Upgrading My SLR Camera

[marcus_parker_wood]

<p>Hey.<br>

I didn't know where to put this, so thought I'd place this here.<br>

I want to upgrade from my Chinon CE-5, it's been a very kind camera but am looking for more features for an SLR.<br>

At the moment my setup consists of of a 50mm, 35mm and 28mm lens, so ideally I want to be able to upgrade, but still stay within the same 'cheapish' lens range so I can buy the equivalent focal lengths (as most of my money goes on film and developing costs). They are K mounts, so don't mind staying within a brand of camera with K mounts. I'd love to have an autofocus feature, but the more I go into that territory the more confusing for me it becomes (and expensive)<br>

I know everyone recommends the AE-1 or OM's but, I want one that outperforms my current model, because as far I am aware, my Chinon is on the same level as the AE-1 (in terms of features)<br>

Any help is appreciated!</p>

[wogears]

<p>What features are you looking for?</p>

[marcus_parker_wood]

<p>- Shutter Priority and Aperture Priority would be something I would like.<br>

- Autofocus, but as I understand it, lenses are quite expensive? I'm willing to forgo that if needed.<br>

- Faster Shutter Speed (my Chinon CE-5 can only do 1/2000)<br>

- Ability to buy cheap (but good) lenses.<br>

If there are any features that you could recommend for someone looking for an upgrade, or a camera you own (or once owned) that would be great. <br>

At the moment I'm doing research into what I could get, but there is so many cameras out there and so many conflicted opinions I'm at a loss.</p>

 

[wogears]

<p>Canon A-1, Nikon N80s.</p>

<p>You won't get AF with the Canon, but you will with the Nikon. You will need new lenses, especially for AF, but these are available at good prices.</p>

[paul_k1664875007]

<p>From the many brands that use the K mount (most of which are not in the Nikon/Canon level of reputation) obviously Pentax would be the first choice</p>

<p>The later/last generation of Pentax MZ film camera's still have the K mount, so you could for the time being keep using your present lenses, but also offer AF, which obviously becomes possible when you upgrade to AF lenses.</p>

<p>And of course you can also keep using both manual and AF lenses on future Pentax and Samsung DSLR's</p>

[jcuknz]

<p>when I used Pentax I bought an adaptor ring which enabled my K mount replacement camera to use my older M42 lenses.</p>

[Jochen_S]

<p>I've been using k-mount stuff since 1985. I honestly don't recommend getting an AF body to use manual focus lenses on it. The AF cameras have "focusing" screens optimized for brightness not focusing which lack all those occasionally appreciated focusing aids like split prisms or microprism rings or spots.<br>

What is an 1/4000 or even 1/8000 sec on your shutter dial really worth or good for? Is it that important to shoot TMZ or Delta 3200 in bright sunlight at the beach wide open? Or to take another picture of a banana shaped Airplane propeller? - I'd rather buy (& bring along) another k-mount body and load it with slower film.<br>

Manual Pentax bodies: I liked the Super A (although the base plate bent too far to attach the 3.5 FPS motordrive again. It offers shutter and aperture priority TTL flash control and a sane program mode.<br>

My used LX was a dog and doesn't offer shutter priority. - Both cameras end at 1/200sec.<br>

Pentaxes I am really recommending: KX with new light seals and maybe MX. Both are plain fully mechanical bodies and likely to be repairable by independent shops. - I simply had too many issues with Super A or LX to recommend something battery dependent. <br>

Pentax AF has never been fast. or as fast as the counterparts by Canon or Nikon. If you want to use and challenge an AF I recommend biting the bullet and buying maybe an EOS 50 / (5?) or a Nikon F100. - EOS 1 / F 5 or 6 would be alternatives in case you really want to spend a lot on film bodies. <br>

Lenses: What do you like or need? - I suppose unspectacular manual focus / manual aperture k-mount glass can be still found for somewhat cheap. - Due to the by now really inexpensive Pentax DSLRs the used AF lens pond might be overfished. Days when nobody was interested in stuff like an used 50mm macro or a 135mm f2.8 are surely over. Keep in mind that Pentax bodies require a lockable "A" setting on the aperture ring to do shutter priority or program mode (unlike your Chinon)<br>

When you see an inexpensive zoom somewhere maybe better skip it. The old manual focus ones I have don't knock my socks off (although they were marketed as mid range products back in their days.) It seems 3rd parties are only offering their bottom line in k-mount during recent years.<br>

I'm not sure how much value early AF has in general. - If AF is just there and slow it is pretty annoying. -Watching it fail and substituting it by hand is much slower than manual focusing from the start and ergonomically more challenging since the average AF lens wasn't made for manually focusing it, has too much throw on the distance ring and could do with a bit more mechanical resistance too. <br>

