It had to happen eventually. Five years of reading photography blogs and magazines extolling the virtues of Leica cameras and lenses (and knowing of the Minolta-Leica collaboration) made me want to try Minolta’s Leica-inspired offering. I have used a Leica, and that initial experience was not a favorable one. It was a later experience with the Minolta 7sII that made me reconsider rangefinders and made me a fan. Going down the rangefinder rabbit hole led me to Minolta’s fixed-lens rangefinders of the 50s and 60s, but I was hesitant to try Minolta’s Leica-esque model, mainly due to its cost. Even so, the VMLP progressed quickly, and soon, the Minolta-35 was the only significant model I had never tried.
Buying into the Leica-sphere is not cheap, even for non-Leica gear, which is true of Minolta’s gear. While these days there are many more Minolta-35s available for sale on eBay in the US than a few years ago, many do not work—yet, they usually cost 200.00+. Thus, owning a working copy with a decent lens usually means buying a non-working camera and sending it for repair. I won’t retell my buying saga, and how I ended up with the Model F, Model II, and the first Model IIB, so I’ll start at the end.
My first IIB was purchased without a lens. I already had a working 45mm f2.8 that came from a non-working Model F. I jumped at the chance to own this final model because it fit my sense of aesthetics and functional requirements. Having used a Model II and at least having fiddled with a Model F, I was certain I wanted a IIB. Of course, IIBs are rare, especially in the US. But one popped up on eBay, and I contacted the seller, who gave me a good discount.
A few months ago, I bought a second Model IIB. The second Model IIB came with a Canon Serenar 50mm 1.9 collapsible lens. One thing I’ve learned when buying Leica-adjacent gear is it’s always less expensive to buy a lens attached to a camera than to buy a lens alone. The seller said he would accept offers for the camera and noted the lens focus was stuck and that the lens had haze. He insisted the camera worked properly, so I made an offer for the camera, and he tossed the lens in for free.
Historical Perspective
The Minolta-35 was produced from 1947 until the final model, the IIB, was released in 1958. The Super Rokkor 50mm 1.8 LTM lens, released with the IIB model, is still highly regarded. Although inspired by Leica’s rangefinder camera design, the 1947 Minolta-35 had features that were improvements over the contemporaneous Leica design. Film loading is my favorite improvement–the film loads by opening the backdoor, not from the bottom of the camera. Reading the process for trimming and loading bottom-load Leicas gave me a headache.
The Minolta-35 viewfinder had the rangefinder integrated, so it did not require two windows to focus and compose. The self-timer, which I rarely use on cameras, was standard. The frame size was 24x32mm for models A through II. That’s non-standard, but it does allow for four additional frames on the traditional 36-frame roll.
Slight variations and improvements were made to the design over its production run. For me, the most significant were the increase in frame size to 24x34mm (Model D, 1949), the addition of eyesight correction (Model E, 1951), flash PC connection (Model F, 1952), and finally, the film advance lever and frame counter combo in the Model IIB, released in 1958.
Minolta made four normal lenses for the Minolta-35. The 45mm f2.8 was released in 1947. The 50mm f2 and f2.8 were released with the Model II in 1952, and the 50mm f1.8 was released to accompany the Model IIB. During the camera’s production run, other lenses were released: 85mm f2.8, 110mm f5.6, 135mm f4, for the Model II (35mm f3.5) and IIB (100mm f3.5, 35mm f1.8). The release of Minolta’s inaugural SLR, the SR-2, in 1958 led to the end of the Minolta-35 line in 1959.
Inspection and Appearance
Both Model IIBs were in pristine condition. I was amazed that the sellers had been accurate in their descriptions. Both viewfinders were clear, and the rangefinder patches were still bright. The metal surfaces had no rust, marks, or dings, and even the leatherette looked good! The IIB has a film advance lever instead of a knob. However, it does retain the film rewind knob.
Shutter curtains the main issue one encounters with Minolta-35s. Curtains tend to have holes, be loose, or are stuck open. Happily, the curtains on both my copies are in excellent condition. These are cameras with classic designs in beautiful condition. I was overjoyed!
Function and Handling
The Minolta-35 IIB has a top shutter speed of 1/500 sec and slow speeds down to 1 sec and B if needed. Accessing speeds of 1/25 or slower is done by setting the main shutter speed dial to the red 1/25 setting, then turning the slow speed dial on the front of the camera to the desired speed.
