives and prints back, together with a CD with the scans. So regardless there is nothing I could do really. I don't know how to develop film, don't have the equipment and space, as well as the patience for that. I also don't want to do that, that's not enjoyable for me. Just like many people enjoy electronics, but don't enjoy repairing it. I don't think developing colour negative at home is much fun, black and white might be simpler. All that except of cause you know a really cheap scanner (like, under 600 bucks "cheap", or should I use the term affordable) which provides comparable or better results, I'm all for that. However I'm not gonna spend thousands on a scanner I don't even know how to use.

I'm still relatively new to this. What you said all makes nice sense, but I just don't have the option at this point in time. The only thing I can say for certain is that developing film myself is really not my cup of tea. I'd be fine with scanning, but ya can't scan without a scanner.

Perhaps the small Photo-studio/lab my neighbour owns would scan my negatives, gotta ask. I know he has a scanner, but that's gonna be expensive. Like real expensive. Expensive like 15 bucks a roll expensive, euros that is, or 20 idk. Ain't gonna pay that.

[Spopepro]

Oh for sure. I probably just should have said that film has a ton of latitude, and that doing stuff when printing/scanning to adjust contrast and exposure is not only possible, but common. But only go into that stuff if you have a negative you really, really like. I rent use of the scanner mentioned for $55 an hour (it's a $20k piece of kit) and I can scan about 3-4 frames in an hour. But I won't scan if I'm not planning on printing.

I also have someone else develop my color film, the tiny bit I shoot. Developing color is nasty business. And printing color is kind of a pain, because you can't have a safe light on in the darkroom. It's a good thing I really like B&W and I enjoy the hobby of developing and printing. Otherwise I really couldn't be bothered.

[Olumin]

Oh for sure. I probably just should have said that film has a ton of latitude, and that doing stuff when printing/scanning to adjust contrast and exposure is not only possible, but common. But only go into that stuff if you have a negative you really, really like. I rent use of the scanner mentioned for $55 an hour (it's a $20k piece of kit) and I can scan about 3-4 frames in an hour. But I won't scan if I'm not planning on printing.

I also have someone else develop my color film, the tiny bit I shoot. Developing color is nasty business. And printing color is kind of a pain, because you can't have a safe light on in the darkroom. It's a good thing I really like B&W and I enjoy the hobby of developing and printing. Otherwise I really couldn't be bothered.

Yea I don't really shot black and white with 35mm. I don't really care for prints in that case, I'd rather take the scans. I can still get them printed later on. $55 an hour is certainly not affordably for me at this point in time, I'm also not really willing to put that kind of effort into it. That might be worth it when shooting medium format, but with 35mm? I'm looking for a quick, simple and cheap solution to get decent development and scanning of my 35mm rolls. The mini-lab would probably do a better job, but at a steep price, which I am not willing to pay for 36 images..

[CPTBadAss]

FWIW I thrifted an Epson V600 for $13 to scan negatives and prints. Not $20k quality but pretty damn good imo.