Thanks for all of the replies. Nikon, Canon, Olympus, Ricoh........
I need to go and lie down in a dark room (with my laptop and ebay).
Here are my random and poorly put together thoughts.
1) if the kids are moving, the AF might be nice. You had the F90x, so you should know what you are missing if you go all manual, though. I would have suggested an N90 or N90s, as they are pretty cheap these days.
2) The next toy I would have recommended was the OM-1. My first camera, and I loved it. As you note, they are cheap now. The one drawback I saw was that there wasn't the whole stable of glass as for the nikons. E.g. there isn't as much in wide angle. Reasonably light.
3) A MF Nikon. If you go back to the AF, then you can use the glass for both. I have the N90 and an FE. The FE is a bit bigger and heavier than the OM, but not that much. The 100mm 2.8 Series E is light, cheap and good. All the older manual focus lenses are available at reasonable prices.
4) The Canonet is a great toy. I used to keep mine loaded with 3200 speed film. It is quiet and has good glass. I got a lot of shots that no one saw/heard because it is quiet. However, it isn't really that much smaller than an OM1 with a 50mm lens.
Matt, the OM lens range includes 18mm, 21mm, 24mm, 28mm lenses. There are also the 8mm and 16mm fisheye lenses, but you'll need a fair bit of cash to buy them!
Anáil nathrach, ortha bháis is beatha, do chéal déanaimh.
First of all, I am offended! A TOY!? Surely you jest?!
Originally Posted by MattCarey
Kidding aside, while I really love mine (probably beyond reason), the suggestion of buying one was very much to go along with the EF, which is a wonderful, robust, solid, all metal BRICK. Big and heavy. So a little RF to go along with it... see my point?
If you go with an Oly, you're right - not much need! Which reminds me - I want one of those too!
Just looked through my 1982 Good Camera Guide edited by Stephen Bayley who was the then technical editor of Amateur Photographer. In terms of value for money in 1982 the Ricoh KR 10 was rated the best value for money. The 50mm lens it came with was rated as superb at 9/10. It uses the Pentax K mount. These cameras are not as common as the ME Super but generally are cheap when advertised. In the Pentax range the ME super was so common that it remains excellent value while the K1000 and LX (especially the LX) have both gained the kind of cult status that makes them much more expensive.
Originally Posted by leeturner
The Olympus range are all rated highly but again are relatively expensive in comparison with the Ricoh and ME Super.
With a few exceptions almost all cameras of that time were powered by two 1.5v silver oxide cells. Are these the cells that are difficult to obtain now?
In the book only the Contax 139 and Minolta XD11/XD7(the letters used depended on where in the world the camera was sold) get 9/10 for camera quality.
Best of luck
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I sold my 8008s and went about a year before I bought another 35mm which wound up being the N80, only cause I had lenses left over, but then the camera is light and the metering is good. If I had to start fresh I'd find any decent late model AF body regardless of brand with incorporated flash and the single best zoom I could afford. The thing I love most about the Nikon is the "D" flash with flash compensation for people pic's, but then there's quite a few others that have the same option. I think for the prices around today, a body with the latest metering options, including top notch TTL flash metering, a better choice for people pics, especially when having available zoom lenses that are better performing then in years previous.
Save some cash, battery hassles and get just as good a camera as an OM1, buy a Pentax MX. They are cheaper, as nice, and take standered akaline or silver oxide batteries.
I love mine use it and an ME Super all the time. I second the canonet though, love it as well.
K-mount lenses are great, fairly cheap, and go from 17mm- 1000mm. The MX is a Pro camera, offers interchangable focusing screens, motor drive, fully manual operation at all speeds, PC socket, and a hotshoe. You really cant go wrong with this camera, and it is about the same size as the OM-1, esspecially with the 40mm pancake lense.
Ah! Batteries! I recommended the Canon EF, a camera that used the mercury cells.. BUT: it is one of a very few (and the only one I know of for a fact) cameras that have voltage compensating circuitry built in. Its there, I know, I had one, I tested this out myself - 1.3v or 1.5v, it does not care.
I once had an OM1 and an OM2n with 28, 50, 135 and 300mm lenses.
I sold it all and got myself a F90X. I now have that and a FE2.
Although the OM system was good and the cameras small Ill choose a Nikon body today if starting over again. I find the nikon bodies better than Olympus. You get more info in the viewfinder on Nikon and I find them brighter. The F90X has a great viewfinder, much better than the FE2 and its is very good with AI(S) lenses so I'd recommend the F90X.
Well....If I were on a strict budget, I would look for the Pentax Spotmatic II with the 55/1.8 SMC Takumar lens. The OM-1 is a great choice that I am toying with as well and the Canon Canonet QL17 GIII. I have taken many a cool shot with that little rangefinder.
"Life moves pretty fast, if you don't stop and look around once and a while, you might just miss it."