Given its age, the viewfinder was surprisingly clear, and the rangefinder patch was sharp and distinct. The camera body is metal, dense, and substantial—it feels built to last. The IIB weighs a little more than 20 oz (595 gm) and with a lens that climbs to 27oz or more. Despite its weight, it is less bulky than a typical 1960s SLR.
The film compartment is opened using a dial on the bottom marked with arrows for “Open” and Close.” There is a film rewind lever on top near the shutter release that has to be moved to the “Rewind” position before rewinding the film. I forgot and left this lever in the “rewind” position and then panicked for a moment when I thought my camera had stopped working. There is a flash connection on the camera’s top rear.
Shooting the Minolta-35 IIB
When shooting, the most difficult adjustment for me was the need to wind the film before setting the shutter speed. With SLRs, such a step isn’t required. Otherwise, the shooting experience was similar to all other rangefinders.
Initial testing included checking the door hinges, ensuring all dials turned properly, checking the slow shutter speeds, and, of course, the rangefinder accuracy. Once assured that the cameras functioned properly, I ran one roll of film through each to check whether shutter speeds and rangefinders were accurate. Both cameras yielded properly exposed and correctly focused negatives—and I breathed a sigh of relief and celebrated!
I like the solid feel and balance of this camera. The viewfinder is brighter, bigger, and easier to see than my 7sII. There were no quirks, all elements functioned smoothly. When I used my father-in-law’s Leica for a week, I never heard singing or saw special colors, nor did I with the IIB. It performs exactly as intended, and that is what I appreciate.
My subjects for testing the camera’s essential functions were mundane objects around the house and outside, so those images are not worth showing. However, once I knew the cameras worked correctly, I had the problem of which lens to use. I had a 45mm f2.8 that came with the Model F, and later I found an inexpensive 50mm f2.8 that the seller was eager to be rid of, which came with a hood and a few other items. Later, I discovered a review that made the f2.8 sound like it was not worth having. The 50mm f1.8 had glowing reviews, but none were for sale in good condition for less than 400.00. Of course, there was the Canon Serener 50mm 1.9 with the haze. Given the facts at hand, I assumed that the 45mm f2.8 was going to be best choice. At some point, I stumbled across a Flickr account that had images for the 50mm f2.8, and they were not as bad as reviews had led me to believe. Then I got a bright idea—why not test them side-by-side?
For testing purposes I used Portra 400. I shot the following series of images:
- Landscape and portrait images of a vase of flowers at f5.6 using each lens
- Landscape image at f8 using each lens (testing color/contrast)
- Book cover images were shot wide-open, then at f5.6 to test basic sharpness. (These are color images converted to B&W because the LED lighting added distracting color artifacts).
These tests were designed to check for sharpness, haze effects (Canon), ease of focus, and field of view. In particular, I had been warned that the 45mm did not work well with the IIB.
Images
On seeing the images, I was shocked. The first three were taken with the 50mm 2.8 using Kentmere 400. Seeing them and discovering they were not horrible is what led me to test all three lenses. Reviews had led me to expect soft images with poor color and low contrast—especially from the Canon. While the Canon lens does have haze, these test images aren’t bad.
I didn’t see significant differences in the vase images. The 45mm seems slightly sharper, but not to a degree I would argue about. At f8, all appear equal, and the color renditions are true to life, with the Canon slightly cooler (???).
The sharpness tests have user error issues. While taking the wide-open 50mm f2.8 shot, I messed up the lighting, so the illumination drops off to the right. The Canon 50mm has a very stiff focus ring, and I kept accidentally unscrewing it, which is probably why the wide-open f1.9 image is blurred. (I kept the f1.9 Canon image just for purposes of symmetry.) Wide open, the 45mm and 50mm images look about the same. At f5.6, the differences in sharpness are more noticeable, but not dramatic. However, the 45mm f2.8 does seem to win on sharpness.
Impression
The Minolta-35 IIB is a solid camera–beautiful, balanced, and functional—a classic. I look forward to walking about with it. As for the lenses, I have gone from being sure I had a couple of duds to looking forward to my next outing. The Minolta lenses are clean, but the Canon could use a CLA, but given the way all three perform, I’m not sure a CLA will return sufficient value to justify the cost. Is there a Super Rokkor 50mm f1.8 in my future? Not unless I become frustrated with these, but that will take a few more rolls to figure out. As things now stand, my Minolta-35 IIBs are the perfect culmination of my VMLP purchases—a very happy finale to an enjoyable quest!
