The Three Year Anniversary Review

Raxeh is Hexar spelled backwards!

I bought my first Hexar RF in March, 2005. I’d just sold back to KEH the Canon 10D I’d bought a few months earlier. I’d also sold them both my Nikon FM2s and a number of lenses for a ridiculous pittance. I’d decided that what I really wanted was a rangefinder, but even with the money in hand from the sale of the Nikons and the Canon, a Leica was out of reach. Ah, but the Hexar RF, that I could afford. I already owned a Hexar AF, and Dante said the RF was a fine camera, so I gave KEH $889 for a Hexar RF and a 50 Hexanon. I was so excited that I skipped worked the day the UPS guy was schedule to bring them. A few short minutes after he left, the box was open, and I was nearly heartbroken. The shutter was too loud, so much louder than the Hexar AF was even in its ‘loud’ mode. That would have been the end of it if I hadn’t been too poor to buy the Leica. I could have sent the Hexar back, but I knew that I would just be tempted to buy that Leica that I couldn’t afford. So I kept the Hexar out of self-defense.

Fast forward three years. I’ve now got two Hexar RF bodies, three of the Hexanon lenses, but still no Leica. I could afford that Leica now, but I’ve grown to appreciate the Hexar. It’s an entirely unique camera, combining modern materials and technologies with one of the oldest focusing systems around. It’s a combination that for me works better than either an entirely manual camera or one of the button and dial encrusted monstrosities that now populate the B&H catalog.

An Iconoclastic Design

The Hexar RF’s appeal has a lot to do with the iconoclastic nature of its genesis. If the admittedly excellent Zeiss Ikon was an attempt to make evolutionary improvements on the Leica M6, the Hexar RF was an attempt to make an entirely new species of camera by crossing the unique focusing system of the M6 with the automation and controls of the Canon T90 - for those not up on their history of the modern SLR, the T90 was the ergonomic inspiration for the auto everything SLRs or the 90’s and, eventually, every DSLR you’ve ever fondled. The result was something like learning Zen archery by doing industrial time-motion studies. The Hexar RF abandoned all the ancient conceits of the Leica - clumsy film loading, peculiar metering, limited shutter speeds - while hanging onto the small size and excellent rangefinder. Along the way, the automation and modern materials led to improved ergonomics and handling. It was, and still is, a revolutionary design, which is perhaps why it ultimately failed to find a place in the market. It turned out that the photographers who still appreciated the rangefinder’s benefits also happened to be in unhappy but ultimately faithful marriages with the all of the Leica’s shortcomings.

serial photography courtesy of the motor-drive

Commercial failure aside, the Hexar RF’s unholy marriage of rangefinder focusing and modern features actually works as a photographic tool. To understand why it works, it’s first necessary to understand what the contemporary Leica did and did not offer. The Leica has always enjoyed a reputation as the fast working camera for the discrete, natural light photographer. The lack of shutter vibration - a feature of it’s mirror free design - meant that you could hold it steady at much slower shutter speeds. The rangefinder itself made it possible to focus in much lower light levels than an SLR. The quiet shutter and small size allowed photography in places that larger and louder cameras would not be appropriate. The ability to see around the edges of the frame had serious compositional benefits. What you traded for all this was ease of use, a certain amount of framing inaccuracy, a minimum focusing distance of .7m and maximum focal length of 135. The last three are inherent to rangefinders, but there wasn’t much reason for all the usability oddities of the Leica. The Leica’s cumbersome film loading, slow and inaccurate shutter, lack of AE or integrated winder were all design choices specific to the Leica.

hexar rf, 28mm hexanon, neopan 1600

The Hexar RF discarded many of those design choices. The rangefinder was retained, but pretty much everything else went. In the place of a mechanical cloth shutter with a max speed of 1/1000th was a titanium bladed electrically controlled shutter capable of 1/4000th of second. In place of the silky smooth manual advance was a an automatic winder capable of slightly better than two frames a second. In place of manual metering with a semi-spot was a center-weighted meter and shutter priority AE. In place of bottom loading and manual rewind were an automatic loading and rewind system. In place of brass and leather were titanium and synthetics.

