What mechanical SLR to buy?

My Kiev 4 is now dead, and I was going to replace it with either a

Contax IIIa or a Canon 7, but then thought, maybe I should look at

an old mechanical SLR. What I want is something small, old timey,

and can be had with a good 50mm lens (i.e. optical quality won't

dissappoint me, an L lens user) in good shape for under $400. How

are the Canon FD mount lenses? How are the Nikon lenses of that era?

Anybody got a recommendation for me (old timey, mechanical, manual

focus, no batteries or at most a little coin battery for the meter,

consistent quality in the cameras - i.e. not Soviet made - and can

be had in good condition with a 50mm lens for under $400)? I want it

to be 35mm too btw.

Thanks,

Richard

A Nikon FM2 and f1.8 50mm lens should fill the bill. For a new camera check out a Voigtlander TM. Very similar to the Pentax Spotmatic. Or just get a good Spottie and 50mm f1.4 SMC Super Takumar. Well under $400.

Any of the Nikons ,F,F2,F3,FM can be bought for under $400 with a good 50mm lens.The MF Nikkor lenses are exceptional .

Then I'd certainly recommend looking at the Pentax MX. It is a teeny-tiny SLR, offers multiple easily changeable screens, a motor drive option and only requires a battery for the meter. If you tag that up with a Pentax 40mm f2.8 pancake lens you have the smallest SLR/lens combo of any SLR system-and that includes Olympus OM. Pentax also offers several excellent 50mm standard lenses as well. The main weakness with the MX is that they are long in the tooth, but of course you can use ANY Pentax K or M42 Screw mount (with adaptor for the later).

Olympus OM1.

The F2 is kinda the era I'm looking for, but I want something with a meter. How much do the metered F2's run? How does the Canon F-1 compare? What are the similar offerings of the less mainstream, but still mainstream companies such as Olympus and Minolta of this era/style of camera?

Thanks,

Richard

I should add, the MX-40mm pancake is the smallest 35mm SLR/lens. Of course there in the Pentax 110 SLR system that you can hide in your palm...

The OM1n is a very well built, mechanical camera with a lightmeter. It is small but sturdy and the Zuiko lenses are generally very good and small as well. It is the closest thing to a Leica M that you'll find among SLRs.

Don't worry about the Nikon lenses 'of that era': firstly they were exceptional, as said above, and secondly the Nikon F-mount has not changed, you should be able to use any AI('d) non-G type lens. Check this link for a full lens compatibility chart:

http://www.nikonlinks.com/unklbil/bodylens.htm

 

 

I'd recommend a Nikon FM or FE series. The FE has automatic exposure (aperture priority) while the FM does not. The FT3 is also very good, but heavier and sturdier. I got an FT3 for $100 with a 50mm f/2 included.

Where can I get more info on the Pentax? Or the Minolta for that matter? The lens doesn't have to be 50, 40 would do, and I do like the concept of pancake lenses. Basically 35mm to 50mm would do, but I'm biased towards 50. What I want is something to take the place of my Kiev (something I can stick in my briefcase - though since the replacement is going to cost more than the $40 Kieev, I'll get a Domke that can double as a briefcase/proper camera case - and use during my lunchbreak - I work in downtown DC - or for when I'm back at college in Carolina something I can go for a walk with, and something that fits the requirements I set up in my first post).

 

I should add, I prefer something that can be had with a reasonably affordable lens that can do f/2 or faster.

Thanks,

Richard

So who was making the best lenses back then? My biggest complaint against my Kiev was that even with a new old stock helios 103, the optical quality wasn't anywhere near that of a canon L.

 

I should add I don't care for automatic exposure. I have a 10D, and I basically want the opposite: film and all manual.

Yet another question: what were the German offerings of the era?

Go get yourself a good old Chinon CS or GAF L-CS (rebadged Chinon CS) with a set of primes. You'll be glad you did. Bulletproof, in my estimation.

A place to find out all your Pentax questions:

 

http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/

 

The black MX is somewhat rare, but really lovely. The silver MX is pretty easy to get at a reasonable price.

And the answer is: Nikon FM2n.

