What SLR?

[kirktuck]

Phil is wrong. Chicks really dig the R8. It's a babe magnet of a camera. But it is acquired taste like really fine chewing tobacco and MD 20-20. How

would a generation raised on Coca Cola cameras even begin to contemplate the glory? I used to be a wedding photographer but the R8 is so

wonderful ad agencies started calling me and begging me to do calenders for Victoria's Secret. Now I rarely have to shoot chubby brides and grooms

with bad teeth.

 

<p>

 

Kirk

[vic_.]

Max, it might be helpful if you said a bit more about the kind of

features/benefits you would like to see in your "money no object"

camera. For example:

(1) Do you want an all manual [will perform without batteries]

camera, or do you want automation?

(2) Macro capability?

(3) How long do you want the available lenses to go?

(4) Do you care about picture quality, like Dr. Knapp?

(5) Is weight a consideration?

(6) etc., you get the picture.

Otherwise you'll get freeform brainstormy answers, leaving you more

confused than before. As it currently stands, if money is no object,

buy all the Leica-R's, Canons, Nikons, and Hasselblads, with all

their lenses, and make up your mind after shooting 100 rolls through

each combination. Then, since money is no object, send me the

cameras you don't want to keep. :)

[xavier_dalfort]

Max, as you asked on Leica Photography, I will give you a Leica

answer.

 

<p>

 

If New, then the R8. But I don't like the style

 

<p>

 

If second hand or new on Demo (Dr Lang of Germany on Ebay) then a:

R6 or R6.2 if mechanical

R7 if electronic.

 

<p>

 

For both you can can find bargains in terms of lenses.

 

<p>

 

Of course, in other brands, look the previous answers. There are nice.

 

<p>

 

However, if you want to keep the Leica spirit, I'd recommend the

Nikon FM3A, expensive but with nice lenses too.

 

<p>

 

All in the mood. X.

[max_wall]

Vikram: I am looking a SLR with the highest build quality; glass quality; picture quality;

and reliability.

 

<p>

 

Xavier: I am sorry, but I do not understand your comment ". . .if you want to keep the

Leica spirit, I'd recommend the Nikon FM3A. . ." . Would you please explain, or is this

a tongue-in-cheek response that I am not sophisticated enough to understand?

 

<p>

 

Thanks to all for your advice and suggestions.

[hector_v.3]

Hey, Alfred Knapp MD:

How come you always sign your posts "Alfred Knapp MD"? I'm sure

you're not trying to impress us. It just seems weird. I'm a doctor

too (vascular surgeon) but I don't throw it around.

No offense, just wondering.

 

<p>

 

Hector V.

 

<p>

 

P.S. The F5 is a brick. I tried it for three months and felt like

Sisyphus.

[max_wall]

Vikram: I am looking for the SLR that has the best build quality; lens quality; picture

quality; and reliability.

 

<p>

 

Xavier: I am sorry, but I do not understand your comment: ". . .if you want to keep the

Leica spirit, I'd recommend the Nikon FM3A. . .".

 

<p>

 

Thanks to all for your advice and suggestions.

[max_wall]

I apologize for the duplicate post.

[vic_.]

Max, Apologies if I came across as being rude. I think for a

manual "money-no-object" the only new SLR's worth considering are the

Nikon FM3a or the medium format Hasselblad manual. You can still

find some unsold manual cameras at obscure dealers. The used market

will get you better cameras, such as the Leica R6.2, Canon F-1, Nikon

F2AS, Pentax MX [great size], etc. (I'm no expert on the available

list). For automated cameras you have unlimited choices, as outlined

above. (My own preference is 100% manual, with a light meter.) Are

you manual or do you like automation?

[wgpinc]

I use both M and R Leica. The R probably goes out with me a little

more than the M, but it goes in phases. I recommend that you get

either the Canon EOS-3 or the Nikon F100. Get the 16 or 17-35 zoom

and a couple of primes, 50 1.4, 85 1.8 or 1.4, 135 2.0. You'll be

ready for most any situation and you'll get great pictures. Good

luck!

[jay_.]

I use Leica M, Leica R (including R8), and recently switched from F5

and F100 Nikon to Canon EOS 1V. Simply put I was tired after 10

years of waiting for Nikon to catch up. The F5 is probably the more

high-tech and durable body, but Canon's got a large assortment of IS

lenses now and Nikon's VR are still coming.

