Rangefinders and Lomo.

mori · 4th January 2006

Hey everyone,

I'm quite a greenhorn where this is concerned so bear with me.

Many websites have dubbed the Olympus XA as an ideal alternative to the discontinued Lomo-LCA. However they are so expensive and are hardly available in Singapore (as far as I know). Are there cheaper alternatives that you would recommend?

Also, Lomo LCA shots have very distinct features (eg. vignetting) - do these only pertain to the LCA or similar cameras in general? Thanks so much for your help!!!

celerystalksme · 4th January 2006

Cosina CX-2/Praktica CX-2...Olympus XA/XA2...I'm sure many many others...

Vignetting, slightly out of focus, contrast, etc...these are not limited to the Lomo LC-A...you can find those qualities in many many cameras. The LC-A is the product of marketing...the LC-A is not unique AT ALL! But those Lomography markerters are GENIUSES and have convinced non-photography people that the LC-A can do things other cameras don't/can't.

skinnylatte · 5th January 2006

Originally Posted by celerystalksme

Cosina CX-2/Praktica CX-2...Olympus XA/XA2...I'm sure many many others...

Vignetting, slightly out of focus, contrast, etc...these are not limited to the Lomo LC-A...you can find those qualities in many many cameras. The LC-A is the product of marketing...the LC-A is not unique AT ALL! But those Lomography markerters are GENIUSES and have convinced non-photography people that the LC-A can do things other cameras don't/can't.

Exactly.

I think you will find that the choice of the rangefinder enthusiast (who can't afford voigtlander or leica) will opt for the yashica electro 35 GS/GSN/GT/GTN (GS=GT, GSN=GTN, except the T ones are in black), or the canonet QL17/19/28. They're all very capable cameras. Then there are also cameras like the Rollei 35.

A good resouce would be www.cameraquest.com and www.photoethnography.com.

zaren · 6th January 2006

Originally Posted by skinnylatte

Exactly.

I think you will find that the choice of the rangefinder enthusiast (who can't afford voigtlander or leica) will opt for the yashica electro 35 GS/GSN/GT/GTN (GS=GT, GSN=GTN, except the T ones are in black), or the canonet QL17/19/28. They're all very capable cameras. Then there are also cameras like the Rollei 35.

A good resouce would be www.cameraquest.com and www.photoethnography.com.

the rollei 35 is hardly a "cheaper alternative"

the oly RC can also be considered, it's smaller than the yashica and the canonet, albeit with a slower lens. (f2.8 vs f1.7)

mori · 7th January 2006

Thanks for the help guys! I'm currently looking at some of the Olympus XA models on eBay. Would you recommend the XA or the XA2? I know the picture qualities are somewhat similar but what about the technical aspect of the cameras? I've heard that the XA2 is somewhat more Lomo-like than the XA.

skinnylatte · 7th January 2006

xa2 is zone focus. xa is more of a real rangefinder. more expensive too.

zaren · 7th January 2006

Originally Posted by mori

Thanks for the help guys! I'm currently looking at some of the Olympus XA models on eBay. Would you recommend the XA or the XA2? I know the picture qualities are somewhat similar but what about the technical aspect of the cameras? I've heard that the XA2 is somewhat more Lomo-like than the XA.

go for the XA.

celerystalksme · 7th January 2006

Originally Posted by mori

Thanks for the help guys! I'm currently looking at some of the Olympus XA models on eBay. Would you recommend the XA or the XA2? I know the picture qualities are somewhat similar but what about the technical aspect of the cameras? I've heard that the XA2 is somewhat more Lomo-like than the XA.

XA2 and the LCA both use zone focusing...so you never quite know if you're in focus or not...it's guess work and experience. The XA is an actual rangefinder with a rangefinder patch in the viewfinder. But it's a really small patch...and many of the viewfinders are a bit hazy with age (you can have it cleaned)...so some people say the XA is not much better than zone focusing.

Other than that...the XA2 opens up to f3.5 while the XA opens up to F2.8...the XA2 shutter goes from 2-1/750 while the XA goes from 10-1/500...the XA2 focuses from 1.2m-infinity while the XA focuses for 0.85m-infinity...and of course, the XA2 is zone focus while the XA is a true rangefinder...

Personally, I'd go for the XA...

4th January 2006	#1
mori Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Singapore Posts: 54	Rangefinders and Lomo. Hey everyone, I'm quite a greenhorn where this is concerned so bear with me. Many websites have dubbed the Olympus XA as an ideal alternative to the discontinued Lomo-LCA. However they are so expensive and are hardly available in Singapore (as far as I know). Are there cheaper alternatives that you would recommend? Also, Lomo LCA shots have very distinct features (eg. vignetting) - do these only pertain to the LCA or similar cameras in general? Thanks so much for your help!!!

4th January 2006	#2
celerystalksme Deregistered Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 23	Re: Rangefinders and Lomo. Cosina CX-2/Praktica CX-2...Olympus XA/XA2...I'm sure many many others... Vignetting, slightly out of focus, contrast, etc...these are not limited to the Lomo LC-A...you can find those qualities in many many cameras. The LC-A is the product of marketing...the LC-A is not unique AT ALL! But those Lomography markerters are GENIUSES and have convinced non-photography people that the LC-A can do things other cameras don't/can't.

7th January 2006	#5
mori Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Singapore Posts: 54	Re: Rangefinders and Lomo. Thanks for the help guys! I'm currently looking at some of the Olympus XA models on eBay. Would you recommend the XA or the XA2? I know the picture qualities are somewhat similar but what about the technical aspect of the cameras? I've heard that the XA2 is somewhat more Lomo-like than the XA.

7th January 2006	#6
skinnylatte Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 196	Re: Rangefinders and Lomo. xa2 is zone focus. xa is more of a real rangefinder. more expensive too.