Nikon F3t/fm3a vs Leicaflex SL/ Leica R7

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by paulo_teles, Dec 13, 2014.

  1. Hi

    Greetings to this forum :)

    I have a question I would like to post.

    After having been a long time RF shooter ( have Leicas M2, 3, 4-P, 5, 6 ttl, and 7, and 1 bessa r2a, and an r4m, Leitz, CV, and ZM glass,
    kind of 50/30/20 ) I do acknowledge tha sometings simply cannot be done in RFs...

    So I was considering to venture into the slr world, my options are Nikon f3t/fm3a and eventually an F6 or a digital ff dslr, or Leicaflex
    SL/Leica R7.

    Afaik, Leica R glass is insanely more expensive than Nikkor AIs, Nikkor Ais is forward compatible with Nikon D800, while Leica R is
    compatible with Leica R bodies, period.

    Nikon SLRs will allow me to shoot Zeiss Zf glass, as well as Voigtlander Sl 2....

    Now, my questions :

    In terms of "bulletproofness", serviceability, reliability, and of course, IQ, which system would you select... ??

    Which of these two camera brands / camera models would you bring into a war zone... ??

    Best regards,

  2. Neither. I would get (and have) the F100. Not only can it use Ai and AIS glass, it can also use the latest Nikon AF and AF with VR glass. Unless you need the Nikon CLS for flash, you probably would not need the F6.
    I believe Steve McCurry used a F100 (among other cameras) on assignment, so it is relatively "bulletproof". And if it does break, at current used prices, simply junk it and get another used one.
    For film cameras, IQ is mostly a function of the film and lens; the main part the body plays is in the metering system. The F100 metering system is very good.
  3. Nikon F, F2 ,F5, F6 ,F100, FM2, FM3a would be my choices just pick the one you like best. Are you really going to a war zone?
  4. Steve McCurry also used the FM2. It was the FM2, with a Nikkor 105mm 2.5, and Kodachrome used to get the Sharbot Gula shot, "Afghan Girl," Today my preference would be the FM3a.
  5. Hi gents, thanks 4 your insights :)

    @Stewart :

    I have been in some, anyway, I like to travel to weird places, where things like a Government, or Police, or Law are only
    meaningless words... Call it "transient states" in Nation evolution.. ..I may ( not sure yet) go to Ukraine in January...and
    take some photos there....

    My long life dream is one day being able to enter North Korea, travel inside, completely unrestrained, shoot lots of photos,
    and get out of there, alive and by my own feet preferably... :)
  6. SCL


    If you're shooting wide open with "standard" lenses, Leica glass barely squeeks out the lead, IMHO, followed closely by Zeiss, then Nikon/Canon (neck in neck depending on focal length). Top of the line glass, I think for your purposes, the results would be almost indistinguishable. The Nikon F6 is horrendously expensive and heavy....I'd go for the F5 (heavy as a brick also but much less expensive than an F6), or a F100 (much like an F5 but lighter, less bulletproof, fewer interchangeable focusing screens) - still a great camera though. With the Leicas you don't get autofocus - I'd go for an F8 over the F7 as they are better bodies, and personally I'd choose a Leicaflex SL2 over a standard Leicaflex. I've personally owned all the bodies mentioned, so speak from personal experience.
  7. I appreciate your demeanor, but North Korea and completely unrestrained shooting is a mission impossible (at least currently). You might want to contact our embassy in S. Korea for more info and read reviews from people that tried something similar. Anyway, you'd have a shadow (and or a driver) assigned to you....and you could be in plenty of doo doo when you point the camera at "wrong" direction. Oh, did I mention that you'd be paying for having this "minder" to be with you ?
    My fave is Nikon F2 ( tank) and if you want to combine with optics that surpass Leica, you may want to look at the recent Schneider offerings: 25/2.1, 50/2.8, 90/4.5 macro and 100/2.1...some of these are T-lenses (for transmission). These are esoteric-enough, that you might have to sell your Hummer to be able to afford this level of optics.
    Enjoy all those alternative places...and stay safe.
  8. Leica R glass is insanely more expensive than Nikkor​
    And not insanely better. The F100 would be my pick for the best in size, weight, features, durability and price. I love the F2 and F3HP as well but you are beginning to get into some real vintage stuff. I own all of these including a Leicaflex Sl and R6.
  9. Hi Louis Meluso,

    Would you deem leicaflex SL to be tougher and more rugged than the F3hp, or an Fm2n... ??