Cameras like the old Nikon F501 or very early Minolta 5000 / 7000 didn't convince me to desire AF. An F4 would be somewhere in between and I don't know how far away from their current impressive DSLRs Nikon ceased film SLR production; i.e. whatever you get,; don't expect it to track an approaching subject while you are shooting 5 or more FPS.<br>

AF lens pricing is relative. - There are not really expensive contemporary consumer zooms with built in image stabilization by Canon or Nikon or 3rd parties for those. I'm sure they are taking pictures (somehow) and everything depends on your needs. I think I am getting acceptable 4K pictures out of Fuji APSC consumer zooms and Pentax or even Sigma DSLR kit zooms are not too bad stopped down a bit, although they seem going for 50 Euro/$. - Are you shooting ISO 25 film from a tripod and pull processing it to do murals? <br />- Before somebody gets me wrong: A decent stabilized long f2.8 zoom seems to cost about 2000 Euro/$. I don't own one. - I am not eager to carry one and yes, Tamron 70-210 f3.5 from the 80s seem far from stellar lenses. The OP did not tell which k-mount 28, 35 and 50mm made him happy so far. - I'm not doing serious lens testing on film. - I used what I have. and tried it on digital later. - If I need sharpnes on pixel level the Pentax macros seem my best bet on DSLRs and the Leica stuff I have does well enough in general with CV 15mm being an exception (but still in use). I'm feeling a bit disappointed by my Pentax lens collection in comparison but I see how one could get along with it. <br>

If photographic opportunities enhancing camera system features are the shopping goal, I see no way around a system that offers lenses with optical image stabilization and a rather fast AF with multiple measuring spots. - Focus and recompose is too risky at wide open aperture. <br>

IMHO rational film vs digital debates went out of ammo a while ago. Whatever one is buying these days might end serving on digital later. Personally I am not very thick skinned when it comes to gear with annoying handling; i.e. using an old M42 or plain k-mount lens on a crippled k-mount DSLR isn't what I 'd call fun. Pentax AF seems somewhere in between to me. It fails frequently in sports like situations, but I see no chance to do the manual focusing better with the screens given in AF cameras and am questioning my SLR focusing skills in general. <br>

For gear shopping I see 2 ways to go: either stick to some as electrically primitive as possible system with maybe 3 bodies and hopefully eternally lasting manual primes. Or go for the modern convenience of for example a bigger Nikon with a matching endless tourist zoom like 28-200VR. The Nikon might weigh less but I'd expect the zoom to last limited time. In the 80s my consumer zooms broke within 2 or 4 years of admittedly heavy amateur usage. LensrentalsDOTcom claim that no 70-200 f2.8 is likely to survive 50 rental weeks without need for adjustments. A bulky alternative to the single Nikon approach would be splitting the focal range over 2 lenses preferably spread over 2 bodies. - Image quality might be the same investment can be too weight increases.</p>

[Gary Naka]

<p>WHY do you want a faster shutter speed than 1/2000 sec?<br>

My first camera had only 1/500 sec, my 2nd and 3rd had 1/1000 sec, and my Hasselblad is back down to 1/500 sec. I feel no need for anything faster.</p>

<p>If the answer is to shoot ISO 1600 film during the day, then you need to look not at the camera but your choice of film. IMHO ISO 1600 is a low light/night/shadow film, NOT a full daylight film. There is no such thing as a film that will give you both full daylight and good dim light/night results. That is why we have different films to choose from. You select the film to match your shooting conditions.<br>

You can get 2 bodies, #1 with ISO 100 film for daylight, and #2 with ISO 800+ for low light. Then where ever you are you select the camera body with the film that is appropriate for the situation. I the old days of film I did that with ASA-32 Panatomic-X in one body and ASA-400 Tri-X in another body. Tri-X was the fastest film we could get, back then.</p>

[Gary Naka]

<p>What is your budget $$$ ?<br>

It is hard for me to make a recommendation without knowing where to target.<br>

If you shop well, and are patient, you can find some good deals out there on pretty good gear. KEH, eBay, Craigslist, photo fairs, camera shows, etc. So you don't have to limit yourself to tier 3 gear. <br>

What you have to expect on these old cameras and lenses is that they may have to go in for a CLA (Clean Lube and Adjust), which costs $$. After 30+ years, the grease on many/most cameras has dried up to some degree, and that affect things like the shutter speed accuracy, or how stiff the focusing ring has become. If you are lucky, the shutter speed is still close to spec.</p>

<p> </p>