Wine, Beer and MD 20/20

For many Leica users, these were not improvements, and I’m not such a zealot that I can’t see why. There is something immensely satisfying about photographing with a precision mechanical instrument like the Leica. It taps into some lower part of our brain, the part of our brain that recognizes that small and heavy and full of springy bits is a very good thing. The Hexar RF is still small and heavy, but it doesn’t hit the same part of the brain. If the Leica is a fine wine, the Hexar is just a really good beer (by extension the average DSLR is some sort of cheap swill like Mad Dog).

Perhaps I’m revealing my middle-class, mid-west roots, but I drink a lot more beer than I do wine. By the same token, I like my cameras to have some limitations, but not quite as many as the Leica has. I regularly use 1/4000th to keep my aperture wide in bright light. I can load my Hexar one handed while walking. The auto winder means that I’m ready when Kate’s expression changes. The auto-exposure keeps me from doing dumb things like leaving the shutter at 1/8th of second. I’m convinced I make more successful photographs because of the Hexar’s enhanced features.

Lenses and Other Lenses

hexar rf, CV 35mm F1.4 SC, TriX

Yes, the Hexar RF can focus Leica lenses and Cosina lenses and Zeiss lenses too; I know because I’ve successfully used lenses from all three manufacturers. Despite that, the Hexar’s KM mount is not entirely compatible with other manufacturers lenses. For an explanation of why these two statements are not mutually exclusive, see Hands off my flange!. This also explains why the M8 can’t focus the Hexanon lenses.

hexar rf, 90mm hexanon, provia 100f

The Konica Hexanon lenses are excellent. The 50mm in particularly is a sleeper of a lens although prices do seem to be climbing. The 35 remains somewhat rare, but I’ve never talked to someone who didn’t love it. The 90 is grand portrait lens, although framing is a bit tricky with the Hexar’s gestural 90mm frame lines. The 28 is a 28 and nobody seems to get excited about 28mm lenses. If you never used anything other than the KM lenses, you wouldn’t be missing much, but if you do want to use that Sumilux, you can as long as you are up to the challenge of focusing a fast lens on an rangefinder. It isn’t exactly an easy task, so don’t be surprised if it takes practice.

The Future of the Rangefinder of the Future

Hexar RF, CV 35mm F1.4 SC, TriX

As of this writing the Hexar RF has been out of production for five years. Konica no longer makes cameras, having sold its camera line to Sony in the great digital shake down of the last few years. There are rumors of a Sony warehouse in Germany full of Hexar spare parts, but as far as I can tell, spare parts are nearly unobtainable. I harbor no illusions that anyone will be able to repair my Hexars. That said, I’ve been able to do little things myself. When I lost the eyepiece lens on one of mine last year, I was able to replace it with an over-sized lens purchased from an optics warehouse. I’ve also repaired a sloppy winder mode selector dial and recalibrated one of the rangefinders. Neither was too painful, but eventually something is going to break that I can’t fix. I’m betting that the shutter release button will be the first thing to go; the similar shutter release on the Hexar AF has a troubled history. The only reasonable option is to stockpile Hexar RF bodies, but prices have been going up. The last one I saw at KEH was listed at $800, I think. That’s better appreciation than a Leica, but it doesn’t bode well for my future use of Hexars. When the day comes when both mine die and no replacement is available, I probably will break down and buy that Leica, likely an M6TTL - I like the that the shutter speed dial turns the wrong way. By that time I may also be drinking more wine, so perhaps its limitations will appeal to me.

