only slightly OT: jersey-pocketable film camera?

[ceolwulf]

I'm getting more and more into shooting film and I'd like to get a film camera to take along on rides. I could use a handlebar bag but I'd prefer something that just tucked into a jersey pocket. Seems lately any compact 35mm with a fixed lens of f/2.8 or better is worth its weight in gold (have you seen the prices of Olympus Stylus Epics lately?!). Any out there that kind of fly under the radar a bit but still have good image quality and preferably won't break immediately? The Minox 35 cameras (I've had a couple of them before) could be ideal, but they are supposedly not at all reliable, shutters are iffy. Olympus XA might be my best bet. There's a Canon MC that seems interesting, very rare though, don't really want to ruin a collectors' item.

Thoughts?

[jtakeda]

how much are you trying to spend?

I currently have

yashica t4
ricoh gr1
and rollei 35

the rollei is fun but the ricoh is my go to if im bringing a camera on a ride.

Ricoh would be what id recommend but a T4 is wayyy easier to find. Ive found 3 in the last 2 years--I paid no more than $3 for each of them. Just go to garage sales and fleas and they pop up

[R3awak3n]

Xa is your best bet but its expensive. I have 3, cant believe prices of them. Great cameras.

I also have a couple of epic infinities (aka the mju i) not as nice as the epic. I could sell ya one if you would like :)

[daker13]

The Yashica T4 takes nice pics and I still like it after about 20 years.

[jamesdak]

I used to carry around a little 35mm rangefinder that was really, really good. A Minolta Hi-matic 7sII. If you can find one it will take amazing shots for such a little package.

http://www.pbase.com/jhuddle/image/44091541.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/jhuddle/image/43587047.jpg

This little Olympus 35 RC's are great too. My son used mine to shoot a picture that ultimately took 1st place in the Utah State Fair.

http://www.pbase.com/jhuddle/image/44091535.jpg

[speedevil]

I have a couple of the Rollei 35s, and they have their quirks. But they also have superb Zeiss optics and a unique design that holds the film completely flat so the image is sharp all the way to the edge.

Very well made cameras, but the biggest nuisance is the exposure meter battery. The original was a mercury sell, which isn't available. You can get a carrier for hearing aid batteries, but then you need to have the exposure meter recalibrated because of the voltage difference. Once it's done, you're good for a long time.

[pbarry]

Ricoh gr1 hands down, if you can find one. They are getting long in the tooth now, but a good working example is worth.. They should do a run of 20k units @ $899 USD. I'd buy one.

[ceolwulf]

Great suggestions guys and we clearly need better garage sales in this area :help: most of what’s been mentioned sells for three to five hundred on eBay now ... was hoping to keep it under a hundred. I’ll have to pay a bit more attention to local sales I guess.

[jtakeda]

Yow. Didn’t realize the gr1 went up in price so much. I think I paid $150 years ago :0

[pbarry]

I was talking a new run from Ricoh $$. :)
They look better than any point and shoot but most folks don't know the difference. The last one I bought, 12 years ago, was $30 at an old school camera store.

[oldpotatoe]

I had one of these, really spectacular with a spectacular price..but you get what ya pay for.

[avalonracing]

As a guy who has a degree in photography, spent 20 years making a living as a commercial photographer and has shot, processed and printed more film than anyone under 40 or outside the profession could ever dream of, I have to ask...
Why film? Is it because tubes of paint, brushes and an easel too cumbersome?

[speedevil]

As a guy who has a degree in photography, spent 20 years making a living as a commercial photographer and has shot, processed and printed more film than anyone under 40 or outside the profession could ever dream of, I have to ask...
Why film? Is it because tubes of paint, brushes and an easel too cumbersome?

Maybe the OP rides C&V bikes, and so naturally likes C&V cameras too? If so, that seems a reasonable match.

[avalonracing]

Maybe the OP rides C&V bikes, and so naturally likes C&V cameras too? If so, that seems a reasonable match.

