Looking for a New Camera

<p>I've been buying and regularly using film cameras again for the past four years. Among my favorites are a Kodak Brownie No.2 (1904), Century Camera No.46 4x5 (1905), Kodak Panoram No.2 (1909), Kodak Special No.2 (1914), Voigtlander Bergheil (1928), Voigtlander Bessa RF (1937,) Leica IIIc (1942,) and Rolleiflex (1951.) I use the Leica IIIc with four Leica LTM lenses the most. I love that camera! However, I do like to shoot at night a lot and this is harder to do with a camera that has no internal meter. So, I'm looking for a modern camera.</p>

<p>I like to buy what were the "hot" cameras of their day, the really desirable ones. They are cheap now! Camera will be used for "street" shooting in urban downtowns, at summer festivals, and steam tractor/threshing shows. My favorite photographer of all time is either O. Wintson Link or Brassai. I did have things narrowed down to either a Leica M6, Zeiss Ikon ZM, Nikon Fm2/T, or Nikon F3/T. I'll probably buy an M6 at some point, but not this year. I think I've narrowed it down to the F3/T. I like the looks of it and it will do what I want with the panache I'm after! I want the black/silver version for sure. It's not as compact as the M6, but it is older and more "classic." I briefly looked at a Contax G2 because their excellent Zeiss lenses are so cheap, but ruled it out because it's too automated and the AF is noisy. Not the experience I'm after.</p>

<p> For lenses I generally buy something like 25/50/100mm equivalents. This is a wide range and is all I want to carry. For anything else I do have a Nikon D800E and a broad lens choice. After doing some reading I'm thinking of buying Nikon AiS lenses that are vintage to the F3/T. They are 28mm f2, 50mm f1.2, and 105mm f2.5. These are generally agreed to be Nikon legends. Again, they have the look I want, and will give images a classic appearance. I'm skipping the 28mm f1.4--I'm a user more than a collector.</p>

<p>So, am I missing anything? Basically I'm after a highly desirable camera with good lenses, compact enough to carry around, and has a usuable meter for night use. I briefly considered a Hassleblad CM500 with 40/80/150mm, but the system is large and the Nikon lenses are much faster for night use. Any thoughts on the above? I almost always shoot either FP4 or HP5, rarely shoot color, and never shoot E6 any more.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p><div></div>

<p>Kent:</p>

<p>I'm a bit on the other end of the range. I have the F3HP and mess of other stuff, and I'll always pick up the FE first. In fact, I so rarely use high speeds or auto that I'm particularly happy with the first regular FM! </p>

<p>The F3 is a brick. The viewfinder is helpful for my glasses, but it's smaller.</p>

<p>Now that you know what floats MY boat, I'd have to recommend the FM3a. :-) Best, newest, shiniest object! I just don't have one .... yet.</p>

<p>I thought the night shot SLRs of F3 vintage were OM2 & Pentax LX with "autodynamic metering"? - I don't recommend the LX; it seems a bitching & unreliable diva to me.<br>

I know little about built in meters right for night shots. - besides putting (a working) LX on auto & tripod, carrying the Gossen with 9V block battery and "get needle centered" scale, that isn't named "Profisix" on the American market seems a good concept. If your tripod & head are awesome enough maybe combineit with a unmetered Leica M? <br>

Sorry I didn't have Nikons or OMs yet.</p>

<p>Tripod is a Gitzo 1325cf, head is an AcraTech Ultimate. They handle my Gundlach Korona 5x7 (1926) OK. </p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>I think you'll really like the F3/T. At one time I had a F3HP/F4 & F5 together for several years...it was like having 3 kids each with a different personality. The F5 was a beast and IMHO truly outstanding - especially with AF lenses. The F3 was probably the most useful to me and my style of shooting, but these days, of the 3, I only have the F4 left...and it was always tough for me to choose between it and the F3. But you've been down the road with lots of different vintage cameras, so you know where I'm coming from - anybody who cherishes their Leica screwmounts understands. The AIS 28/F2.8 (not the 2.0 you are looking at) has been a favorite of mine for years, and still sees plenty of service on my mirrorless body, Best of luck in your choices....I've enjoyed many of your train based shots over the years, and frankly got reinspired to capture some of the local train scenes before they faded into history.</p>