You can buy one (body only) in excelent condition for less than $250 USD. Or even less.

Minolta SRT-101 is a good option. Find out all about them at www.rokkorfiles.com

I would second the nikon option. Olympus is the nicest handling and small, light and quiet. A Nikon FM or FE will be more solid, and a bit noisier, but it has the best lenses, and the most available lens options. The FM or FE can use pre AI nikkors, while the FM-2 FM-3 and FE-2 will need AI or later. The 50mm 1.8 AIS is very small, almost a pancake, and there are two versions, one that focuses as close as 0.45m and the other that does not focus so close.

 

On the other hand a Pentaz ME super may fit the bill or a Pentax MX, both are very cheap, and small, and there are hosts of lenses available, from old screw mount (with very cheap adapter) all the way to the latest AF lenses.

 

The Canon F1-n is a superb camera but big and heavy. If you do go for a Canon, make sure to get the NEW F1, not the original 1970s version. The newer model is much much nicer. FD lenses are unbelievable cheap, as they are completely obsolete, and can only work with old Canons, but the quality is superb.

 

I own a Leicaflex SL, which I would highly recommend for the fun factor, but it is heavy, and big, and you will need to mortgage your wife to buy lenses for it!

I think I'm back to deciding between the Canon F-1 or the Nikon FM2 (the 1/1000 max shutter speed of the pentax and olympus are a big part of this)...which company has (or had in the case of Canon since FD mount is no more) lenses? What 50 should I look for for each if I want affordability (camera + lens under $400) and optically quality, and hopefully f/2 or faster?\

 

Anybody have some suggestions that haven't already been made?

Thanks,

Richard

I'm not keen on The New F-1 because it's electronic, I want fully manual with a light meter.

Richard

How about a Yashica body and Zeiss lenses?

 

Robert

How about a rangefinder?

 

If you only need one standard lens, you should be able to find a (much cheaper) rangefinder that will do the job, while being much smaller and quieter.

 

A Minolta 7s for example, a tremendous camera for its type, I own one myself and I can really recommend it. The Rokkor lens can compete with any SLR or other lens for 35mm cameras. The lens is 45mm, f/1.8, extremely sharp and well-made, stops down to f/22. The focus ring feels good and sturdy. If you don't need interchangeable lenses, this is it, believe me. The camera itself has fully manual, fully automatic, shutter priority or aperture priority exposure control. (though I use it mostly on manual, I have never once had a wrong exposure with automated settings).

 

Selftimer, hotshoe, etc all included. You should be able to get one for about $50-$75.

 

Some other quality rangefinders with very similar specs; the Konica Auto S2, Yashica GSN, and Canonet QL19.

 

The meter reads EV-values, which I find to be brilliant. If your batteries die, you can easily use it without a meter because on the lens, the exposure controls give you an EV metering as well. Note, if your batteries die, the one in my Minolta have not been changed in 20 years at the very least and they still go on and on. Almost scary, actually :).

If I get a rangefinder, it will either be a Contax IIIa or a Canon 7. Part of the reason I want to go mechanical SLR instead though is...I dunno, I have a dSLR, I had a rangefinder, now to try something else. Also, it's not that I won't buy other lenses, it's that I only need this one lens for now.

 

I saw a very nice black FM2n at a local camera shop with 50 1.8 lens for $365. Fair price? Other than the faster x-sync speed, any functional differences between the FM2n and the FM2? I know the FM2n (at least the one I saw) doesn't have a honeycomb shutter. Is there a downside to that? How do the Nikon manual lenses compare to the Canon manual focus lenses? How does the Canon F-1 stack up against a Nikon FM2n?

 

I still wonder what the German offerings of the time were.

Thanks,

Richard

Not small, except by the standards of today's monster SLRs, you owe it to yourself to peek through the viewfinder of a Leicaflex SL and Leicaflex SL2. You may never forgive yourself if you get a Nikon FM etc. first, and then chance upon one of these. Viewfinder and focusing action to die for in a manual SLR.

Sure the Leicaflex rocks, but what lens could I get and stay within budget?

Richard

Sure the Leicaflex rocks, but what lens could I get and stay within budget?

Richard