[doug herr]

<I>I am looking for the SLR that has the best build quality; lens

quality; picture quality; and reliability. </I><P>

Max, no matter what you buy it will be a compromise. If you don't

care about modern features the camera with best build quality,

lens quality, picture quality and reliability is a Leicaflex SL, rebuilt

by Sherry Krauter, Don Goldberg or the like. <BR>

<CENTER>

<IMG

SRC="http://www.wildlightphoto.com/birds/blsk.jpg"><BR><I>Bla

ck Skipper<BR>Leicaflex SL, 400mm f/6.8 Telyt</I></CENTER>

<P> Any of the cameras mentioned can produce

exceptional-quality photos, depending on you, the photographer.

Canon and Nikon and other makers produce some exceptional

lenses, and they also produce some lenses that are merely

adequate. If you go with one of these brands you'll have to be

more selective about which lenses you get. An advantage of

current Leica-R equipment is that the entire line of lenses is

either best-in-class or among the best in the class: no

second-rate lenses. Leica reflexes lack a lot of the electronic

gizmos of Nikon and Canon but if these are not important to you

there's no point picking one of these bodies and having to be

careful which lenses you buy.<BR><CENTER>

<IMG

SRC="http://www.wildlightphoto.com/birds/ssha0.jpg"><BR><I>

Sharp-shinned Hawk<BR>Leicaflex SL, 560mm f./6.8

Telyt</I></CENTER><P>If, in your mind, the camera is supposed

to think for you then definitely forget Leica. If you want the

camera body to work reliably for many years, give you a clear,

uncluttered view of the subject, and let you use many of the finest

lenses ever made for 35mm SLR cameras, definitely consider

the R8. But most importantly define what kind of photos you

want, what camera features you consider essential, and go to a

store to try them yourself.

[doug herr]

danged fumble fingers! the first bird is a Black Skimmer.

[andy_piper2]

One thing that (in my mind) keeps the Nikon line at the top for SLR

work (even though I use an SL right now) is that Nikon has kept the

removable prism.

 

<p>

 

Being able to 'Pop the top' and shoot with the camera at ground level

or held high over your head is still THE sign of a pro-level camera.

Any so-called "pro" camera that can't do this is just a Canon Rebel

with delusions of grandeur, IMHO.

 

<p>

 

The little right-angle viewer dealies just don't cut it - unless you

ENJOY lying on your belly in the mud.

 

<p>

 

If I used an SLR more and could live without the 400 f/6.8 (which I

could probably adapt anyway) I would go directly to ANY Nikon F or the

Canon F-1 range, for that reason.

 

<p>

 

And no, that isn't contradicted by my use of the (eye-level only) Leica

rangefinders - I keep drawing mental designs in my head for a true

waistlevel finder for the M that would cover from 15mm up to 35mm

lenses. I want one - bad!

[dlegaspi]

<div style="font-family: Tahoma">F5 is one of the best, no arguments

about that. i have my F5 for two years now. a fine camera as it is,

the rgb meter is WAY overrated, IMO.</div>

[mark_c]

EOS 1v, no contest. At least you can remove the power booster when

you'd prefer not to be carrying a boat anchor. Plus you get all

those IS lenses.

[djphoto]

Max, I must speak up for the humble Canon EOS-A2, probably the most

under-rated camera on the market. It is one of the best-kept secrets

in photography and is used by an astonishing number of working

photographers.

 

<p>

 

I bought a pair of them seven years ago and they've been in regular

professional use ever since. I did my Rock City Barns book with them,

and they have accounted for numerous corporate assignments, magazine

articles, brochures, and weddings. The A2's combination of just the

right features, precision, silence, durability, reliability, and ease

of use make it one of the best cameras ever made for day-in, day-out

professional work. And they don't weigh a ton, either.

 

<p>

 

Did I say the A2 is quiet? It is nearly as silent as my M3 and not as

loud as my Leica CL.

 

Brand new EOS-5s can be bought for $489 apiece from B&H, and A2s for

$399 -- surely one of the best bargains in the history of photography.

 

<p>

 

For those who will inevitably reply that the A2 is outmoded, I would

simply say that nothing is outmoded if it can capably handle the job

it was designed to do. Besides, we all use Leicas! Who are we to talk

about outmoded?!

[james_.1]

Canon 1V, along with the 28-70L, and a few juicy primes. Who said

Canon is plastic? Not this badboy, can we say magnesium? Oh yah...