<p>For a short while in the 1990s I had an F5. I quickly sold it for an F100, which I used until 2005. As for the F4, I think it was the heaviest 35mm camera ever mass produced. I had to rule that one out. ;-)</p>

<p>I love the waist level finder on my Rolleiflex. It allows for steadier holding, and it's much more discreet as I'm looking down instead of pointing a camera at someone. How useful is the WLF on an F3? It would have to be much smaller.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>If your budget can stretch to it, get an Olympus OM4 Ti, a later version and 55 1.2 or the 50 1.2. If looking for something a bit cheaper, just an OM4 and the 50mm 1.4.</p>

<p>35mm WLFs: I consider already the Pentax "really -HP" sports finder, an unique beast that allows you to wear a closed crash helmet, not really good enough for ground glass focusing. - Same about the WLF add on prism for an early Practica. - For me WLFs only work with loupe out for focusing and add a bit of value to watch a subject with the lowered camera. I guess they are a great thing while you are waiting for your train to come? they also allow shorter lighter & less expensive tripods. - I'm tall and too lazy to bend down to my VF.<br>

Previous comment wasn't about static challenge to hold Leica. - More asking: Will it feel good to reframe the shot after focusing on your head considering that the tripod thread is outside the M's center somewhere below the shutter release button. - I believe with SLRs /TLRs and an option to focus anywhere on the ground glass a less easy to handle head might work well enough. - My ball head here doesn't feel ideal but was made by & for Linhof.</p>

<p>I just got my hands on an F3HP a couple of days ago, after lusting after them for years. I've yet to run a roll through it yet, but I've been doing a lot of reading up on it in my spare time. </p>

<p>A couple of points that seem to come up in debates are the meter and HP vs. non-HP finder. Some prefer the eye relief of the HP finder, some prefer the slightly higher magnification of the non-HP finder. The meter on the F3 is a bit different from most other Nikon meters in that it is center-weighted with an 80/20 bias towards the 12mm circle, where others are 60/40. In essence, it acts like a large spot meter. On the positive side, the meter is supposedly good out to several minutes of exposure in low light/night shooting.</p>

<p>One thing that is universally disliked, and that might be important to you with night shooting, is the viewfinder illumination button. I can confirm that it is tiny, poorly placed, and (on my copy at least) quite difficult to turn on reliably. If I were going to do a lot of shooting at night, I'd take a pen light to shine at the front of the viewfinder instead of trying to use that awful button.</p>

<p>The Nikon F3/T may be your best bet, I don't know. I am not a big SLR fan. If I was doing night photography and wanted a large negative or positive for reproduction purposes I might consider the Mamiya 6 RF system, very small for a medium format, excellent lenses and reasonably priced (with one lens) in mint condition (got mine over the years from local sellers here and from Japan where there are many). A tripod mount accessory ("N" something), not expensive, is necessary if you change optics while the camera is on the tripod, due to the position of the dark slide lever on the bottom. It is a VF-RF type camera of course, which may not "light your fire". </p>

<p>Can't disagree with the F3 in whatever version. One camera though that keeps reminding me of how good it is, the N90s. I have two of them and when I use one I am reminded of how quick it really is and how straightforward it is to use. I also have and love the F4s but if I could only have one it would be an F2.</p>

<p>Rick H.</p>

<p>The N90s was my first "real" camera and I put a lot of miles on it. It doesn't quite have the "cool" factor I'm after here though, and it's too similar to the D800E which I already have. If I remember right, the D800E is a direct descendant. The Momamiya 645 was something I had considered as I shot a Bronica 645 from 1995--2005 and liked the format. The Olympus OM4ti is probably the best overall match for what I'm doing, but I've always liked the mystique of the Nikon. As a bonus the Nikon AiS lenses can be used on my D800E. I think I just might pick up a WLF and try it out. I was assuming I'd have to use the flip up magnifier, just as I do on my Rolleiflex.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

<p><strong>Olympus OM2n </strong></p>

<ol>

<li>A truly compact & <strong>quite</strong> <em>system</em> camera (Most silent of their auto exposure models, later got louder).</li>

<li>Excellent compact lenses.</li>

<li>Huge/brilliant viewfinder image.</li>

<li>During the exposure of 1/15 of a second & longer, the auto metering cells constantly monitor the light reflecting <strong>off of the film</strong> for 2 minutes or more (Simple bracketing of auto exposures and within 3 exposures you'll usually achieve the desired affect).</li>

