Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,971   Posts: 1,558,626   Online: 1004
      
Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 65
  1. #31

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by Les Sarile View Post
    1. Fujica ST801 - No aperture priority and no battery dependance except for meter only. M42 screw mount lens.
    2. Nikon FM3A - Has aperture priority with batteries but full shutter range available without due to the hybrid shutter mechanism. Newest on the list and likely in better shape. Body alone is most likely out of your price range.
    3. Nikon FM2 T - No aperture priority and no battery dependance except for meter only. Body alone is most likely out of your price range.
    4. Nikon F2 AS - No aperture priority and no battery dependance except for meter only. Body alone is likely out of your price range.
    5. Nikon F3 - Has aperture priority with batteries but limited functionality without. Interchangeable viewfinder and screens.
    6. Canon F1 - No aperture priority and no battery dependance except for meter only. Interchangeable viewfinder and screens.
    7. Canon AE-1 - Has shutter priority and is fully dependent on battery.
    8. Canon A 1 - Has aperture and shutter priority and is fully dependent on battery.
    9. Contax RTS III - Modern SLR without autofocus and is fully dependent on batteries.
    10. Contax G2 - Modern rangefinder with autofocus that is fully dependent on batteries.
    11. Leica M3 - No aperture priority and no battery dependance. Body alone is most likely out of your price range.
    12. Pentax LX - Has aperture priority with batteries but X sync to 1/2000 shutter speeds available without. Full system support. Interchangeable viewfinder and screens. Only camera that can autoexpose for as long as it takes - or batteries drain.
    13. Pentax Spotmatic F - No aperture priority and no battery dependance except for meter only. M42 screw mount lens.

    More details from manuals can be found at Butkus Camera Manual Library




    Mamiya RZ67 is excellent with exceptional lenses but definitely way out of your price range and is very heavy. 6X7 piece of film is very nice.
    Wow. Nice. Thank your for all of this.

  2. #32

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    11
    After a bit of searching and your responses I shorted the list down to these:

    a. Canon F1
    b. Nikon F2
    c. Pentax LX

    I didn't mentioned the other tags in their names (for ex. AS, N), because I'm not familiar with those yet.
    What do you think about these? In some cases the price range can be expanded.
    Any lens recommendation for these?
    Thanks.

  3. #33

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    One hour south of the Mackinaw Bridge
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    323
    You can't so wrong with any camera on your list. All are great.

    You're at the "personal preference" part of your search. If you have the opportunity to try and sample any of these the cameras, do so. How a camera feels in YOUR hands will trump any opinions we can offer. Plus anything you hear now will be fanboy talk, nothing more.

    Jim B.

  4. #34

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    846
    Quote Originally Posted by flajcsi View Post
    After a bit of searching and your responses I shorted the list down to these:

    a. Canon F1
    b. Nikon F2
    c. Pentax LX

    I didn't mentioned the other tags in their names (for ex. AS, N), because I'm not familiar with those yet.
    What do you think about these? In some cases the price range can be expanded.
    Any lens recommendation for these?
    Thanks.
    Is that the aperture & shutter priority capable Canon New F-1 or manual body Canon F-1?

    The AS for the F2 designates the finder attached to the body which will influence cost and functionaility.

    You can read extensively about these three bodies at http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/
    Last edited by Les Sarile; 05-28-2013 at 11:40 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  5. #35

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    St. Louis, Mo.
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    895
    Quote Originally Posted by flajcsi View Post
    Do you think it's better to jump right to Medium Format?
    Why not? Shooting with a 645 with eye level finder, ttl flash and matrix metering isn't much different than a 35mm camera. Of course using a waist level finder and separate meter is different.

    Comparing 35mm to medium format, each has it's strengths and weaknesses but don't be intimidated by medium format. It's not hard at all.

    Now moving up to large format and using sheet film and camera movements is a lot different.

  6. #36
    GRHazelton's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Jonesboro, GA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    383
    I'm a Pentax shooter and can comment on the LX. It is a wonderful camera, excellent ergonomics, (for me!) especially with the Grip B added. Very smooth acting wind, metering (center weighted) is very accurate and consistent. Auto exposure from about EV -6 to +20. As someone above commented auto exposures can run to many, many minutes. Since the meter reads off the film changes in lighting are compensated for, and there's no need for a viewfinder blind. The camera is weather sealed, although after so many years that may not be dependable.

    Ideally you could handle examples of the three you mention. A camera is ideally a very personal possession, I'm sure many of us have bought a camera and never "warmed" to it. For example, the Pentax is quite small for a professional system camera, this may be a factor in your decision. I've found that the winder, which is not too hard to find, adds a little heft which is nice, and also furnishes power rewind. Pretty cool!

