Hello all, First of all please give your experience and opinion on the cameras youve used below, then after feel free to spread the hate for my having started another one of these unseenly bits informational vomit that so pollutes our forums. I shoot street, photojournalism at uppity dinner parties that demand a quieter camera, product(clothing) perhaps even call it fashion. Architecture, think art not for industrial purposes. And portraits. I grew up in a theater so many of my pictures lean toward the cinematic. I love shooting at night, think brassai but no where near the beauty or mastery. With the product shots i do up close work so i fear that as much as i would love it, probably no leica M. I have glasses. This has been the bane of my camera shooting life. I love wearing my glasses, contacts or not for me. Its why i only shoot 50mm on my canon P because i cant even close to see the 35 lines. I dont often shoot over 50mm unless i have to and usually never ever over 100mm. pls no autofocus modern bodies f100 f4 etc. Im one of those horribly annoying people that like the feel of manual film advancement. These are the camers im looking at and the lenses i have extensively looked at for the style I would like.( as much so as looking at photos on flickr can confer.) The lenses that give the "style" that i like. summicrons, elmarits, summilux's 35 1.4 contax zeiss 28 hollywood hasselblads 80 planar Rolleiflex 2.8 planar and xenotar Most of these Im thinking in terms of black and white, a few of the leicas and all of the zeiss's colors are superb to my eyes. Now for the camera bodies with lenses im thinkin of. Nikon f2 fm2a f3t/pHP with 35 1.4 ais or zeiss zf and whatever is the better 28mm and perhaps whatever 50 has the best character, perhaps zeiss again? I know i can google the specs of the above bodies but i want to know of user experiences of one against another, for instance my friend will only use f2 bodies. I have no idea why. canon F1new, because its damned beautiful. 35/2 thorium concave, 50 1.2 or around. perhaps 85 1.2 On david hancocks youtube video he fires the shutter of an F1 and olumpus om 10, the f1new seems very quiet Olympus om2n/3/4 28/2 although i dont like the look as much as some of the above lenses but it fills a tiny bit. 50 1.2 or macro 85 or 90 contax s2/139 28 hollywood but i prefer the look of the 35 1.4 even though i wouldnt think they are differently formulated? Hasselblad 500/1/3 c/cm/cw/cx with 80 coated planar. perhaps maybe the 120 Rolleiflex 2.8 planar or xenotar. I seems as if the planar is clearer and crispy sharp, the colors are typical zeiss amazing. But the xenotar seems to have its own allure, like nikons portrait defocus lens. sharp contrasty and soft at the same time? I think i prefer to planar but i dont want to over look the xenotar because as i said it has its own allure. Leicaflex sl2. with whatever 28 35 or 50 i can afford. seems like probably elmarits for the first two or summi for the 50. I like these lenses b&w and color renditions. Thank you guys so much for your opinions and tactile experiences. Have a wonderful day. Dont forget to leave your hatemail.