<li>A<em> State Of The Art</em> <strong>bargain...</strong></li>

</ol><div></div>

<p>Most of my long exposures will be less than two minutes, and typically maybe 30 seconds. My strategy for using my 4x5 is to take a "polaroid" with my DSLR, then shoot with film using bulb mode. This works well. As for the FM3a, it's probably an easier camera to use, but keep in mind I enjoy using a Voigtlander Bergheil made in 1928 too. That's what I'm sort of measuring the F3/T against.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p><div></div>

<p>My first official camera purchase was and is my Nikon F3HP that I still use and love. So many threads on the F3, and heralded high as it should be. There is a feel and ergonomic familiararity that seem condusive to the human hand, but hey, I must be predjudice this was my first camera, and good for me that is was the F3, and the features of the F3 are well known particularly the build quality, top and bottom brass covers, the electromagnetic shutter release, smooth winding mechanism, exposure lock location perfect for the 4th finger, or whatever is comfortable for the individual. The high eyepoint finder, minimal read, 100% finder view.<br /> I also use the Contax G2, I found mine new in black. A camera that usually gets tagged for noisy autofocus, but realistically, who can hear the autofocus motor? You the Photographer only. When on the street, or in a social gathering, your victims, or subjects can't hear it, their ear is not next to the camera as yours is. The G2 is magic when you spend the time with it. Just like looking at any picture there are elements seen when one looks for extended periods. The G2 set to manual focus with the 28mm Biogon set to 2.7 meters, at F11 is essentailly a point and shoot camera, Genius. The focus lock on the rear top plate under the shutter release is there to be used, and most don't. Exposre lock is a forward click on, the on off button, Genius. A great camera properly dissed by certain forces, just as the Zeiss Ikon was.</p>

<p>A Leica M6 with Leica lenses would be best for me, but not for my marriage. :-)</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>My lil' buddy cameras are the Nikon FM (or FM2n) and the FE (or FE2). Between these, only the FM and the FE can use non-Ai lenses (in man. stop down mode) if that matters. </p>

<p>Now, for one thing that does matter to a blind old bat like me ...</p>

<p>The FE series have a meter needle while the FM series have leds (+ 0 -).</p>

<p>During the day, or in bright areas I prefer the meter needle view. At night or in very dark locales nothing beats the led indicator. This is something I never gave much thought to, but now I find that it does matter to me more than I would have thought.</p>

<p>Just my 2 cents from left field.</p>

<p>Jim M.</p>

<p>An F3 is a little modern by my standards. :) I have four F2 bodies and an FM (plus my D200 and D7000). For many years, my only lenses were a 28 3.5, 50 2.0, 105 2.5 and 200 4.0. So I agree with your choice of the first three focal lengths -- I would have loved to have had the faster versions of the 28 and 50. The 105 is absolutely a classic and was definitely one of my bread and butter lenses back in the day. <br /><br />If you're going for a classic look, I prefer the F2 over the F3 but the F3 is fine. If you want something more compact, think about the FM, but I like the beefiness of the F2 and F3. <br /><br />I don't have an M6 but I do have an M3 and it's lots of fun. But without a built in meter a little more work to use. I do have the meter that goes in the shoe, but it's dead and I haven't gotten around to having it fixed or replaced.</p>

<p>I don't think the add-on Leica meters can be fixed any more. The company that made the cadmium (or whatever it was) sensors closed down. There is a tiny little meter by Sekonic (?) that fits into the accessory shoe, but it's uncoupled.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>At the moment I have the FM3a, FE and an FM2N.</p>

<p>They are all great cameras but the F3's give you I believe 100% viewfinder info. I like the F3 - I had one but sold it to fund a lens. The metering is bit different to the above and I found it to be very accurate. If I was going for another I'd go for the F3 Press version - look it up. I'd love one of those. But I am very fond of the FM/FE series Nikons I have.</p>

<p>With regard to lenses I have a 28mm Ai 2.0 which is an outstanding lens - I think it is much sharper in the far corners than the much vaunted 28mm 2.8 version at distance and not bad at all in close up (0.30m or the AIS version is 0.25m).</p>