  10. Several years ago I shot a comparison test roll for Contax, Nikon and Leica each with their 35mm f2.8 lens. Ten shots each on 36 roll Ektachrome. All of the same 10 low-mid-and high contrast landscapes. I compared the frames on a Leica slide projector at about 24x36 on a neutral silver screen. They were all very comparable and adequate. I forced myself to pick one or two that were at least very slightly better than the rest. They were both Contax. After that test I went straight Nikon for 35mm and have not looked back. The F100 is the one body that I have used the most. It is so flexible and compatible, it's almost boring. Just get the premium Nikkor lenses.
  11. If you can find a low miles F3t that would be my choice. It will use any glass made by Nikon up to the series G stuff. But for all out going to work no matter what I would take an F2 with a non metered prism.
  12. I think more Nikon SLR's were in the war zone than the Leica SLR's. There were many Leica RF's in the war zones but not Leica SLR's.
    So I say go for the Nikon system.
  13. Having shot miles of film through the Nikon product line, if I had to go somewhere to shoot film where I HAD to get results my choices are the F4s, F2 and F3. I'm not a big fan of AF so all my glass would be AI or AIs. Tough as nails and dead reliable, the rest of the line has some excellent models but these are the three I count on for film use.
    Rick H.
  14. A quick question, Paulo:
    Is it necessary for you to shoot film on these adventures? For the things you say you'd like to do, wouldn't you want to shoot digital? You could carry thousands of images on memory cards in your pocket. You could shoot in extremely low light. You'd wouldn't have to change film every 36 images. You could decide later whether you want to render in color or B&W. And you could save an awful lot of money on film and processing costs.
    Is it the money? Honestly, any 35 year old camera is going to be a roll of the dice, and mostly unserviceable except in a few select boutique houses. There are 10-15 year-old F3ts out there somewhere. They have an electronic shutter though, and can only do 1/80th without a battery, which can sometimes be finicky. Once you're into the newer all-electronic AF bodies, even the F100, you might as well have a DSLR.
    You won't need to buy and carry 100 rolls of film in and out of sensitive areas and protect them from xrays. You can upload your pictures to the web/cloud if you have a laptop, and sell them to the wire services or publish breaking news. You can carry tens of thousands of images on a handful of memory cards. You can have backup copies, in case one copy is seized.
    A D3s is a nice piece of kit, if 12MP is enough for you. It's built like a tank. It has a great viewfinder. You can focus manually with it. It handles great. And it works beautifully at the highest ISO settings. The D4 is better, but a lot more money.
  15. Would you deem leicaflex SL to be tougher and more rugged than the F3hp, or an Fm2n​
    No. Heavier, yes. The F3HP (T) is a top flight professional camera system. I was never in a war zone with one but I pounded countless rolls through mine for 13 years, in all kinds of weather, without a hitch. I wear eyeglasses which was part of the appeal of the F3HP to me...great finder. Also it was one of the reason I sold my FM2n with it's short eye point I had trouble seeing the whole frame. Otherwise a good, compact solution.
    If you want something with basic controls and real old school, precise, hand built, all-mechanical quality, the Nikon F2, with the plain prism, is where you should look. See my post HERE. The Leicaflex doesn't come close.
  16. If you intend to shoot a lot of pictures under harsh conditions in situations where equipment failure would cost you money and a repair service is a long way away, you would be crazy to shoot with any 30-year-old camera. The only possible choice among the cameras you mention is the FM3a, moving to an F6 sooner rather than later.
  17. I have a Leica R6, a normal F3 (not the HP) and a FM2n. Out of these three, for bullet-proofness, I would take the F3; it's a brick. The FM2n next - feels more solid in every way than the R6. Both R6 and FM2 have the obvious advantage of working without a battery, which the F3 can do only with very serious limits.
    Going digital does sound a bit more practical - any full frame Nikon will do what you want, and do so admirably. In the current situation, I think the D750 is the most interesting one to consider (though personally, I'd favour the D810 for the way its controls are laid out, but that's more my habit than something the knock the D750 on). The initial investment would obviously be a bit more, and you'd rely on having electrical power frequently enough, but after that, you would be set. Film is not getting cheaper.
    I do not yet have a lot of lenses for the R6, while for the Nikons I am pretty well sorted. Yet, that few Leica lenses I have - they do perform absolutely fabulous. They are pricey, but to get Nikons with comparable performance, you're going to pay as well (with some exceptions). I think all in all, it is not making a world of difference in optical performance if you choose the right lenses.
    ...while Leica R is compatible with Leica R bodies, period.​
    Look up Leitax - it is possible to convert quite a number of Leica R lenses to Nikon F mount.
    Another option, not cheap but might fit in with your way of working, is the latest Leica M (typ 240, if I recall well), with the converter for R lenses.
  18. 'Which of these two camera brands / camera models would you bring into a war zone... ??' Nikon F2 T: '...the ultimate choice for those who demand a camera that would provide them a level of dependability even being assigned to hell.' - Leonard Foo at

