Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 74,001   Posts: 1,633,472   Online: 859
      
Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567
Results 61 to 63 of 63
  1. #61

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    9
    I guess there is no bad camera. I use Contax cameras. The main reasons were very bright viewfinders (I wear glasses. That's why I didn't go for nikon!), shortest lag time button-film exposure, excellent lenses (they are not so expensive as always assumed). I use my equipment since over 20 years with no problems at all. The RTS III is very heavy, but has the unique feature of perfectly flat film, because the film is sucked onto a ceramic plate. You may consider the Contax RX, which is cheaper and lighter and can do everything one needs. Lenses: 50 or 85 mm and 1.4 plus 35 mm 2.8 or even shorter. The 135 mm 2.8 is also a very, very excellent option. Lighter and cheaper than the 85 mm. The G2 is a much lighter rangefinder camera with autofocus option. I found the viewfinder to be too small for me, but it always shows the full-frame of the lens mounted. Lenses are excellent too. I finally got a Zeiss Ikon ZM instead. I wish you a lot of fun with your choice, Peter

  2. #62

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    999
    Quote Originally Posted by Andrey View Post
    I don't know why, but I prefer F3 to F1. F3 is a culmination of Nikon's decades of excellence. F1 is a learning experience for Canon.
    If you look at the releases of both Canon and Nikon, Canon matched Nikon's releases body for body including the interchangeable viewfinder pro body types.
    • 1959 Canonflex <-> Nikon F
    • 1971 Canon F-1 <-> Nikon F2
    • 1980-81 Canon New F-1 <-> Nikon F3

    This is a convenient link that shows the timeline for both, as well as Minolta and Pentax -> http://minolta.eazypix.de/slrtable/

  3. #63

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    11
    After checking and reading I found out that a 35mm body and at least one or two prime would cost me as much as a Mamiya 645.
    However the quality and the size in bigger, the price is almost the same.
    Do you think worth to jump right to Medium format or work a little bit more on 35mm?

Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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