I get classic and vintage things but film cameras are penny farthing bikes. They look good on display but they are actually damn impractical. Hey, I sometimes miss using the darkroom but in reality, I'd rather shoot than dunk things in chemicals.

But in trying to be helpful to the OP: I've owned a Stylus Epic and an XA (which is sitting on a shelf right in front of me) and those were the best cameras to take on rides. I'd actually find an XA if you can as it is more fun to set your focus and aperture yourself and you can control your ISO for exposure compensation if you need to. Also, the 35mm lens is sharp and fast for a small film camera.

[wallymann]

safe to assume you'll be carrying your choice in a ziplock? i cant think of any option that'd be sweat- or moisture-tolerant.

[Mark McM]

Range finder cameras (like most of the ones mentioned) can be thinner than SLRs, but if you want the full range of functions of an SLR, the Pentax MX with the 40mm pancake lens is nearly as thin (and the body is smaller than many range finders):

http://www.collection-appareils.fr/pentax/images/Pentax_mx.jpg


I have in fact ridden with one of these in a jersey pocket.

[jamesdak]

As a guy who has a degree in photography, spent 20 years making a living as a commercial photographer and has shot, processed and printed more film than anyone under 40 or outside the profession could ever dream of, I have to ask...
Why film? Is it because tubes of paint, brushes and an easel too cumbersome?


LOL, I was wondering the same thing but held my tongue. I've been shooting for over 30 years myself and don't shot film anymore. Digital is just so far advanced over film now. And I too still have a ton of film camera's lying around. I also have a couple dozen manual focus, prime Leica R, Contax Zeiss, Olympus, and Pentax lenses I've converted for use on my DSLRs. But I just can't seem to see shooting film. I've still got about a dozen rolls of Velvia in the freezer that aren't being used. On my rides I have an old Galaxy 4 cellphone with me and just use that camera.

http://www.pbase.com/jhuddle/image/167585048.jpg

But to each their own.

[colker]

As a guy who has a degree in photography, spent 20 years making a living as a commercial photographer and has shot, processed and printed more film than anyone under 40 or outside the profession could ever dream of, I have to ask...
Why film? Is it because tubes of paint, brushes and an easel too cumbersome?


LOL... i agree.

[colker]

LOL, I was wondering the same thing but held my tongue. I've been shooting for over 30 years myself and don't shot film anymore. Digital is just so far advanced over film now. And I too still have a ton of film camera's lying around. I also have a couple dozen manual focus, prime Leica R, Contax Zeiss, Olympus, and Pentax lenses I've converted for use on my DSLRs. But I just can't seem to see shooting film. I've still got about a dozen rolls of Velvia in the freezer that aren't being used. On my rides I have an old Galaxy 4 cellphone with me and just use that camera.

http://www.pbase.com/jhuddle/image/167585048.jpg

But to each their own.

Only reason i see to shoot film is printing something 10 x10 meters at least.

[ceolwulf]

Thanks all, my initial thought that the XA seems ideal appears to be justified.

The film "versus" digital debate died years ago. They're two different things and it's possible to enjoy one or the other or both or neither. LP vs. CD (or FLAC), paper vs. Kindle, bicycles vs. motorcycles. The "vs." doesn't belong. I too have been shooting for 30 years and I really tried to "go digital", was a fairly early adopter, but for me personally I mostly stopped caring about photography at around the same time. Now I'm shooting again and having fun.

[ceolwulf]

http://www.collection-appareils.fr/pentax/images/Pentax_mx.jpg


I have in fact ridden with one of these in a jersey pocket.

That's commitment!

[false_Aest]

Folks,

Get a Nikon 35TI. The lens is superb. The look is awesome. It's small and works so well

[mhespenheide]

Yashica T4 would be my choice for your description.

Personally, I like a little wider, so I have a relatively anonymous Nikon "LiteTouch" with a fixed 28mm lens. It's the size of a deck of cards or so. (Not that I use it anymore at all, having made the switch to digital.)