    I also like/shoot the FM3a as a compact alternative.
  19. @Luke Raven,

    I do understand these issues, but... Are dSLRs rugged enough... ??

    I mean.. Dust in the sensor, because of changing the lenses, damp, shock, vibration, extreme inclement hot/cold...

    So far I only shot two digitals... An M8, which I sold, ( my ultra wides were no longer ultra wides... ), and a Canon eos
    600d, that dies at temps below -15....

    I know that electronics can be made as rugged and reliable as possible... My Laptop is a Toughbook CF-19 MK6, my
    cellphone is an AGM Rock V20... I mean.. These things are virtually indestructible... But I doubt that such resilience and
    ruggedness has ever been put in a dSLR...
  20. Wouldn't a Nikon F2 be in the running? No battery, interchangeable finders, built very well and no limit on older lenses. No autofocus but I think that is all you'll be giving up.
  21. I think if you're really considering going to a war zone or its equivalent, including -15 degree temperatures, and such, an all mechanical camera with no battery dependency makes sense. A good meter is nice, but you can survive without it. Manual focus lenses will focus even if they are too cold to move smoothly or if you drop them and bend something. Auto diaphragm lenses will still work, in preview mode or wide open, or manually, even if the diaphragm gets gummy and stops working right. A mechanical shutter will usually work no matter what, if not on one speed then another. I've had a Nikon F out on -20 degree days tramping through the snow, and no issues at all. I've dropped it in the snow, left it in freezing cars over night, and the only issue was a foggy finder. An F2 is newer and a little nicer but it still has the heart of an F. If you're seriously looking for utter toughness, I'd get an F or an F2 and have it cleaned and lubed and checked out, and then get a good quality pocket digital point and shoot that's water resistant, and keep that in your pocket just in case the F2 falls off a cliff.
  22. @Warren Williams

    Yes, this is an option I would be considering, as a backup body for a hypothetical ( dont know if it even exists.. ) dSLR with
    the same level of dependability.

    Just as a side note :D

    I graduated in Mechanical engineering with major in dynamic behaviour os materials under high strain rate loading, (
    shock wave induced phase transitions, shock wave implosion, self forging projectiles, etc )

    My first paid work was as researcher in an ordonnance research laboratory which was a spin off. Of my university. That
    lab had an ongoing research project with the ONR ( office of naval research, USA) because it is located in a NATO

    One day, when testing a magneto-cumulative generator in a test site ( this is the kind of "portable" device that one uses to
    unleash electric intensities in the range of Giga Amperes, in microseconds and feed it to another such devices, only larger
    as a seed current, or to a high power microwave oscillator... ) ...every kind of electronic device, within hundreds of meters
    had a soft reset...cell phones, computers, electronic watches, name it.. Those nearer had an electronic hard kill,the
    EM field caused dielectric rupture of capacitors in the chips, leading to their permanent damage.

    Can a dSLR survive such a thing... ???