<p>The 105mm 2.5 - I have nothing to add - lovely.</p>

<p>For 50mm, the 1.4 is nice (I love it for B&W) but the 50mm 1.8S (looks like an E series lens but focuses at 0.45m) which was made for the Japanese market is truly outstanding - forget about the 45mm 2.8 P. You can even use as a close up lens with the PK13. This lens laughs in the face of highlights and is sharper at distance than my 50mm 1.8 AFS.</p>

<p>I have used OM-1's which I believe to be the best camera ever made. It's meter is very good but I feel the FE/FM/FM meters are better for landscapes. However, the Zuiko lenses tend to be far too contrasty for my eyes. Zuiko's are great for print film but are not so good IMHO for E6. You need to use them carefully. If I had my way, I would put Nikkors on the OM1.</p>

<p>Pentax? Well I liked the MX before I got into the MZ5N. I think that most Pentax M series lenses are not as good as their Nikon counterparts and also not as good as the FA autofocus glass that came later. With one exception however and that is the Pentax-A 50mm 1.4 which I think is better than the Nikon 50mm 1.4.</p>

<p>Les</p>

<p>Testing is one thing - field use is another. It's not just about sharpness - but all round rendering. One of the best zooms I have ever used is the Pentax A 24-50mm zoom. The FAL 20-35mm was also a fabulous lens for colour. But I've had most Pentax M lenses and they just did not do it for me. Some of the A lenses (such as the 28mm 2.8) were also not as good as they should have been in that respect.</p>

<p>But I mean everything I say about the Pentax A 50mm 1.4. It equalled the FA 50mm 1.4 in colour but it was one of the most perfect B&W primes I've ever used, and if I had money to burn I'd buy it just for that purpose and put it on an LX. A cracking lens by any standard.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Well, I thought I'd add a few comments to the suggestions. Since you're leaning toward Nikon, let's take a look. You mentioned you'll be doing night work. As Cory mentioned, the F3 is not particularly welll suited for this, which means you'd probably need to take a penlight. And if it's <em>panache</em> you're after, a camera that's really useful for night work and exposures up to 10 seconds is the F2 with either the DP2, DP-3 or DP-12 head (F2S, F2SB, and F2AS, respectively). These three heads use LEDs instead of needles, plus the meter readouts can be viewed from the top of the camera -- you don't need your eye at the eyepiece. Now, the <em>panachiest</em> of the lot -- in fact of most all Nikons in general, is the F2AS. All three of the aforementioned heads offer the extended metering range down to 10 seconds, but only the DP-12 (F2AS) couples to the AI coupling tab on AI and later lenses. Oh, and since you have a preference toward titanium cameras, the F2 was made in titanium as well. Titanium F2s, whether the F2T or F2 Titan, are pricey, but they're out there. Most hard-core Nikon users would consider the F2T with the DP-12 finder to be the ultimate Nikon film camera of all time. I know I do, and I love my F3 and F4, but my F2s have a special place in my heart. :-)</p>

<p>Quite a few folks have mentioned the low-light metering capabilities of a few cameras, specifically a couple of Olympus ones and the Pentax LX. Of all these cameras, the LX is the <em>wunderkind, </em>by far. And it is not a touchy or finicky camera. It is a rock-stable, reliable platform. But you don't need this. All you need is a camera with a B setting and a cable release. Buy yourself a good hand-held meter and use it to meter your night scenes. My personal favorites are the Gossen Luna Pro SBC and Luna Pro F, but there are a number of good ones out there -- like the Minoltas and Sekonics. These Luna Pros are kinda old nowadays -- I've owned mine for over 20 years, and they haven't missed a lick. The Luna Pros will meter down to minutes. Plus there are attachments for them that can be bought, such as the 7.5-15 degree restrictor attachment that will provide you with almost spot capabilities. The SBC is more or less a standard hand-held meter that reads either reflected or incident light, whereas the F is a basically an SBC with flash meter capabilities.</p>

<p>I need to correct Jim on one point. He mentions that the FM <em>series</em> uses LEDs (+ o - ), when actually only the FM2 uses the LED readout. The FM uses a needle. It is this one difference that many people cite as a big reason why they like the FM2 better than the FM.</p>

