If you could choose one manual camera...

<blockquote>

<p>"... if you could choose just one high end manual camera, what would it be? <br /> Criteria: under $1000 including lens + lens that is suitable for landscape photography"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Fuji GW670III with the 90mm f/3.5 lens for general photography<br /> or<br /> Fuji GSW690III with the 65mm f/5.6 lens for landscape photography</p><div></div>

<p>If money wasn't an object here, I would go for Hasselblad 500CM with 80MM Planar *. If I was on a budget, Yashica TLR MAT 124 G. </p>

<p>I think most manual cameras with the same company's lenses perform similarly in the hands of an experienced photographer. The final print quality is dictated by one thing, the Kodak films. <br>

So buy any manual camera that you like.</p>

<p>I think asking this question, you get the favorite old manual camera from each person who replies.</p>

<p>We all have one that is just a little more special than the others. </p>

<p>I have the Canon VI that was new when I was one year old, that I started using after my father bought a Canon Pellix, and mostly stopped when I bought my own SLR, near the end of college years. I have many negative from fifth through eighth grade taken on that one, and many when I needed black and white film after I bought my SLR and put slide film in it.</p>

<p>There are some things that only you can decide. Rangefinder or SLR, 35mm or 120. </p>

<p>There are so many out there for very good prices, though. </p>

<p><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/4936195-md.jpg" alt="" width="679" height="494" /><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/18189695-lg.jpg" alt="" width="416" height="104" /><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/18217776-md.jpg" alt="" width="680" height="510" /></p>

<p>Since the OP mentioned a Minolta specifically, then I'll set my first choice as a 35mm as well. And it would be the original Canon F-1, specifically the second version of the original Canon F-1, known informally as the F-1n. This camera has proven to be an extremely rugged photographic tool. Its meter is well known for its reliability and accuracy. I own two F-1n's -- I have one mounted to a Motor Drive MF and the other mounted to a Winder F. I shot thousands of slides with my old F-1s and would not hesitate to continue to do so now. In fact, my preferred type of 35mm emulsion is still slide film. There are a variety of excellent quality lenses that can be used, more than one even, and one will still be well below the $1000 limit.</p>

<p>If I were to expand my choice to medium format, then I'd have to choose between one of the two MF systems I own: Bronica ETRSi or Pentax 6x7. The 6x7 gets the immediate nod because of its negative size, but the Bronica is also a very compelling choice because of its flash sync at all speeds and modularity with interchangeable backs and all. The Bronica will also accept a motor drive/winder option as well as provide TTL flash when using the Metz SCA 300 module and compatible Metz flashes, such as the 45 CT-4/CL-4. Tough choice. Both cameras take brilliant photos.</p>

<p> </p>

I went through a period of buying, trying, and reselling quite a few medium format cameras after prices had dropped and

everyone was going digital. My favorites were the Fuji GS645W and the Mamiya 7. Although the Mamiya produced larger

negatives, which were easier to print, the one that I kept was the Fuji because of its small size; I could easily carry it on

hikes. My favorite 35mm was my old Canon F-1, which I purchased new in 1974 and used until about 1990, when it was

stolen. I still own a Canon T90, but I think that I would still prefer an F-1 (the new version). For large format, my Wista 45N field camera would be hard to beat. It is the only film camera that I still use occasionally. So, if I had to choose, it would be the one manual camera that I would keep.

I'm not really recomending this but since it didn'T get mentioend yet.. A Kono Omega certainly fits the

budget easily with alternate a second lens possibly. A one mentioned the question is MF or 35mm

<p>Nikon FM2n, solid, dependable, non-battery dependant and Nikon (prime) lenses are very, very good.<br>

Medium format is very nice and gives minimal grain, but do you really want to be hauling around something that heavy?</p>

<p>To correct a point about Minolta SLRs: Lenses are not interchangeable across all series. I happily used SR-T 101, SR-T 102, SR-T 200 for about 35 years. However, when Minolta came out with the Maxxum, I found that I would need a whole new set of lenses. The SR-T lenses did not work on Maxxum cameras and vice-versa.<br>

I'm now using a Nikon F and F-3 (and digital D1 and D300) and, with few exceptions, lenses are interchangeable. Nikon got it right.<br>

I have a fondness for folding cameras, and use a 2x3 Linhof Technika IV, a Century Graphic and two Voigtlander Avuses.</p>