[Calnago]

I have one of these... and haven't used it except for one trip when I got it many years ago... Just dug it out upon seeing this thread...
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1784/28950079918_aba4f8912c_c.jpg

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1809/42823379391_7369d9986d_c.jpg

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1808/42823380311_d147a879c0_c.jpg

[NHAero]

Definitions of what fits in a jersey pocket vary :)
The best camera I ever owned was the Ricoh GR1v and that was pocketable. I bought it in 2002 to take on a trip to Tibet where I knew I'd be away from power and batteries for weeks. When I sold it I got more than I paid, and a quick look at eBay shows upwards of $650 is common today.
25 years before that I carried an Olympus 35RC on an 8 month overseas ramble. I still have that camera - probably not worth all that much with the dent it acquired in Africa - but IIRC it weighs twice what the Ricoh weighs and it's less sleek regarding sliding in and out of pockets.

[R3awak3n]

you guys that are recommending some of these cameras need to see what an olympus XA looks like, it is really small, the true definition of pocketable. the nikon 35ti is sweet but way bigger compared to the XA, also $$$$

[jamesdak]

Only reason i see to shoot film is printing something 10 x10 meters at least.

That's one heck of a huge image!! :eek:

[warren128]

I've been an avid photographer since I was a kid (since the late 1960s), but I have moved on from film even though I still have a bunch of my favorite film cameras around.

From my own experience with compact, fixed lens film cameras, I have traveled extensively with a Yashica T4 and later, a T4 Super. The lens is superb, and has a lot of "character".

I also played around with an Olympus XA2, the zone focus version of the XA. The XA2 is also very compact, with a nice performing lens.

So far, I have been satisfied with using my cell phone's camera while on my rides.

[cadence90]

.... ..
.
.

[IFRider]

Earliers '80s, the bums I hung around with climbed a lot and we swore by those Olympus XA/XA2. Still have mine with the flash, although a shelf camera these days. Very durable and easy to use with a nice lens. Not a lot in the way of exposure control though. Took the below with it in the '83 (Mount Robson) on slide film scanned via a Nikon scanner.

These days for small, semi-pocketable I carry a Fujifilm X100f. Feels like the Leica IIIf I learned on and maybe not pocketable, Independent Fabrications/Baileyworks makes a small handlebar bag that holds it perfectly. Tons more creative control than the XA.

That Nikon 35TI was what we dreamed about, also a similar Contax. I would be nervous about dropping them while riding though. We used to keep XA hanging off our rock climbing rack.

[srcarter]

As a guy who has a degree in photography, spent 20 years making a living as a commercial photographer and has shot, processed and printed more film than anyone under 40 or outside the profession could ever dream of, I have to ask...
Why film? Is it because tubes of paint, brushes and an easel too cumbersome?

This reminds me of this classic New Yorker cartoon on vinyl records. The same might be said for film.

https://images.fineartamerica.com/images-medium-large-5/a-man-shows-another-man-his-extensive-collection-alex-gregory.jpg

[Louis]

This reminds me of this classic New Yorker cartoon on vinyl records. The same might be said for film.

Hey, I have the record collection, I might as well keep the turntable:

https://nyti.ms/1opl7cC

https://static01.nyt.com/images/2014/08/10/magazine/10collector1/mag-10Collector-t_CA0-articleLarge.jpg?quality=75&auto=webp&disable=upscale

[Calnago]

Re my Nikon Ti35... is there an actual market for something like that these days? I’ll put it up for sale if there is. Like I said, I used it on one cycling trip through the UK one summers. Shot slides. That was it. It is a bit big and heavy for carrying in a jersey pocket for sure. I also had a Yashixa T4. Thought I still had it but couldn’t find it. Maybe I have it to someone. Like many, my iPhone serves as my main camera on rides these days.

[jtakeda]

Ti35 is a $500+ camera these days.

I used to flip cameras (to buy bikes) but the camera market is insane right now.