    I wonder... :D
  23. Paulo, there are only a few cameras of any kind that one can take anywhere. When they were new, the F, F2, F2t were rugged workhorses. Now they are 35-40 years old. You can only get them fixed in a few places, not all of whom do the "right" fix. It's cheaper most of the time to just buy another film camera. Those old shutters were good, but the newer kevlar and carbon fiber shutters are better and last 3 times longer.
    There are some DSLRs that qualify, positively.
    If you look in at Luminous Landscape, you'll note that they do yearly photo trips to Antarctica. The Nikon and Canon top-line DSLRs do fine at -40f, and there have been no failures. A lot of people take D800s there. [The 5DII has a well-known vulnerability to moisture on one of the neckstrap eyelets, and fails. I wouldn't even consider the low end Canons.] Steve McCurry has been shooting with a D3 for years. These shutters last 300,000 actuations or more. They are mechanically superb, and made for photojournalism. They have better weather sealing than their mechanical predecessors. These are "everything" cameras.
    These are the reasons I recommend the top-end Nikons like the D3s (now reasonably priced for a lightly-used model), and the even-better D4 (now discounted due to the introduction of the D4s). You will surely get shots that you never would have gotten in non-existent light where film hits its limits.
  24. ...and with the D3/D4 bodies you can focus manually, which allows you to use the Ai/Ais lenses. That removes another factor of electro-mechanical reliability from the equation.
  25. F6 is an amazing camera if you decide to go with a film camera. If digital, I love the D3s but even used prices are still
    relatively high.
  26. Is the d700 a good alternative to the D3s... ??

    Moneywise speaking, it is, but, what about the rest... ??
  27. I thought some more about this after I posted and think that in the situation you describe I'd go with a pair of F2 bodies and maybe two more stashed somewhere as backups. A motor drive would be optional. Get them serviced properly and you'll be fine. There are many places where I would rather have a solid mechanical film camera than anything digital. Carrying a lot of film is not as easy as carrying a few memory cards but it doesn't look like easy is what concerns you. Lose a card and lose several hundred images. Lose a couple of rolls of film and you lose maybe 72 images.
    Rick H.
  28. When we talk about ruggedness, I have to smile.
    A simple bad blow could ruin any flagship from Nikon, Leica or whatever.
    Many years ago, I used to carry with a Olympus XA to take summit photos, usually in below zero conditions. Or inside caves with very high humidity levels. It doesn`t matter, all batteries get bad with cold, and all glass get fogged when changing temperatures in humid conditions. These are the main problems.
    If there is rain over the camera, the F3 has a very weak weather protection. Recent top DSLR cameras and lenses are "weather resistant", but my D700 stopped working one day under a very soft rain, and got frozen another time very close to 0ºC. I have photos taken with my XA at -20ºC.
    So you have to protect any camera you were using. There is no "bulletproof" camera, nor lenses.
    Obviously, digital are better for everything, except for charging batteries and managing files if you are into really wild conditions. If you want to live ten days inside a tent in a base camp, I prefer to take a film camera and forget all that digital issues. Silver oxide button batteries last a lot! But you can ascend the Eiger or the Matterhorn, make a vivac there, and easily use a cellular phone to take all the photos (to carry a charged phone is a really safe choice these days, anywhere... are they bulletproof?).
    Do you know that cheap small video cameras?(the ones used attached to helmets). Is there any other video/photo thing used in more extreme conditions around the world?
    Is the d700 a good alternative to the D3s... ??
    I`m still using a D700, and I`m so happy with it (specially this days, I have just cleaned the sensor! :) No need of using a bigger&heavier D3s to shoot my kids and weekend activities... (even with one, two or three stops of noise advantage).
    BTW, I`m wondering about the camera I`ll be using in two weeks at the mountains (ski touring in a high sierra), and I`m debating between the D700 (too big&heavy&cumbersome), a Leica M6/FM2 (film is very limiting) or a quality small film P&S... I`m towards the later for convenience&comfort, but with the D700 is so easy to take loads of photos. I`m not decided yet :/
  29. Is the d700 a good alternative to the D3s... ??