    Now as with any camera there are downsides. Any old camera probably needs a professional CLA; I'm not sure Pentax is still servicing the LX. Eric Hendrickson in Tennessee is the Pentax expert, his charges are moderate, but the LX is intrinsically expensive to work on, especially if the integrity of the body seals is preserved. Beware the "sticky mirror" syndrome, in which the mirror action is very slow, or the mirror refuses to descend. A proper CLA would run about $150. As with any old camera be sure you can return it in case there's a problem. With the LX make sure the speeds below X sync work; they are electronically controlled and thus vulnerable. If it will furnish a timed proper exposure of, say, five minutes, it should be okay. BTW, X sync is only about 1/70 sec, pretty slow by today's standards. So it goes with a horizontally run titanium foil shutter, I suppose.

    An operating LX in reasonable condition would cost probably $350 to $400.

    While the LX can use hundreds of lenses, back to the first K mount, Pentax label lenses aren't as commonly available as, for example, Canon or Nikon. While the LX is a full system camera, finding a motor drive or a 250 exposure back for the LX is not easy, nor is finding the various system viewfinders, nor the interchangeable screens. BTW, while Ricoh uses a variant of the K mount it has an extra pin which can "lock" the lens onto the mount of a Pentax digital SLR. I don't know whether this applies to the LX. Like the Hassie the LX uses special lugs for the neck strap, if your purchase doesn't come with them there is a strap with compatible ends from B&H or Adorama. Not as attractive, however.

    I also have a Pentax 645n, like Alan Gales says its like shooting with a big, noisy 35mm SLR. I'd suggest the 645n, which has a better viewfinder than the original 645, autofocus with confirmation beep/icon, film edge exposure imprinting, 16 exp per roll rather than 15, and a really intuitive operation. Wonderful lenses, but no third party producers. Note that the longest reasonably priced tele is 200mm, about like a 135mm on a 35mm camera. With a hard to find adaptor the 645 can use lenses from the Pentax 67, but that camera's long lenses are pretty costly. It uses inserts, so no mid-roll switching. BTW, the 220 inserts are usually cheaper than the 120 and are easily "converted" to 120 with a tiny screwdriver and a little care.

    Ken Rockwell, so often dismissed, has a good "take" on the 645n and a few of its lenses.

  7. #37

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    298
    Interesting question.

    Contax G2 and leica are the only different cameras. You can get a FED or a bessa for less if you want to have a rangefinder.

    The rest are quite similar, with some feature differences which dictate prices and choices. Just flash sync speed, viewfinder quality - brightness, ease of focusing, compatibility with glasses, weight... self timer... ability to take a motor drive... need for batteries... But they're all SLRs from the same period. Fundamentally they'll handle the same and the 50mm lenses would probably be sharper and have higher contrast than the helios.

    Do you need a 1.4 normal lens? if you don't, there's a number of rangefinders with non-removable lenses. They'd be like a "leica", but would cost 60 bucks. Lenses around f/2 are common. F/2.8 lenses are more compact. 35 RC, canonet, yashica electric and such

  8. #38
    fstop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    698
    Quote Originally Posted by flajcsi View Post
    After a bit of searching and your responses I shorted the list down to these:

    a. Canon F1
    b. Nikon F2
    c. Pentax LX

    I didn't mentioned the other tags in their names (for ex. AS, N), because I'm not familiar with those yet.
    What do you think about these? In some cases the price range can be expanded.
    Any lens recommendation for these?
    Thanks.
    Given that choice, I would go for the Nikon, if you ever decide to move into a DSLR you can use your manual lenses. Portraits and landscapes don't need auto focus lenses.
    APUG: F, F/FTN,F2,F2A,F2AS,F3,F3HP,FA,FE,FM,FM2,FE2,XK,XM,XD, XD-5,XD-7,XD-11,XE,XE-5,XE-7,SRT101,SRT102,XG9,XG7,XG1,XG-SE,XG-M,X700,OM-1,OM-1n,OM-2,OM-2n,OM-4,F-1,F-1N,AE-1P,R5,500C/M,SCII
    DPUG:D100,D200,D300

  9. #39
    GRHazelton's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Jonesboro, GA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    383
    Quote Originally Posted by fstop View Post
    Given that choice, I would go for the Nikon, if you ever decide to move into a DSLR you can use your manual lenses. Portraits and landscapes don't need auto focus lenses.
    Also true of the Pentax LX, although lenses without the "A" on the aperture ring aren't as convenient.

  10. #40
    PDH
    PDH is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    514
    I would consider a T 90 and Canon FD lens which are still inexpensive as are Minolta MD compaired to Pentax K or Nikon F which it seems to me are increasing in price as digital shooters are buying up the manual focus F and Ks. I had a T 90 with a few lens, 50 1.4, 28, 100, and a 135 prime and a couple of zooms. Just sold them last year as I have too many cameras as it is. The T 90 was the replacement for the New F 1. Other option a Minolta 202 and brace of lens.

Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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