I sold a Contax t2 data back for a friend the week after one of the Jenner’s was on Jimmie kimmel or something and mentioned that’s the camera they use—sold it in 24 hours for $750 to someone in LA. WITH A BURNT FLASH FILM

[ceolwulf]

Re my Nikon Ti35... is there an actual market for something like that these days? I’ll put it up for sale if there is. Like I said, I used it on one cycling trip through the UK one summers. Shot slides. That was it. It is a bit big and heavy for carrying in a jersey pocket for sure. I also had a Yashixa T4. Thought I still had it but couldn’t find it. Maybe I have it to someone. Like many, my iPhone serves as my main camera on rides these days.

Quick search of sold listings on eBay for the Nikon 35Ti indicates they sell on average $500 to $600. Very sought after.

Same goes for the Yashica T4 and several others mentioned. 35mm compacts are having a real renaissance. Some like the Contax T2 or Minolta TC-1 regularly top $1000.

On the other hand anything with a zoom lens usually won't fetch more than fifty bucks.

[ckamp]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180616/c33d7f00d4c7b318c2cb00ffae3c7484.jpg

But now I use a mirrorless fujifilm X-M1 with 35mm f/2 or pancake 27mm f/2.8. You can find the body very cheap (185$ on EBay).

Fuji pro models from around the same year have the same sensor/processor, it takes excellent photos.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tylercheung]

Having cut my teeth on film, I second the Fujis. (Some ppl use the Panasonic equivalent, etc)

The reason I say this, is that the Fuji's are the most "film-ey" of the digital cameras, and are calibrated off of their Provia film stock. The X100 will even simulate different black and white film grain...

[ckamp]

Yes, a good point! It's why I went with Fuji and the processing it offers.

My other setup is a Pentax KP with some of the 'legendary' limiteds (77, 43 etc.). I also feel I can can get some film-feel from this setup. (Too big for a jersey pocket, but I felt like talking about it anyway.)



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RFC]

I get classic and vintage things but film cameras are penny farthing bikes. They look good on display but they are actually damn impractical. Hey, I sometimes miss using the darkroom but in reality, I'd rather shoot than dunk things in chemicals.

But in trying to be helpful to the OP: I've owned a Stylus Epic and an XA (which is sitting on a shelf right in front of me) and those were the best cameras to take on rides. I'd actually find an XA if you can as it is more fun to set your focus and aperture yourself and you can control your ISO for exposure compensation if you need to. Also, the 35mm lens is sharp and fast for a small film camera.

I paid the rent in undergrad working as a film photographer and spent a couple of summers working as a photo journalist for daily newspapers. I did many allnighters in photo labs breathing fumes and turning out less than satisfying prints. The only night that provided any satisfaction was the night the hot redhead female campus cop stopped in to see what was going on.

Years later when I discovered and embraced digital I knew I would never go back to film. I sold my Leicas without a whimper.

So, in good faith, I have to ask, why are you getting more into film?

[Calnago]

...The only night that provided any satisfaction was the night the hot redhead female campus cop stopped in to see what was going on.

So you’re saying your days, and nights, with film were totally worth it after all. :)

[cadence90]

.... ..
.
.

[RFC]

Well, we don't really know, do we? It could very easily have gone like...

HawtCop: "Hey, what are you doing there?"
RFC: "Oh, who, me? Uh, I'm just mixing up some Dektol and hypo, some selenium toner too."
HawtCop: "What's that?"
RFC: "Well, heh, I'm flattered that you ask! It's film stuff, chemicals. I'm kind of a artist and all. Hey, we might have "chemistry"! Wanna get it on?"
HawtCop: "What??? Jeezus, cripes, hell no! You look a mess, you're pale as a ghost, you smell gross, and your fingers are all black and yellow! Disgusting! Lock up when you leave!"

;)
.

LOL!!! perfect! We had crossed paths before. She did carry handcuffs.

[Calnago]

I prefer to imagine the best.