    Moneywise speaking, it is, but, what about the rest... ??​
    The D3/D700 use the same sensor. The sensor in the D3s was a new sensor, which solved a few problems with pattern noise and blooming at high gain settings. In other respects, the D700 is a fine rugged camera in a proven body. I'd give the flagship body an edge, but only you can decide how important that edge is to you. If you are not likely to exceed ISO 5000, then the D700 should be fine. With the D3s, you can go easily to ISO25600 without pattern noise. If you want to shoot by lanterns/candles, it is a very good camera for that, and the D700 is not.
  30. Lose a card and lose several hundred images. Lose a couple of rolls of film and you lose maybe 72 images.​
    The solution is to back up to hard drive and the cloud. You could have all your film stock irradiated in a scanner, or seized by border guards, and there would be no back-up possible.
  31. For me, the best combo would be a Nikon Df body for digital and a FM3a or a well kept FM2n. Wide selection of lenses available used and new. In addition to Nikkors you can use Leica R lenses with a Leitax adaptor. About going to North Korea unrestrained.....not in this lifetime.
  32. It's hard to gauge Paulo's requirements for weather-resistance. The old F/F2/F3 did not like rain. We used a 'raincoat' that would screw onto the filter thread. I don't think the FMs liked rain. If they didn't like rain, they definitely didn't like snow and ice. They didn't mind the cold so much, so long as your lube held up. But they needed to stay away from direct moisture. This is all past tense. Today, they are old and hard to fix, even if your repair person even has a source for parts cameras.
    The better DSLRs can go to Antarctica and take pictures. The film SLRs with good weather-sealing (I suppose the F5/F6, EOS 1) are all-electronic anyway. Why use film?
  33. Paulo, if for the reasons you specify you prefer film (and some level of concern wrt cold, humidity and dust is justified when it comes to electronics - but any so also the F3, F100 and F6 are out), then out of my 3 cameras I listed before, I'd go with the FM2 actually (despite having read Luke's warning on rain - I haven't tested that yet). On a whole, the FM2 is a very well-rounded package: higher shutter speeds, fully mechanical, takes all Ai and AiS lenses which really suffices (pre-AI compatibility isn't that important if you don't have the lenses yet after all), not big nor heavy. Plus, most important, it is newer, sold in pretty high quantities so easier to find in a not-too-used state, easier to replace, and a great deal cheaper than a FM3a.
    I'm sure the F2 is a great camera, but it's not a very recent model. The F3 is already of pretty serious age. The mechanics will simply be more worn out. The Leica R6, R6.2 and R7 are also quite recent, and Sebastião Salgado used them in pretty harsh conditions, so they do have some pedigree as well. But as said before, my R6 doesn't feel as sturdy as the FM2.
    There is no scientific testing whatsoever behind this last statement but realistically so far, other than anecdotes, this whole thread is devoid of solid data. So, guestimating, are cameras as the D3, D700, R7, FM3 or F3 going to survive? Well, most likely yes, and equally likely that any of those can cause issues in the conditions you describe. There is no real way of telling as the number of people that have done serious comparitive testing on a quantity significant enough to yield decent results is most likely about zero. You probably have to go a bit with your gut-feeling on this one.
  34. Gosh, if I was doing a full boot-up on a manual focus film system, I'd be looking long and hard at the Contax range and Zeiss lenses. Some really, really nice equipment.
  35. I have the Nikon F3HP and I take it .....
    ..... nowhere.
    My Nikon FEs do 99.9% of what the F3HP does, but with far less weight.
    If I were going into a war zone with film, I would upgrade to the FM3A. That's a more modern version of the FE, which I would trust a bit more due to newness. Take 2.
    Then, I'd take the classic AI (or AIS) primes: 24 or 28 (I prefer the 24), 50, 105. I went on my last trip to France with the 24 and 50. In the future, I think I'll be better off with the 24 and 105 and their foot-powered zoom features. Though I love my 105 so much its hard to think of damage in the field....
    Two bodies, three primes. All classics.
    Load up with Provia (more natural rendition and people) and Velvia (golden hour shooting of scenics).
    Take a light tripod. When I'm doing urban shots, its secondary use is as a cudgel. I've warded off many a gypsy horde by raising it threateningly.
    Have fun!
  36. @Luke Raven :