[albert knapp md]

Hello Hector V.: First of all it is Albert not Alfred. Secondly, I have

always signed off with MD and never gave any thought to not.

Thirdly, I am a gastroenterologist in New York at NYU and

Lenoxs Hill. How about you?

[xavier_dalfort]

Max,

 

<p>

 

My comment about the FM3A? It's a simple SLR, hand wound and re-

wound, a large choice of fantastic lenses.

 

<p>

 

The Nikon is not the state of the art (compared with a F100) but it

is simple to operate. When well used it delivers wonderful pictures.

Mind you, the M6 has some of those characteristics. And the M6 is the

spirit of Leica, isn't it?

 

<p>

 

A few years back if the Nikon FM3A was on the Market, I would have

bought it to replace my Pentax P30N.

 

<p>

 

Regards. X.

[jacques4]

Kirk, isn't Victoria's Secret the CocaCola of lingerie and dessous?

The very definition of mass market junk.

[Allen Herbert]

Nikon F5..too big a F100 does the same lower price,lot less size and

weight.

[gary voth]

You can't just by an SLR anymore: you must consider the whole system.

 

<p>

 

For me, Canon EOS is the most conforable and intuitive camera

system, having the most advanced autofocus lens technology. (They

seem to continually stay 2-3 years ahead of Nikon on this front--

first it was USM motors, now it's IS).

 

<p>

 

It's often the little things that make a difference. For example,

it's second nature to me to manually touch up focus without first

switching to manual focus mode. This is impossible with most other

AF systems. Or applying exposure compensation when shooting on AE:

the back dial on the Canon bodies makes this really easy. Or being

able to configure the camera with or without the booster. I also

like that the top-end EOS bodies and lenses are now nearly

waterproof.

 

<p>

 

But--a lot of people like the "feel" of the top Nikon bodies in

their hand and the sound of the Nikon motors, which are a bit

quieter than the Canons. This is a subjective thing, but it counts

for something. Me, I find EOS bodies easier to work, and can put up

with a louder drive.

 

<p>

 

Whatever you choose, consider what lenses you will be using now and

down the road.

[doug_landrum]

I agree with Doug Herr. Consider, what type of photography will you

apply to your SLR. If you want knock your socks off images and do

not do sports or low light wildlife, then Leica R lenses are without

peer. If you can afford putting the price of a BMW into a lens, then

the Leica modular long lenses are beyond peer for image quality or

price. But discontinued the Leica 400mm f/6.8 Telyt (about US$800)

will beat any current Nikon or Canon optic of equavalent focal lenght

for knock your socks off images in good light. Canon and Nikon offer

image stabilzation and auto focus that may get an image in low light

where a 400 Telyt shooter may miss (see contra the Doug Herr shots

for wildlife). In the 19mm to 180mm range, Leica R lenses are

without peer in quality and lens to lens consistency - Canon and

Nikon pro lenses cost about the same now. The 19mm Elmarit, 50mm

Summicron, 100mm APO Macro Elmarit and (old) 180mm f/3.4 APO Telyt

are unsurpassed by Nikon, Canon or the M lenses. Cameras are mostly

just boxes for film. The R6/R6.2 is a better manual camera than the

M6. The R7 is a very sound electronic auto exposure camera with

features way beyond the M7. I don't have a R8, but would like one to

shoot with my R lenses.

By the way, I still like my M3 and M6 better for intimate people

photography.

For the selection of a SLR, Canon means the latest fad and

compatability to the best 35mm digital boxes, Nikon means snobbery

outdated by five years or so and Leica means the priciest and best

lenses for a strictly film based system. Your choice.

[doug_landrum]

R6 and 100mm Apo-Macro Elmarit.

 

<p>

 

<a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?

photo_id=194076&size=lg">Iron Man</a>

[Robin Smith]

Well if you are a Leica user you owe it to yourself to check out the

following R8, R6.2, R7, SL2 or SL. All are very nice cameras and you

have the best glass bar none. If you buy s/h then you are onto a good

thing. But if you want AF and all the extra stuff that only the big

boys can provide (and I know very few people who really need this

stuff - but the idea of having it, or possibly having it one day,

appeals to them) then you need to look at Canon or Nikon, and maybe

Minolta. Much as I think Nikon are the more venerable marque, I do

think Canon has the edge in terms of features.