Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,733   Posts: 1,515,311   Online: 875
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16
  1. #11
    Geomax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by wildbill View Post
    "film photography"? is there another type I don't know about?
    Na nothing worthwhile!

  2. #12

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    235
    My vote if you want small, yet sophisticated is the Nikon FA+45mm pancake.

  3. #13
    guitstik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Eads TN.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,098
    Images
    66
    If you are wanting a good mechanical camera that is compact and easy to use and also rugged enough to grab and go to out of the way places I would suggest the Olympus OM series of cameras especially the OM-1/1n. Small, light weight and rugged enough for whatever you throw at it. I've got an OM-1 and it is a great little camer with terrific lenses. When I put my OM-1 100/2 next to my F3 105/2,8 you can tell the difference, the 105 by its self is a monster lens.

    When I was much younger I used to hike/camp in the Olympia mountain range and I even spent a few summers in Alaska and the camera I used then was a Minolta srT-101 with a 50/1,7 and that proved to be a rugged little camera as well.
    Thy heart -- thy heart! -- I wake and sigh,
    And sleep to dream till day
    Of the truth that gold can never buy
    Of the bawbles that it may.

    www.silverhalidephotography.com

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    191
    If you like F3 but it feels to heavy for climbing then get a lighter manual camera, no not FE2 or FM2 they're still too heavy, get FM10. Most of the body parts are plastic but it is tough enough for the job. I had it once and I literally throw it in to my backpack before I go hiking and the backpack also get thrown here and there during hiking. I didn't care that it is not really made by Nikon cause it does take Nikon's best lenses and that's what important to me.

  5. #15
    Rol_Lei Nut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Hamburg
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,118
    A summary of likely answers:
    1) get what I have, as only that will take decent pictures.
    2) get what wins all the popularity contests and (past) sales figures (strangely, d*g*t*l not allowed)
    3) get a camera which will hammer nails, can be used as a weapon and will attract notice because of it huge white lenses
    4) get a camera with as many "features" as possible: you never know when that 1364th nose-activated reenforced Plutonium AF sensor will win you a prize-winning picture. Also, shooting at 10 FPS is almost as good as watching a super-8 home movie...
    5) ridicule any non-mainstream cameras (meaning 99% of the general public hasn't heard of them) such as Leicas, Soviets, rangefinders in general, ect.
    6) that older mechanical cameras are too unreliable and innaccurate to use, that the "battery problem" is unsolvable...

    So, more seriouly now....

    I also go mountaneering and on long-distance treks, so the kind of issues you have are familiar.

    First, the cameras you mention:
    Nikon F3: a bit heavy. Also, not having to rely on a battery (or change one in awful conditions) is a plus.
    Rollei 35S: Great lens. You're stuck with a 40mm FL. Scale focusing might not be an issue in your case, as you don't seem to do many closer-ups.
    Leica III: No meter. Neeeds extra viewfinder for FLs other than 50mm. Probably needs a CLA. Slow lens changing.
    Bessa R: Nice choice, except for fine-focusing fast lenses or teles.

    I tend to favour a lighter & more compact SLR or rangefinder system.
    My "mountain SLR" is a Rolleiflex, but you could look into Olympus OM or Pentax MX cameras. In the Nikon world, FM, FM2, FM3A.
    A rangefinder can be even more compact and slightly lighter, and its disadvantages minimal (I rarely take a 200mm+ lens with me on a long trek anyway).

    Some examples of weight:
    Leica M6 + 21 +35 +90 1080 g. (1274 with a 15mm included) - A Bessa would be somewhat lighter
    Rolleiflex SL35-E + 18 + 35 + 85 1326 g. (the 18mm isn't expecially light)
    Nikon Fe2 + 20 +35 + 105 1579 g. (the 105mm is pretty heavy)
    Pentax 6x7 +45 +75 +165 3789 g. (with meter prism).
    Iskra 6x6 (one of the best MF folders around, results-wise) 918 g.

    P.S: I mentioned MF because nowdays you can get a MF enlarger almost for free and the Iskra really is sweet & relatively light.
    Last edited by Rol_Lei Nut; 01-30-2012 at 03:29 AM. Click to view previous post history.
    M6, SL, SL2, R5, P6x7, SL3003, SL35-E, F, F2, FM, FE-2, Varex IIa

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    40
    If you going to such a long hard trip, I suggest you take 2 cameras with you. Somewhat identical in operation (get twins if possible). Put films at 2 different speeds.

    In terms of what exact model is good, only you can decide it after using one for some time. I have never done a moutain climbing

    It is not always best of the features, but which camera you can just grab and take shot without thinking about anything else. Only then get the second one. I suggest an identical one.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin