New forum - Let's give this a try...PLEASE READ

[k5083]

<p>Thanks for creating this forum, Josh. Although some seem confused, I know exactly what to post about here, and it's very welcome. I have a number of toys that I've had misgivings about sharing on either the classic or new gear forums, and I predict this will be as successful as the classic forum.</p>

 

[ridinhome]

<p>I hope this forum becomes the Modern Film Camera equivalent of Classic Manual Cameras. In other words, less focused on "What lens should I get" as much as a celebration of superb cameras and what they can do. Gearhead discussions are of course very interesting and useful as a resource to current and future members of the forum but I hope they do not dominate the discussion.<br>

More pics please. I'll plan on posting some shots soon with my T90.</p>

[joshroot]

<blockquote>

<p>Electronic Film Cameras is an awkward construction. I have never heard anyone say I own an electronic film camera. Cameras have been using batteries for at least 40 years. It is about time that we don't qualify a camera as modern because it is using batteries.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I agree with the statement that "Electronic Film Cameras" is an awkward thing to say. I'm going to switch it to "Modern Film Cameras". Yes, film cameras have been using batteries for decades now. But the point is more to differentiate between the Classic forum and this one. The phrase "modern" will do that as well as anything.</p>

[andrewg_ny]

<p>I expect there are many of us on p-net with fond memories for and interest in a lot of good equipment from the roughly 1983-2000 timeframe that doesn't really belong in the Classic Manual forum, but is either increasingly irrelevant in the current brand-specific forums now dominated by digital, or has been orphaned by the manufacturer existing the business and has too small a userbase on p-net to support a dedicated forum.</p>

<p>Perhaps the best working parameters for exclusion from the Classic Manual Cameras forum that I'd read/observed are the incorporation of built-in motorization or autofocus, maybe full program AE as well. There were a fair number of cameras like Konica Autoreflex T-series, Pentax Spotmatic ES that feature autoexposure but seem more classic/manual than modern in most respects. I would find it hard to exclude something like a Pentax K2 either, even ME Super. </p>

<p>The new Modern Film Cameras forum does seem to be a pretty good home for discussing cameras that while still manual-focus are just a little more modern, like Pentax Super Program (includes full program AE, shutter-priority, aperture priority, and TTL flash) and even simpler P3 which includes program AE and DX coding.</p>

<p> </p>

[timwitt]

<p>I doubt we will ever have a perfect definition of what belongs here and what belongs in Classic Manual Cameras but CMC has worked well for my four or so years there. I expect this forum will work just as well for it's range of cameras and users.</p>

<p>My decisions to post in CMC have been mostly based on:<br />-Age of camera (older than approximately 1976, my semi-arbitrary start point of mostly electronic (semiconductors) cameras.<br />-Trap needle exposure, no meter or meter only (exposure not controlled by semiconductors).<br />-Manual focus.<br />-Is there a forum that fits better like the Canon FD Forum?<br />-I think non-Leica rangefinders fit in CMC better than in the Leica & Rangefinders Forum.<br /><br />Of my current cameras, I post Canon T90, EF, FTb and F-1 in the Canon FD Forum.<br />Konica Auto S2, C35 Automatic, Olympus 35RD and Pen EES2 in the CMC Forum.<br />Pilot Super, Brownie Hawkeye and Rolleiflex MX in the CMC Forum.<br />Mamiya M645 in the Medium Format Forum.<br />Nikon FM and FE2 in the Nikon Forum.<br />Canon EOS3, A2E and 30D in the EOS Forum.<br /><br />I may begin to post semiconductor controlled film Nikon and EOS here because of the digital drowning effect is that proves to be the accepted practice.</p>

[james_kennedy9]

<p>Brilliant concept, Josh, and I take pride in my minor role in suggesting something similar :-)</p>

<p>I think your idea is much better than my original of changing the classic forum to the film forum. I intend to participate in both, and I don't think I will have much trouble differentiating between them. Nikon F, F2, all Nikkormats with FT in their name, FMs, <em>classic</em>, F3, F4, F5, F6, N80, N90, FEs, <em>modern. </em> The Canon T90 would be defined as modern, but probably is better at home in the Canon FD forum. Minolta SR_Ts, <em>classic,</em> XDs and XEs, <em>modern.</em> I base my differentiation on whether without batteries, a camera has full manual capabilities except for exposure information. It also solves the problem that many of the <em>by-brand</em> forums are dominated by the accursed digital. </p>

<p>My motivation was prompted by becoming aware of two neat cameras that I had completely ignored because I thought they fell into the category of cheap plastic crap, N80 and N90. Some may think that they continue to fall into this category, but if they were good enough for Galen Rowell, they are far too good for me. The N80 with the AF 50mm f/1.8 is a compact and very light delight. I visited a local photo store yesterday to buy some film and a neck strap and saw a Nikkor AF 75-240 mm lens, LN, for $36. Yes, it is plasticky with a cheap plastic lens mount and gets lousy reviews, but a few shots with D90 show it to be a decent performer and very light (and very cheap).</p>

<p>Admittedly, I have no developed film to display, but I have shots in the cameras, and need a little cooperation from Seattle weather, unlikely this time of year.</p>

[wclark5179]

<p>Thanks Josh for creating this forum. I've got several cameras that qualify and will stay tuned into this forum to see if I can help. And learn!</p>

[robert_chadwick]

<p>Excellent idea to start this forum, I have a varied collection of ancient and modern cameras including digital, I wish this forum every success...</p>

[donnie_strickland]

<p>Josh, I think that name works much better. Well done!</p>

[william_markey]

<p>Blah, blah, blah...how about we just go ahead and get this forum started with some postings instead of trying to figure out definitions and meanings. C'mon...this is going to be a great place for film shooters to hang our hats!</p>

<p>Now saying all that....I don't have anything to post!! <sheepish grin></p>

[brian_m.1]

<p>My EOS 650 fits smack in the middle of this forum, but there is nothing to ask. It looks and works like the day I bought it new. I have all the lenses I am likely to buy and since I started my "classic camera" collection, it hardly gets used. The only advice I might want is how to store it.</p>

[george_carpenter1]

<p>Well. I'm assuming that the "other" electronic film cameras, like the Mamiya 6s &7s, or the sundry Fuji GF/X 67/8/90 types could find a home here. Some of that, of course would depend on the issue being relevant to the terms "film and electronic" and not to the medium format or rangefinder issues. Maybe. Tough to be exact on this one until there is some direction. These could fit under the "Rangefinder" category, but seldom seem to find company with the likes of Leica.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>Brian, one thing about storing/keeping any of these old battery powered cameras is to be very sure that the battery is NOT left in it for long periods. But I bet you knew that already.</p>

<p>The only issue that I know of on the old EOS cameras (and many others) is the deterioration of the foam, especially the mirror bumper. I see frequent mention of it, anyway, but none of mine seem to have the problem of the rather-more-of-them-than-makes-sense group I have so far.I did have to replace the mirror bumper and light seals on my Contax 139Q, but with the hundreds of old cameras I have, that was the first. On a few of them, the actual light seal materials seem redundant, and the body is light-tight even with the seals in poor shape or gone.</p>

<p>It's too early to be sure, but in the brief time that this forum has been up, it seems to be going very well. Thanks, Josh and whatever elves were involved.</p>

<p>I hope that this won't mean that prices on these cameras will start to go up now. :|<br /> Just a couple of hours ago, won an EOS 630 on eBay. If it works as it is supposed to, I'll be posting it here rather than on the EOS forum, in all likelihood. ;)</p>

[dlw]

<p>Thank you, Josh. I don't think we (the masses) tell you often enough we appreciate all you do for PNet. Cheers!</p>

[charles_stobbs3]

Hooray. I think a lot of creative work was done by camera manufacturers on products that fit in this category and it is good that they have a showplace at last and not have to be tucked away in the other forums.

[ridinhome]

 

<blockquote>

<p>Thank you, Josh. I don't think we (the masses) tell you often enough we appreciate all you do for PNet. Cheers!</p>

</blockquote>

 

<p>Entirely agree. Thanks Josh.</p>

 

[rdm]

<p>Although i like the idea of this forum, I am just saddened that this new forum was created before a forum to separate the Minolta Manual focus cameras from the Sony/Minolta one. I mean Canon has there EOS and then also the FD forum, And us Minolta users Know that we have the same divergence with Minolta MD, and then The Minolta/Sony Alpha . Oh well i guess maybe the Minolta Manual SLR users are not considered important enough to get their own forum like the Canon people got. Guess that why ill always see most of the Minolta Manual Focus stuff posted in the Classic camera forum.</p>

[joshroot]

<p>Dan,</p>

<p>The Sony/Minolta forum was originally the Minolta forum. When Minolta ceased to exist and was bought by Sony, the name was changed to reflect the fact that multiple brands now shared the same lens mount.</p>

[rdm]

<p>I know that Josh, but that has nothing to do with what i am saying. I do not know if you are not understanding what i was asking or avoiding the point I made.<br /> I am sorry if i wasn't clear, I guess i was trying not to be too direct so as not to give the appearance of being mean or rude. Conversational text online can not always carry the tone of ones intended messages<br /> :-)<br /> I will just just use smiley faces to show I'm being light hearted and friendly from now on then and be direct and say , How come Canon gets 2 forums One for the Manual SLR mount and one for the AF SLR mount; when Still Minolta/sony/konica or what ever you wanna call it also has a similar mount History; One for Manual SLR cameras and one for AF SLR cameras? <br>

Seems like it would have been a Logical step in equality, No?</p>

[jpo3136b]

<p>I think this is a nice idea.</p>

[dried_squid]

<p>Thanks. I'll give it a try. I have two Nikon FEs - autoexposure. It has batteries. So I think I understand.</p>

[JDMvW]

Since 2011, I have more and more become convinced that there should just be a "historical cameras" theme that includes the old manual film cameras, the automatic cameras of the 90s, as well as the earlier digital cameras.

 

Another title might simply be "collector cameras"