[RFC]

We really should get back to cameras.:rolleyes: Bottomline is that as much as I enjoyed film photography, it sucks compared to digital. I can understand how there might be situations when film is still best, but only if you are taking aerial shots from a U2.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-u-2-spy-plane-still-flying-combat-missions-60-years-after-debut-1528382700

[slowpoke]

Back to the original question, I'd only recommend retractable-lens or clamshell design camera. Anything with a lens protruding too much may catch in the jersey pocket.

Or OP can get a "feed bag" and store the camera there.

[tylercheung]

granted, nowadays, the answer is probably "iPhone" (or android equivalent)

[giverdada]

Leica MP.

Why not? It costs a million dollars, holds its value, is tiny, and, apparently, it's 'Mechanically Perfect'. Should fit in a jersey pocket, but maybe only a silk-lined Rapha jersey pocket, climate-controlled and all that too... ;)

I've been looking at Fuji X-cameras. I can't afford super new or higher-end ones, but the local k-list has Fuji x20 cameras for three bills. Not bad. Not a steal, but definitely worth a look.

And as for film: I hear ya. I spent my youth in all-night darkroom print marathons as well. Got decent enough to like my prints. Never got very pro, or into fiber, or toning or whatever, but got some good prints up to 11x14" RC and loved the stuff. Even today, I can smell fix and get all nostalgic and long for the old days. Somehow, though, I managed to get through my early photography without ever learning how to process B & W film. So last semester, I taught myself with some excellent youtube videos and a few trial rolls run through the school camera and my Nikon. Holy Crap! I love film! Seriously, though, it's amazing. The stuff coming through the school camera was crap, but the kids were learning. The stuff coming through my Nikon was pretty good, but I was learning. Prints were decent, but the enlarger/printer system wasn't dialed. Anyway, I could HOLD the film, and print it, with my HANDS, onto paper that I could then HAND to another person, for them to HOLD and look at. Not so with digital.

And besides, as get-off-my-lawn-retro as film may seem and sound, there's a lot to be said for concrete records that are reproducible into concrete form. With digital, I tend to not print my photos much. If/when my hard drive bites it, all will be lost. Still have my binders full of contact sheets and negs though...

[RFC]

Wet film still the medium of choice for U2 aerial photos. From my own use of aerials, I'm guessing that the resolution is much higher because they use frames of film as large as the final print.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-u-2-spy-plane-still-flying-combat-missions-60-years-after-debut-1528382700

[staggerwing]

Folks,

Get a Nikon 35TI. The lens is superb. The look is awesome. It's small and works so well

Nikon also made a similar 28TI, with a slightly wider 28mm lens. If I had to pick only one focal length, 28mm would be it.

Canon made a cute little Canonet QL17, which was kind fun. I generally used mine as in "zone focus" mode, although it did have a focus patch in the rangefinder.

And as also noted, some of the manual Pentax bodies were rather small, and didn't get much bigger when you added a pancake lens.

As for why film, why not.

[PSJoyce]

Olympus XA, Tiny, carried one travelling for years,

Rollei 35, Great lens and lots of character

[chrismoustache]

an XA is definitely on my list.

for a good mix of fun, pocketability, price, might as well pick up a Vivitar Ultra Wide and Slim.

[martl]

The Minox 35 cameras (I've had a couple of them before) could be ideal, but they are supposedly not at all reliable, shutters are iffy.
I hear the later models don't have the issue. Older quality cameras often weren't a finished product, but were developed on, based on customer feedback/warranty cases.

Buddy of mine bought a used Rollei 3003 (maginficent camera) which he sent to Rollei for maintenance when the company was already sold to Singapore and the camera was out of production for a decade. He got it back in full upgraded spec at no cost. (on a sidenote, Zeiss didn't charge me for the inspection of my 250mm lens either as there were no repairs needed - sometimes, it pays to spend the extra buck on quality equipment, or at least it used to)

I wouldn't be surprised if Minox had a similar policy. -> http://www.minox.com/index.php?id=6282&L=1