Best Bang for the Buck with Classic Cameras.

[maiku]

<p>At the moment I am astounded by the price of Mamiya RB and RZ and 645 cameras and lenses in Japan. I have a Mamiya 645 with four lenses. My latest purchase was a Mamiya 210 F4 C N for 60 USD. The lens was brand new! This not uncommon at all. I have also come across a ton of Mamiya 67 gear at extremely cheap prices too. My local dealer has a Mamiya RZ67 with a 120 6X7 back, 127mm lens, waist level finder and motor drive for 325 USD. It is mint condition. Is this the same siutation everywhere else with regards to Mamiya gear?</p>

<p>I think at the moment Mamiya gear might be the best bargin out there!</p>

<p>Anyone else want to chime in with their view on the best bang for the buck?</p>

<p>Mike</p>

[Mike Gammill]

<p>I would nominate the following: </p>

<ul>

<li>any of the Minolta SRT series with MC Rokkor lenses (SRT 100 with 55 mm f1.9 is cheap)</li>

<li>Nikkormat FT (or later) with non-AI Nikkors</li>

<li>Konica Autoreflex (A or T) with Hexanon EE lenses</li>

<li>Canon FTb with breech-lock mount Canon lenses</li>

</ul>

 

[gene m]

<p>Canon AE-1.</p>

[User_1172872]

<p>Nikon 8008s.</p>

[User_1172872]

<p>Bronica SQ-a.</p>

[john_tran14]

<p>At this time, there are a lot of chances you can get a film camera for free. So I say, the best bang for the buck becomes the best you can get for free. Below is a short list of some film cameras I got for free (from strangers, not a relative):<br>

F8008s, XD 11, SRT-101, Canon T-90, Canon F1n (not the New F1), Maxxum 7000, Maxxum 7, Canon 650.</p>

<p>For some reason, no one ever donate an AE-1 to me</p>

[steve_levine]

<p>Medium format prices have held a little better here in the states. A 645 SLR "kit" w/lens/back/prism is still around $200-300. Sixties & seventies vintage 35MM SLR gear is certainly at an all time low.</p>

<p>The great Nikon 8008S is indeed a real bargain. I've seen them selling for as little as $15.</p>

[maderik]

My best medium format bargain was a new in sealed box Hua Zhong TLR for $12 + shipping. Kowa 6 setups are also relatively

inexpensive (e,g, a body+3 lenses, two finders & grip for $200)

 

 

As John pointed out, 35mm bodies can often be free. I've been given a Topcon RE Super w/58mm f/1.4 lens, a Nikon FM2n w/Sigma

90mm macro, a Pentax MX+50mm 1.4, several AE-1s, a T-70, a Yashica FR-1, a couple of Electros, and a couple of other modest K-

mount SLRs. I've given away to strangers a Nikon FM2n, Nikon FE, Minolta X370, a couple of AE-1s, the Yashica FR-1, and an Electro.

I'm hoping to find homes for a Pentax K1000, Olympus OM-10 w/manual adapter, Chinon CM-4, two AE-1s and some others TBD (all

with lenses.) If I don't get local takers by mid-Sept, expect some gear give-away posts. So John, if you really want someone to give you

an AE-1, I can oblige.

[JDMvW]

<p>The hard part (meaning expensive) is more likely to be the lenses. Film bodies in most formats are very cheap right now. The exceptions are things like the Leicas, early Nikons, and other heavily collected items.<br /> I've been gathering in all kinds of bargains for years now, and having a swell time shooting cameras I couldn't justify or even afford when they were new.<br /> My favorites in the Classic Manual area are still the L series Prakticas. Aside from lightmeters (like most other old cameras), they still work well and I enjoy shooting with them. Nikon F and F2 as well.<br /> For the "modern" group, the Nikkormat EL and the T90 for manual focus, The EOS 1 and 3 and the N8008s for AF.</p>

[ken_jeanette1]

<p>Does anyone know where i can get a CHEAP Leica R lens (for the R4, so i assume 3 cam) It doesn't need to be pretty. I just want to test the R4 body i picked up. OR, if anyone knows where I can pick up an ADAPTALL mount for LEICA (KEH's is pricey at $50)</p>

[k5083]

<p>I think you are right in looking to 120 format here. It is more bucks than the 35mm cameras, but for much more bang. Also, the glass is not as much in demand by the digi crowd. Many of us have picked up some very fine 35mm cameras for next to nothing, and they are fun to use and deliver superior imagery in ways the digirazzi still have trouble comprehending, but the high end 120 systems and even the better TLRs and folders open up a whole new aspect of photography. My personal steals are my RB67 system and some Ikontas but it could just as easily have been a Bronica, Rollei, or whatever.</p>

 

[vince-p]

<p>With patience you can score a handsome, fully working Nikon F100 for $135 these days. I find that stunning. </p>

[q.g._de_bakker]

