Good, cheap, older equipment for nature photography

[richxcasto]

The Pentax LX has DOF preview and mirror-lock. It will also

function without batteries at X (1/75) - 1/2000 which is nice

in a pinch. Since I just bought some new equipment, mine is

for sale; see http://www.rcon.com/forsale.html for details.

[stanley_mcmanus]

The October 1997 issue of Popular Photography features a profile of an amateur photographer who takes morning landscape photographs. He has used a Canon A-1 body, 35-105 zoom lens, and a Velbon tripod for seventeen years.

[david_bartley]

I think most of the useable possibilities have been mentioned, but I would add one warning, and that is that many of the camera bodies suggested use mercury batteries which are no longer available in the U.S., and no fully satisfactory substitute has yet been developed. For open landscape a handheld meter is not a bad idea anyway, but there are many situations in which TTL metering is an obvious advantage. Of the suggestions made I know for certain that the

Canon A series cameras use silver oxide batteries, and so would be OK. They are also quite inexpensive, and among the FD lenses they use many superb pieces can be found. I think the strategy of buying older equipment only makes sense if you plan to set limits on your system, a body or two and three or four lenses. If you plan to build a large and complex system you will be better off in the long run buying equipment that is new, or at least still in production, since you will otherwise run into obsolescence problems much sooner.

[glen_johnson]

David, are you saying that you have tried the Wein Cell replacements for the mercury batteries and found them to be unsatisfactory in some way, or are you just unaware of their existence? The Wein Cell zinc air batteries worked quite nicely in my Minolta SR-T 201 and my Yashica Mat 124G. They provide the same voltage as the original mercury batteries, and are available from Wein, which I believe is part of the Saunders Group in Rochester, NY.

[dan_smith]

for those interested in large format. Try an old calumet with a 90 and 210 lens. These can be older or newer, either are available used for little money. 6 sheet film holders, a tripod, cable release, small drink cooler or camera bag to carry it around in and use your coat for the dark cloth. For a meter, get a Calculite. Digital, solid state and very reliable & inexpensive. Shoot your film choice & enjoy the pleasant pace the 4x5 will impose on you as you learn. Not much of a choice for wildlife but very workable for most everything else. 4x5 chromes are their own reward & the Ilfochrome prints from them are great.

[tom_benedict]

I'll actually take a different tack on this: For people who already have a camera body, are there any inexpensive ways to get into a branch of photography they can't currently do?

 

<p>

 

Here's an example: Closeup photography

Obvious ideas are two-element closeup lenses, extension tubes, and the like. Another idea is to reverse-mount a lens you might already own. Heck, if you have a lens in the 80-130mm range, reverse-mount your 50mm onto the end of it. You wind up with significantly more than 1:1 magnification, and all it cost was about $15 US for a filter reversing ring (or nothing if you just held the lens up there.)

 

<p>

 

Is it cheap? Relatively so, yes. Are the necessary parts available? Yes, even more so if you already own them. Can they create high-quality, salable images? You betcha.

 

<p>

 

Any other ideas? (No, I don't expect someone to come up with a way to build a high-quality 500mm f/2 optic from a magnifying glass, string, and an old doorknob, but...)

 

<p>

 

Tom

[bob_williams1]

You can buy a good used Canon Ftb bodies for $85 - $175.

It has DOF preview and mirror lockup. The meter usually

needs to be recalibrated - but that only takes 5 minutes. I

own 4 of them and they're not for sale. There are thousands

of FD lenses for sale.

[don_schmidt]

The Canon FTb-QL and FD lenses are certainly a good choice, but if you want to do it really on the cheap, try the somewhat older FT-QL with some FL lenses. The older FT is almost identical to the FTb, will still take the FD lenses if you have them, but it'll also take the FL lenses. They're much cheaper and I don't think there's much difference in quality. They just don't work well on as many bodies -- none after the FTb came out.

[ed_hampe]

I would also suggest the Canon FTb-QL. I've used one for 27 years. I bought it new in 1971 and had it reconditioned once in 1983. It still is in perfect working order. The person who has 4 of them has a one hundred year supply of them. The FD lenses are equally durable.

[robert_garrett]

There seems to be a lot of info on 35mm equipment here. I am interested in information affordable medium and large format equipment. Any suggestions? Thanks

[george_pang1]

I've recently gone and put together a fair Canon FD system, and as others have mentioned it's quite inexpensive. It's probably the largest system available at these kinds of prices. There is a LOT of Canon FD equipment out there which contributes greatly to it's low price.