<p>Regarding Pentax, Mark mentions that he doesn't think the the M-series lenses are as good as the later A-series, and Les takes up for them. Rightly so. I have experience with the Pentax M series only (when it comes to the K mount, that is). I've never done any tests with mine the way Les has -- I've just shot with them, using Kodachrome 64. I tell you what, Pentax's lenses are scary sharp, plus they have great color and contrast. The slides I took using my M lenses look as if I shot them using a medium format camera. My experience with Pentax glass in general is that it is very impressive optically. Here's an example, albeit about 1/3 stop overexposed, I think:</p>

<p>Pentax KX, M 28mm f/2.8, Kodachrome 64<br>

<img src="http://michaelmcbroom.com/images/painteddesert1a.jpg" alt="" width="427" height="640" /></p>

<p>I have a question for the OP, though. I'm curious -- why the preference for titanium-clad cameras? Do you really bang your gear around a lot?</p>

<p>I just think the titanium adds a level of "cool." I am aware of the F2t but for that price I could buy a Civil War era wet plate camera. I've been using just about everything ever made to shoot at night--Bergheil, Bessa, Kodak Brownie, Leica IIIc, 1951 Rolleiflex, not to mention lenses on my 4x5 made in the 1840s or 1910s. I have a Minolta 4f meter, but no spot attachment. It's way too slow for "street" shooting to meter in the lit areas and then take a shot. I'm looking for something that has a faster, internal meter. The OM4Ti is probably the best overall match for me, technically, but it's just a bit too modern for my taste. Really, I've not had much trouble making any camera "work" for me, but I'm also after something that has some style, and the F3T checks most of my boxes. I realize it has some shortcomings, but considering I mostly use cameras from the 1920s & 30s, I don't think that will bother me much. I am excited about the Nikon AIS lenses--28mm f2, 50mm f1.2, 105mm f2.5. They give a look that's just different enough from the state of art lenses I have already that makes them attractive to me. I still would like to get my hands on an F3 somewhere, and preferably compare to an OM4Ti. An advantage for the Nikon is the lenses will work fine on my D800E--I'm not buying into yet another totally different system.</p>

<p> I've bought and used a couple of dozen different cameras now, and am selling down most and keeping just a few of the very "fanciest" or historic. Keepers will include: 1904 Kodak Brownie No.2, 1905 Century Camera Co. No.46 4x5 with Velostigmat lens in Optimo shutter, 1909 Kodak Panoroma No.2, 1914 Kodak Special with TTH lens in Optimo shutter, 1928 Voightlander Bergheil with Heliar, 1937 Voigtlander Bessa RF with Heliar, 1942 Leica IIIc with x4 Leica lenses, and 1951 Rolleiflex with CZJ Tessar. (Might sell Rolleiflex and get an early 1930s one.) Might well add a Leica M6 and three lenses some day, but really this is enough! Will also keep my lenses for 4x5 from the 1840s & 1850s, plus four lenses made 1911--1928 and the Chamonix 045n 4x5. (Unless I end up with an Ebony someday, LOL.) The Nikon F3T will fill a gap between Leica IIIc and D800E.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p><div></div>

<p>Kent</p>

<p>Can I just say that your B&W marshalling yard picture is just dripping with atmosphere - very inspiring - thank you.</p>

<p>Mark</p>

<p>Kent - Currently owning and using all the Nikon F series professional cameras except the F6, I would have to recommend the F2AS. I have more than a few F's and a couple of F2's and after all is said, to hold and use the F2 is a special experience. I had Nikon in southern California CLA my F3HP a couple of years ago, but I just don't trust the electronics..and I find F3's more quirky than the F5 or F4 and even the F2, if the battery fails the camera is unusable expect for one shutter speed. The F2 has a stepless shutter in a certain range and allows for 1/2000 and well as fairly long exposures. It shares a few parts with the "F" and I feel there will always be parts and resources to inexpensively get them repaired (when they require repair which is a rare occasion). I have an M6TTL as well as M2 and screwmount Leicas and nice as they are, they require scheduled maintenance by a Leica technician - which can be very expensive and a PIA. A CLA on an F2 will last for years. I don't think the exposure meter on the M6TTL is anymore effective than even the simplest DP-1 or DP-11 finder on the F2....besides you don't seem to have much of an issue with exposure anyway. Your appreciation of older equipment just makes me believe you would welcome a decent F2. F2AS or any of the F2 varients are still not very expensive.</p>