$135 for an also-ran, that's already well and truly forgotten just over 10 years after it first appeared, because it's not special in any way imaginable, let alone a classic?<br>Yes, amazing...<br>;-D

[vince-p]

<p>Oh, Q. G... How could you? It is a beautiful machine, and a flawless working camera. Whenever I hold and use mine, I feel like a rich man. </p>

[tony_lockerbie]

<p>To follow on with the F100, and the same applies to the F4 and F5, I feel that these all electronic cameras with autofocus just have not held their value at all.<br>

I think that the problem is that they are not considered collectable in the same way as the original F is for example. People have moved on from film so these "modern" film cameras have just been passed over in favour of the older more mechanical styles.<br>

Of course this is just brilliant if you are a dedicated film user! I have bought an F4 and F5 recently for peanuts, both are like new and work just as well, truly good bang for your buck.<br>

Also the Hasselblad 500 series are terrific value at the moment, not rock bottom like some, but truly affordable, which is not a word normally associated with Hasselblads.</p>

[sarah_fox]

<p>I'd vote for the Canon T-70, which is arguably one of the ugliest semi-modern cameras. Despite its ugliness, it's quite durable and reasonably competent. Pair that with a nice Canon FD lens that nobody wants (because it won't adapt to anything), and you really have something!</p>

[mjferron]

<p>Mamyia gear yes. Picked up a Rolleiflex Automat for cheap$$. Can't beat having a 6x6 negative. in a camera that compact and light. </p>

[nicolas_renon]

<p>The best bang for the buck with classic camera is when your camera works flawlessly for years. You can recommend whatever type and brand, it is worthless as it does not apply to your specific camera.<br>

To illustrate my comment: I bought almost 10 years ago a used Praktica SLR camera. These cameras are not very well considered from the reliability standpoint but believe it or not, I never had any trouble with and everything works fine, meter included.<br>

Years later, I bought a Nikkormat FTn which is supposed to be build like a tank (who never read such assumption?). Anyway, the shutter died without warning after 2 or 3 films and I ended up with a lemon...<br>

Bottom line: no one knows the previous life of these used cameras nor how they were stored for years. So, what was valid for brand new cameras right out from factory is far from being true 20 or 30 years later.<br>

Take care.</p>

[q.g._de_bakker]

Nicolas,<br><br>That's rather too obvious, and not peculiar to classic cameras: money spend on anything that turns out not to be any good - whether or not it is typical for that sort/type of thing - is money wasted. ;-)<br><br>Good "bangs for the buck" could be found in the LF world.<br>Using sheet film is still very much doable, and stil offers the great format advantage it always did. It has, however, become even less popular than using 35 mm film, so at one time very expensive bits of (very durable, Nicolas ;-) ) machinery became ridiculously inexpensive.<br>Yet, it appears the parafernalia (the lenses mostly) are becoming more expensive again, so not a good answer to the OP's Q.<br><br>MF SLRs still go for bargain prices (though i still haven't managed to find a complete RZ II for the $200 - 300 people report they find these thingies for.)<br><br>Many of the 'second' or 'third tier' products of yesteryear (Prakticas, Yashica 35 mm SLRs, and such) still go for next to nothing. Yet i still maintain that - no matter how much fun people may find having and using them - these thingies are just old, and don't fit the "classic" category (as little as that not even old Nikon F100 mentioned earlier).

[nicolas_renon]

<p>It might be rather obvious but reading the responses, it looks like the magic bullet still has believers. Yes, everyone had at one point a good experience with old gear, it does not necessary mean it is a sure shot.</p>

<p>Take care.</p>

[dave_g1]

<p>Nothing is ever a sure shot.<br /> For me though, I've had good luck with Miranda SLRs. The oldest one I have has pinholes in the shutter curtains but is otherwise operational. The other three I've had have all been useable. Miranda lenses can not be adapted for digital use easily and so prices have not inflated as much as for lenses in most other vintage mounts. I remember when Exakta lenses were dirt cheap - those days are definitely over.</p>

<p>I have a Miranda D, 35mm, 50mm (two of them in fact, a PAD 1.9, and a preset 2.8), 100mm, and 350mm lenses for it, a waist level finder and an M42 adapter - total cost combined cost about $90-$95. Hard to beat, although it took a while to find the appropriate 35mm PAD lens. The PAD lenses all had oily diaphragms, but these were easily cleaned, as these lenses are built in modules; The entire front of the lens containing all of the front elements unscrews in one piece making cleaning of the diaphragm blades about as easy as anybody could hope for.</p>

<p>If you go with a Miranda F or G the lenses are even easier to find.</p><div></div>

[dee_d]

<p>Not for the fainthearted , but a good Kiev 4 with it's selenium meter which harks back to 1935 is a taste of another world with an excellent 50 f2 Sonnar copy . <br>

The problem being ' good ' - most are fighting to work past years of accumulated grease and muck .<br>

My UK imported TOE Kiev 4 is exceptional for £25 , but this is pure luck . </p>