Barnack Leica clone with improved viewfinder?

[abruzzi]

I recently took a trip to Russia and picked up a couple of old Soviet cameras while there (thanks Alex!). Among the cameras I bought was a Zorki 1, which is a clone of a Leica (a II I think). One thing I really like about the camera is how tiny it is. One thing I hate about it is the viewfinder—both the size of the viewfinder and the fact that focusing is on a separate location.

As far as I can tell, Leica didn’t combine the rangefinder and the viewfinder until the bayonet M cameras (not to mention the fact that most Leicas are far beyond my budget.) I know that some of the Japanese clones of the Leica provide a combined viewfinder/rangefinder. Did any of them improve the size of the viewfinder without sacrificing the tiny size? (I’m surprised at how much larger the FED 2 feels compared to the Zorki 1.)

 

[darkosaric]

Maybe Leica III G? Never had one, so I cannot tell for sure, but it looks like Barnack with a huge viewfinder.

 

[Pentode]

I believe the Leica IIIg had a much bigger viewfinder while retaining the Barnack size and format.

Later Leotax (Japanese Barnack copies) had bigger and better viewfinders as well. I think there was a later Nicca model with a better finder also.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

None, I'm afraid, have same size and combined VF/RF in same body size and LTM Leica.
I have Canon II something, it is combined, but bigger.
Get SBOOI and look into it and RF window with both eyes open. SBOOI is small and better than M3 VF.

 

[abruzzi]

None, I'm afraid, have same size and combined VF/RF.

Bigger is what I want, assuming the Zorki is close to the what an actual Leica has, I’d love a bigger VF. I’ll have to look at the Canon if the VF is larger.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Bigger is what I want, assuming the Zorki is close to the what an actual Leica has, I’d love a bigger VF. I’ll have to look at the Canon if the VF is larger.

Zorki is exact copy of Leica II. Canon II series are longer and higher. And Canon P is larger than M Leica.
Contax IIa are also not very big. And Bessa R is much newer camera with much better combined RF/VF.

 

[StepheKoontz]

I like my canon II. It's lightweight and very close to the same size as my Leica IIIc but combines the viewfinder, as well as having 3 different switchable magnifications.

 

[abruzzi]

Zorki is exact copy of Leica II. Canon II series are longer and higher. And Canon P is larger than M Leica.
Contax IIa are also not very big. And Bessa R is much newer camera with much better combined RF/VF.

Sorry, I misread your last post...when you said same size, I thought you were talking viewfinder size. Yes small camera big VF with combined VF/RF. I have a Kiev IIa that I love, but that is noticeably larger and doesn’t have the collapsible lens which helps to make the camera pocketable.

I take a closer look at some of the stuff mentioned in the thread, thanks.!

 

[Patrick Robert James]

I think the Zorki 3 versions had bigger finders and still were Barnack small.

 

[guangong]

Quality wise, a Canon clone of Leica screw mounts, but with combined viewfinder-rangefinder, would be a better choice. Basically, close to Leica quality. Also, since flange to film distance is identical to Leicas, there is a vast array of very good lenses available. For a slightly larger ltm camera, but with larger viewfinder-rangefinder there is the Canon P.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Quality wise, a Canon clone of Leica screw mounts, but with combined viewfinder-rangefinder, would be a better choice. Basically, close to Leica quality. Also, since flange to film distance is identical to Leicas, there is a vast array of very good lenses available. For a slightly larger ltm camera, but with larger viewfinder-rangefinder there is the Canon P.

P is slightly larger than Leica M cameras. So, it is slightly too large for LTM camera, just like FED-5

 

[abruzzi]

Since size is a large part of this thought experiment, I was figuring on a collapsible lens like the Industar-22 on the Zorki. Maybe even another Industar.

 

[StepheKoontz]

Quality wise, a Canon clone of Leica screw mounts, but with combined viewfinder-rangefinder, would be a better choice. Basically, close to Leica quality. Also, since flange to film distance is identical to Leicas, there is a vast array of very good lenses available. For a slightly larger ltm camera, but with larger viewfinder-rangefinder there is the Canon P.