Other Hexar RF Reviews and Resources:

• The Hexar RF wikipedia entry
• Cameraquest Hexar RF page
• Irwin’s Review
• Dante’s Review
• Washington Post Hexar RF page
• realigning the vf
• Possible Resource for Hexar RF Repairs and Parts
• Last (?) of the New Stock Hexars
• Mega Pearls webshop carries an VF magnifier for the Hexar
• Other Hexar RF posts on this site

Yep, seems to be working. I had to adjust the RF on one of my Hexars recently. The vertical alignment had drifted off by bit. It’s unclear why this happens on the Hexar, as the vertical adjustment wheel is securely stuck in place with a blob of wax. They do seem to drift, although this is true of nearly any RF. Making the adjustment on the Hexar is fairly easy. Remove a couple of screws, take off one dial, pop the top and bust out your screwdrivers. Instructions - recently updated with better pictures and text from the service manual - are available on the ever helpful rangefinderforum.com. I seem to have hit the near focus on mine, at least with the Biogon. Infinity focus might be a bit off, but it hasn’t shown in photos, yet.

As with any complicated and fragile device, you could break yours by doing this, so do so at your own risk.

I just made another repair on one of my Hexars; both are now officially ugly in a way that only a photographer could love. One has the replacement eyepiece lens held in with superglue and gaffer’s tape. On the other one, I’ve just finished a repair to keep the frame advance selector from moving too freely on its own. It had developed a tendency to migrate to the self-timer position when I wasn’t lookig. A bit of wire around the base of the selector and a bit of gaffer’s tape for cosmetic purposes has subdued its wander lust for the moment.

This is what happens when you use your cameras everyday. With very few gaps for digital diversions, I’ve carried one of these bodies almost everyday for 3 years. They’ve banged around in back packs, been rained on, snowed on, poked by TSA minions, slipped from my shoulder repeatedly and generally been treated like tools. They’ve never failed me. I’d consider buying another for the inevitable day when one finally dies, but prices for bodies in good condition have risen considerably since I bought mine. KEH is listing an EX grade body for almost $900. That’s 30% more than I paid for either of mine. Perhaps word has gotten out that they really are fine cameras. For that kind of money you can buy an RF for which spare parts actually exist. Unfortunately, you can’t buy anything with the same feature set of the Hexar RF for any amount of money.

Commodity Apartment Geometry | Hexar RF, ZM Biogon 35, Delta 400, Tmax Dev

Just a couple of gear-head notes:

• Reader Hanjo pointed out that you can now buy from the Megaperls webstore an adapter to allow fitting a Leica VF Magnifier to the Hexar RF . They are also offering 1.15X and 1.35X magnifiers for Leicas (and Hexars via the aforementioned adapter). These magnifiers include diopter adjustment, so they could be very useful for Hexar owners who are unable to find the rare Hexar RF diopter lenses. The 1.35X adapter on the Hexar RF gives a VF magnification of .81, which would make shooting that beautiful KM 90MM F2.8 a heck of a lot easier. Unfortunately, they won’t ship them to the US or Germany due to patent restrictions. Get them at www.unicircuits.com
• My own DIY Eyepiece Replacement is still going strong after almost a year, although I did change the mounting. The original copper mount scratched my glasses. The lens is now held in with a couple of dots of superglue. A thin strip of gaffer’s tape makes it look pretty. This solution has worked out well enough that I don’t pay much attention to which Hexar I grab of a day.
• After almost 3 years of constant use by me - and whatever use the previous owner gave it - the drive selector dial on my original Hexar RF is starting to loosen up a bit. Other than that, it seems as mechanically sound as the day I stayed home from work to wait for the UPS guy to drop it off.
• For anyone looking to buy a new Hexar RF, reader Dave pointed out that Leo’s Cameras still has new stock Hexars and Hexanon lenses in stock. Looks like they’ve got Xpan stuff too.
• For anyone looking for a little inspiration, check out flickr for some of the incredible photography being done with Hexar RFs

For the source of this quote, see this auspiciousdragon post about the new Zeiss Sonnar in S mount. This rumor about a new Nikon S mount digital RF is probably just that, a rumor, but it’s just outrageous enough to be believable. Have Nikon and Zeiss built a relationship around the ZF lenses (or is the F mount public domain)? Are Zeiss, Cosina and Nikon working together to bring out a full frame digital Zeiss Ikon or updated digital Nikon SP rangefinder? Or is some forum nut laughing his but off right now? Magic eight ball says “answer unclear.” Ok, actually, the first time around it didn’t understand the question. The second time around, after I capitalized and punctuated the question, it answered yes. I’m not sure I trust oracular pronouncements from something that needs punctuation in order to understand the question.