 

<p>

 

It has depreciated about as far as it's going to go so your resell value if you paid a good price yourself won't be any lower than you bought it for. Certainly parts aren't QUITE as readily available, but when bodies only cost $90 just buy another body if you break one.All the standard primes can be gotten for $60 to $75 each in mint or near mint condition.. That's for all the primes between 28 and 135.. excluding lenses like the 50/1.2L and macros..

 

<p>

 

Macro stuff is still a bit expensive relative to the bodies and standard primes, but deals can be found. There are auto macro bellows for the system and they are reasonably priced.

 

<p>

 

Are the FD primes any less sharp than the current EOS primes? I doubt it for most of them, but the inexpensive zooms are rather undesirable with one notable exception being the forefather of the current 28-105 EOS lens..

 

<p>

 

And of course if you MUST have new lenses you can still get them from any of the 3rd party lens makers.

[george_thomas2]

As an amateur, my first camera was my father's Canon AE-1 (non-program). This is, in my opinion, an excellent camera that is built like a grenade with regards to sturdiness, yet is capable of impressively sharp pictures. As an avid backpacker, this body, a 28-2.8, and 50-1.8 FD lenses are perfect for landscapes. With the concern of weight everpresent, this skeleton outfit is adequate for a week's worth of picturetaking, if coupled with a lightweight tripod such as Bogen 3001 series. My canon lacks miror lock-up and multi-metering choices, but does have DOF preview and a myriad of inexpensive lens choices. The only question you must ask yourself is "How much do I want to carry?" The totally manual nature of the camera, availability of lens options, and rugged structure of the body all work out to a nice outfit that will cost about $400 in exemplary condition. Perhaps the additon of a zoom lens would be nice for wildlife, but sticking with inexpensive wide lenses for landscapes and nighttime star shots with a cable release is the prudent choice for light weight without the light pocketbook!

[sergio_ortega]

I really enjoyed reading all the posts, good question and lots of good advice. For someone with more than a passing interest in nature photography, someone who really wants to build a system he/she can use and add to, I feel the Nikon route is the better long term choice.

 

<p>

 

I suppose the most obvious reason the Canon FD stuff is so inexpensive these days is directly due to the incompatibility of the FD equipment with the EOS stuff. It's a pity, because the FD equipment is/was excellent. When I made the decision to start building a "top quality" 35mm system several years ago I decided to go with Nikon, even though I had a modest Canon FD outfit at the time.

 

<p>

 

I put an ad in the local paper for my AE-1, 50mm 1.8 FD, (off-brand) 28 2.8 and 70-210 4.5. All in excellent shape. I had a real hard time selling it. I finally sold it to a student for $200. (Canon FD 50mm 1.8's are selling for less than $30 in Shutterbug these days!) It just goes to show that you can get good Canon equipment for very little money.

 

<p>

 

Oh, by the way. A few weeks ago I was comparing some recent transparencies taken with the high-end Nikon AF equipment (the stuff with the 3D color matrix metering and pricey constant aperture fast zoom) to some negs I had made with the old AE-1 and the 50mm. You know, the old stuff was darn good in comparison. Kind of makes you wonder.

[simon_gardner]

Other people in this section have already covered older Minolta gear. I'll second this choice. Many of the SRT Series cameras had mirror locks including the XK (a pro grade camera that I found I could never quite trust). One great old lens is the Vivitar Series 1 90 2.5 macro. It's pretty heavy but that's good because it means it has plenty of glass elements and is highly corrected. This lens delivers very sharp images. The lens also came with a mached 1:1 extension tube which had lens elements in it. Other Series 1 lenses are no good. The 200 F3 had flare problems. The 35 to 85 suffered from low contrast.

 

<p>

 

S. Gardner, Ottawa

[bengt_sjoestroem]

My first camera was a used Canon EF, unfortnuatly it was stolen. It is a verry tough camera with a lot of features that you only find on the expensive models now. DOF, mirror lockup and multiexposures. It has mechanical times from 1/1000 s to 1/2 s and electrical times 1-30 seconds. The mechanical times makes it possible to us it without batteries. EF is also working in verry low temperatures, I have used it in -35 degres Celcius (-31F) without problems. In ads. for used cameras they are priced up to 200$. Comparing EF to FTb is like comparing Elan with Rebel, EF is a much better camera. I know because friends of mine had FTb's and we made some comparsions. In FTb the shutter curtains is made of coated cloth that will age even if the camera is not used, in EF it is metal.