    My approach to safekeeping the images Will probably rely in :

    A Panasonic Toughbook cf19 mk6, with a Linux encrypted partition ( I have tweaked the crypto module api, so as to
    implement a "custom" variation of AES... Larger keyspace bitsize, optimized S permutation tables, unbalanced network
    design, these small changes in C, and a recompiled kernel module, should thwart any attempt to brute-force the partition
    using differential cryptanalysis, for instance...)

    An Iridium cell phone with satellite network access, connected to the laptop's interface.

    A network visible IP of my own server at home with an ftp service active, allowing me to upload loads of data.

    The weakest link here is probably : battery endurance, capability of all this to endure in harsh conditions.

    Probably a full mechanical system as a backup for a dSLR.

    @Brad Cloven :

    I use a monopod... :) the carbon fiber type... I added a small weight to the thinner leg extreme, so that it is kinematically
    balanced... Considering that the monopod extends to 1.80m, and I am 1.90m tall myself... Some guy once was aiming to
    take my M3 away from me, in downtown Rio de Janeiro... Well... Lolll he learned the hard way what Kenjutsu is... :)

    A bit as a side note... :/ I was absolutely puzzled that this dude, about his 20s years old, knew what a Leica M3 was... So
    as to take his chance trying to take it away from me... I would figure that most ppl ( non conoisseurs ) would dismiss an
    old looking chrome RF with some 35mm googles Leitz, as being a "valuable" item...
  37. "my options are Nikon f3t..."
    Paulo, why a "t" (titanium) F3?
  38. "my options are Nikon f3t..."
    Paulo, why a "t" (titanium) F3?
    Hi Didier
    For a Materials engineering rationale... You see... in terms of Bulk modulus, Titanium is inferior to brass , but, from the standpoint of Specific Bulk modulus ( Modulus divided by density ) it is a superior material ( being also favourable in terms of thermal conduction and heat capacity ) ... this meaning that for the same volume, i have a more solid mechanical construction ( all remaining factor equal )...
  39. Hi Paulo -- [reminder my name is K-kaven. :)]
    So does this mean you are considering digital now?
  40. Hi Luke Kaven

    Yup...I will be taking a dSLR, a full mechanical slr, some nikkors, one or two Zeiss Zf, a teleconverter, my Panasonic
    Lappy, my cell phone, and my monopod..

    ...they won't let me in their country with a S.A.D.M. :D

    Just kidding here... But yup... I am considering digital.
  41. That sounds like a good kit. The 28/2 Ai, 105/2.5 Ai are perpetual favorites. If you can find a good 200/4 Ai, it's a good very lightweight 200. The 75-150/3.5E is a cult classic.
    I'll be very interested to hear about your adventures and to see what you bring back!
  42. Hi Paulo, this is a very interesting thread!
    I've never photographed a war zone, but for years I carried an old Nikon EM and a Nikon 28E (or 45P) strapped to me with one of those binocular harness rigs while skiing, hiking, and traveling (a few times in places where the "rule of law" would have been slow to respond). I used a plastic bag to wrap the camera when it rained, and I just let it endure cold. It was cheap and effective (and, being both small and light, it didn't cave in my chest when I crashed while skiing). Thieves probably recognized it as having virtually no value. However, given your "bulletproof" prerequisite, I don't think the EM will work for you (the electronics are sketchy and the seals are all goo by now).
    If I wanted a camera that I could count on to work every time, I'd get an original Nikon F. It's the Colt SAA .45 of the camera world. If I wanted a more recent camera, I'd take my FM2n. If I wanted digital, I'd take a Df (or about ten D80 bodies, since they're so cheap).
    Years ago, I had a Leica R, and for years I had a M6. Both are long departed, as frankly I didn't get that much enjoyment from using them: to me, the R wasn't better than my Nikons, and I discovered that I don't really like the rangefinder method of focusing/viewing.
    As an aside, with your resume, I imagine that you would receive a LOT of attention from the current North Korean government...your visit will very likely be, shall we say, extended.
    Good luck, have fun, and post pictures!
  43. Go for the Nikon. If you insist on Leica sharpness, which is a notch sharper than Nikon's, use Piccure softward on your digital scans from the Nikon and they'll be just as good.
  44. Why not just purchase a few Nikon FM's? They are cheap, simple, small and light, fully mechanical, and don't even need a battery to work. There are many for sale that still work perfectly including the simple light meter. IMHO simpler would be better if you are looking for reliability.
  45. Jaeazuzzzz F*%$ng Christ...

    I just saw a Leicaflex SL2 today, chrome.... such a beauty, pristine... viewfinder clear... no scuffings, nothing.... i purchased it, 240 Eur...
    I am not changing my mind about what systems to take in my next trip....i would never consider taking with me the entire bulk of 2 differents systems + lenses... so, my decision remains... i will take Nikon film SLR body + Nikon dSLR body, and use the same lenses on both... simple as that....
    But g0000shhhh.. I will have to try this Leicaflex SL and buy some 2,3 Cam lenses for it... :)

    That camera is so much "me"... kkkk :D ... simple, heavy, big, efficient....

    this is the kind of thing you expect from the dudes that built the DKM Bismarck, or the DKM Tirpitz, back in the 30s... or Build Mercedes today...
    in a word... Impressive.

Share This Page