I can’t believe no reviewer has yet mentioned the A700’s new Immobilizer Subject Stabilization Ray, clearly demonstrated in the above photo. The implications for candid photography are immense. We all know that the ability of in body IS to reduce camera shake allows you take pictures at previously unthinkably low shutter speeds, speeds so low that the subjects often move on their own. With the A700’s new Immobilizer Subject Stabilization Ray (ISSR), pesky subject motion is no longer a problem. Simply line up up the subject in your crosshairs . . . uh, viewfinder, and engage the ISSR. They won’t move no matter how long the exposure takes. Great for kids and pets too.

ISSR aside, the A700 looks like a fine camera, and unlike the recent Nikon and Canon offerings, the eye-relief doesn’t appear to entirely suck, although it’s a little unclear what 25mm without the frame and 21 mm with the frame means. Is this a removable eyepiece frame? In any event, with one of those fancy Zeiss 16-80 zooms, this would probably be nice piece of kit.

Seriously? Who builds a pro camera (D3) with an eye relief of 18mm? Even their new pro-sumer (D300) camera only has 19.5mm of eye relief. Canon isn’t much better with 20mm for the new 1Dspq43 Mark IIIIXV, but at least the 40D gets 22mm. (Utterly Off-topic Obervation: Someone in the Canon product-naming department must have worked for the Royal Ordnance Ordinance Factory in a previous life.

I don’t want any of these pieces of junk for myself, but I feel for my oppressed, be-spectacled, digital shooting brothers and sisters. Unite! Unite! Stand up for rights!

A couple of bits of gearheadedness to pass on:

• Colin pointed out a little propaganda-review of the ZM Biogon 35 over at Zeiss’ website (PDF version here).
• Jeff Ascough on Cameras and the Desire to Upgrade. Jeff Ascough is arguably one of the best wedding photographers in the world, a dedicated M shooter, and he isn’t buying an M8. His three criteria for new gear purchases are insightful.
• Olympus has released some more notes on the long-upcoming E-3. I’ll be curious to see if this thing ever makes it to market.

Editor’s Note: Two typos in a six line post is exactly the kind of accuracy and attention to detail for which I strive (2 points to whomever can point out the overly pedantic bit of grammar in this post). Would you believe that I used edit and index books for a living? Sigh . . . I gotta stop trying to write this stuff before my coffee kicks in.

Despite my recent comments about using what you are comfortable with, at the moment, I can think of two great ways to spend $5000:

1. Buy an M8.
2. Buy a Seitz Roundshot.

The Case for an M8

It’s fairly hard for me to justify buying an M8. I’ve gone through three digital cameras in as many years. The Canon 10D lasted 4 months before I traded it in for my first Hexar RF. The KM 7D a year later followed on the heels of the great gear purge of ought-five that saw the mad sale of my Hexar AF and Nokton 35 F1.2. The 7D fared poorly; I’m fairly certain I’d sold it within three months at least in part out of bitterness over the lost Hexar AF and Nokton. My current digital, a D80, I’ve had for almost a year, but it’s been sitting unused on the shelf for most of that time. It doesn’t know it yet, but it’s days are probably numbered.