I actually prefer the L series over the P. The L1 is a lovely camera and the viewfinder holds up well over time.

 

[darkroommike]

I actually prefer the L series over the P. The L1 is a lovely camera and the viewfinder holds up well over time.

I also have an L1 and think it might have the best finder of all the Canon clones and the best RF spot.

 

[darinwc]

The Canon ii, III, and IV cameras share many features with the leicas, but the viewfinders are tiny pinholes. The iid2, iis2, and ivsb2 have slightly larger, pinhole and a half sized finders.

The latter cameras have larger finders, but are larger in size as well.

 

[awty]

I would be happy if the zorki 1 had descent brass gears instead of die cast. Then maybe the frames would be even.

 

[darkosaric]

I just purchased SBOOI 50mm finder, because small viewfinder is what puts me off from IIIf. Now when my M3 has an issue, with this finder IIIf is equally or better to use as M3. It is unbelievable how good this finder is. Price of 40€ is not small, but it pays of.

 

[abruzzi]

The main reason I like my zorki is it is small enough to slip in my back pocket (collapsible Industar lens). The placement of aperture ring is where it won't accidentally get knocked, so I leave it at ƒ11 and the shutter at 1/200 with ISO100 film in it. I almost never focus or use the rangefinder (though I'd prefer to be more engaged with focusing. with the design as is, its easier to ignore focusing.) I just pull it out of my pocket, extend the lens, turn the focus to the hyperfocal distance. (for ƒ11 its about 2m to infinity)

It has essentially become a point and shoot (with a 50mm lens!--see my thread in the 35mm forum about point-and-shoots with a "normal" lens). I'd love a better viewfinder, I'd love an integrated rangefinder patch, but if I sacrifice size to that goal, it becomes a different kind of camera, and no longer fills that roll.

 

[M. Axel Wikstrom]

Well, the Barnack Leica with an improved viewfinder is the M-series (among other improvements).

 

[abruzzi]

yeah, but its much larger (and more expensive than I'm prepared to spend):

 

[M. Axel Wikstrom]

yeah, but its much larger (and more expensive than I'm prepared to spend):

Yeah, they had to make room for the improved viewfinder and other niceties like the wind lever and bayonet mount. Regardless, it's not much bigger, and smaller than any SLR.

Sometimes there are bargains. I bought a "user" M3 for $550 not long ago, and recently found an M2 that needed service for $250 - had it serviced and put new skin on and it's probably good for decades to come.

 

[abruzzi]

Fair enough, but it is specifically the tiny size that appeals to me about the Barnack cameras and their clones. The Zorki is nice, and I only have three complaints—the viewfinder size, the separate rangefinder, and the 1/500 top speed. (Ok, film loading is a b**** too.)

 

[M. Axel Wikstrom]

Fair enough, but it is specifically the tiny size that appeals to me about the Barnack cameras and their clones. The Zorki is nice, and I only have three complaints—the viewfinder size, the separate rangefinder, and the 1/500 top speed. (Ok, film loading is a b**** too.)

I like the Barnack Leicas too. Just have to live with the limitations - kind of like driving a Model T vs. later cars. If I want standard controls and modern highway speeds I don't choose the Model T.

 

[jtk]

Yeah, they had to make room for the improved viewfinder and other niceties like the wind lever and bayonet mount. Regardless, it's not much bigger, and smaller than any SLR.

Sometimes there are bargains. I bought a "user" M3 for $550 not long ago, and recently found an M2 that needed service for $250 - had it serviced and put new skin on and it's probably good for decades to come.

Several versions of Pentax are smaller than M and several Pentax lenses are very small @ 1.4.

 

[M. Axel Wikstrom]

Several versions of Pentax are smaller than M and several Pentax lenses are very small @ 1.4.

I guess that little Pentax 110 toy SLR would be smaller ;-)