Given this serial dissatisfaction with digital, why would I go spend almost $5K on another? Well . . . one could make an argument that all of the other digitals were discarded because what I was really waiting for was a digital M or, better yet, a digital Hexar. The M8 might just be good enough. Although I haven’t been all that impressed by most of the reviews or most of the resulting photos, Dante Stella’s recent piece on the M8, has sparked my interest again. He’s described the M8’s strengths and weaknesses in a way that makes sense to me and that runs parallels to my own thoughts on camera design. I’m intrigued again.

Intrigued or not, the M8 would essentially allow me to continue what I’m doing but without dealing with film. I’m not sure if that’s a good or bad thing. Film has a certain rhythm that I’ve come to appreciate. And, as Colin has noted, there’s something about the tangibility of film. I know that regardless of my scanning or photoshop skills, I could go rent a darkroom and print my negs. I probably won’t do it, but it’s nice to know that I could. I also know that even in the event of a massive and multiple hard drive failure, I’d still have the negs. I’m not sure I’m ready to give that up. But with the pile of undeveloped film growing again, I can see the appeal of at least lessening the amount of time I spend with my hands in a changing bag, spotting negs, mixing chemicals, etc etc etc. It’s usually fun, but not always.

The Case for a Roundshot

Michael Reichman’s recent review of the Seitz Roundshot 28/220 came to my attention just a few days after having stumbled on “America by the Yard”, Robert MacKay’s excellent book showcasing some of the best Cirkut images from the 1900’s to 1950’s. I was vaguely aware that there had been some really, really large format panoramic photography done in the past, but the book turned out to be a revelation and potential inspiration.

The Cirkut and the Roundshot 28/220 work on the same principle; the film and the lens both rotate, but in opposite directions. The result is a photograph that can be as wide as you want - up to or even beyond 360 degrees - with a corresponding growth in the negative size as you go. The early Cirkut cameras produced negative that were literally yards long by up to 16 inches tall. The Roundshot, by comparison, uses 120 or 220 film, but the principle is the same.

In either case, the great appeal lies in the resulting images. Long, wide and fairly distortion free if you pay attention to the bubble level. The Cirkut was often used to create giant portraits of whole towns, factory floors, quarries etc. You have to see these to understand the impact entirely. The town and group portraits are particularly fascinating, being a kind of group photography that is certainly posed but almost entirely free of artifice. Do a google image search on Cirkut Cameras and you will start to get an idea of what I’m talking about.

As a modern day stand in for the Cirkut, the Roundshot has a lot of appeal. It would just be too much fun to take one of these things around to small towns, county fairs, all manner of gatherings etc. The documentary possibilities are huge even before you get to architectural photography. With a little luck, you might even be able to get a grant to do this.

This would be something entirely different from what I’m doing now. I’m not sure how much my skills would translate into something like this. I might be entirely lost, up a $5000 creek with no paddle. But it might be a hoot.

Choices, Choices, Choices

All this is working from the erroneous assumption that I’ve got $5000 to spend on camera equipment. I could do it, but it would seem kind of silly given the circumstances of my life at the moment, which perhaps isn’t a reason not to do it. 9 months ago I was thinking about spending $10K for to go to Salt’s documentary program. Heck, if that’s my yardstick, I could buy both the M8 and the Roundshot, and still be ahead of the game considering I wouldn’t be loosing all those wages by being in school full time. Hmm, see how that works? You talk yourself out of spending $5K by way of talking yourself into spending $10K.

If you had $5K to spend on photography, what would you do?

photo courtesy of www.anthonysnaps.com

That’s my rig. The camera I carry everyday, everywhere. It’s sitting on the floor next to me as I write this, and it’s twin with the 50 Hex is sitting by the door, ready to go. After using these Hexars for couple of years, they’ve become a part of me. I feel kind of naked without one of them, but I don’t even notice them when one is hanging off my shoulder. There’s something to be said for any camera that you can use and forget. If you’ve got one, hang on to it. There will always be time to upgrade later, but there will rarely ever be enough time to bond with another old favorite.

BTW, Kate calls pictures like this ‘camera porn,’ a term also useful for things like the KEH catalog.