[joe_boyd]

Buy an older AI-type Nikon body (F2A/F2AS/F3/FM*/FE*/FA/N2000) and then spend your money on good lenses. The AI-type bodies will work with most every Nikon lens (and lots of after-market) lens made since 1977.

 

<p>

 

This gives you tremendous flexibility in buying lenses now that will work for you in the future, and work with more modern equipment if you find yourself flush with cash.

[raynoshn___1]

Canon optics were among the best. And they produced a lot of mechanical bodies that are still on the used market. Once in a while they turn up at steal prices. But another question I think is important. Which of these old (relatively cheap, meaning bodies under 300.00, 50mm lenses under 75.00 and true telephotos in the low hundreds) systems can you get serviced? I have a neighbor who restores old BMW's. He orders parts from some place in Kokomo Flats with a PO Box. I hope my point is well taken,bargain hunters. Cheers.

[tom_kessler]

After almost twenty faithful years with my Canon AE-1, It finally locked up. I took it to a local camers shop to inquire about repair. I wound up replacing it with an F-1N (NEW),(freshly overhauled), an AE-1P as a back-up, 28/2.0SSC - 85/1.8SSC - 135/2.0 - 200/2.8SSC lenses, bought a 35-105/3.5 fixed zoom on line, already had a 50/1.4 from my AE-1 original purchase. All in excellent condition, bodies with 4 year guaranty. After selling my third party zoom lenses my system cost was $1200.00. I couldn't imagine puting a system of this caliber together in any other way. Modern AF systems are terrific, but with comparable lenses, and even entry level bodies, costs could easily run 4 or more times this. Obsolete?...Mmmmmm, ..Okay, if anyone wants to part with a 300/2.8 at an obsolete price, let me know, I'll finish this sytem.

[dirk___]

mirror lock up, DOF...are features of many old and inexpensive

cameras. When you use the selftimer of the FM/FE Nikon series the

mirror locks up and 10 sec later you shoot your image, works pretty

well. Where is an alternative for old used Nikons if you are limited

by a few hundred dollars. Old Pentax stuff has some nead features. Get

a Pentax MX and the lenses can be used on the new AF caeras too! You

get cheap offers of K-mount lenses such as Ricoh. Think about it, this

is the cheapest way to start a real good system. Even old Practica

cameras offer you all you need. M42 mount lenses can be used on all

cameras (ask for retrictions...)and some of the old Zeiss Jena lenses

are cheap and have a great quality...........

[joe swaney]

Been there, done that! I was at a wedding over a year ago, and

noticed the professional photographer (using Nikon stuff) pull out an

old Minolta when taking some inside shots. We talked briefly, and he

was using the older body he'd had for a while for the large

1.4 aperture of the lens. I'd thought about buying the Canon 50 mm

1.4 for my EOS system, but his approach was certainly less expensive.

 

<p>

 

After pondering this, and watching photo.net, etc., I bought an

Olympus OM-2n, winder, 2 lenses, filters, and stuff for under $300. I

put this in the back of my car last fall (cold enough here in Northern

Japan for the film to keep) and pulled it out while driving in the

mountains during the first snowfall of the year.

 

<p>

 

The result? An award-winning image of a local lake taken with the

Zuiko 1.4 lens (stopped down) that blows up very nicely to 11 X 16.

Even better, I loaded TMZ 3200 Black and White, and used that nice 1.4

aperture to get pictures around the campfire this summer without that

incredibly intrusive flash.

 

<p>

 

While I chose Olympus because I owned an OM-1 in the early 80's and

remembered it fondly (stolen) I guess it doesn't matter as much

whether to go Olympus or some other brand (at least to me) as to say

that you can get a really good used camera that will take wonderful

pictures for not much money!

[david_w._griffin]

The Minolta XK is a ruggedly built camera, but it can have it's

electronics problems if it has been abused (much as the XE-7 and

Leica R3 can have the same kinds of problems). Given the wide range

of quite good older Minolta primes, and cheap prices on bodies

(xd-11 and XE-7 and X-570 for instance) this would seem to be a

bargain. I also use Contax lenses on occasion, and though I am not

photographing on a test bench, I often can't tell the difference in

terms of sharpness. This is on a tripod, sometimes with mirrors locked

up, though not always.

 

<p>

 

I have the vivitar ser 1 lenses 35-85 varifocal (not zoom) and the

90-180 f/4.5 Macro Zoom as well as the 90mm f/2.5. All have performed

well, but the macro zoom tends to be heavy and a little dim (at f4.5).

 

<p>

 

The only real disadvantage of the XK is weight and maybe cost. The

metering is not sophisticated, but it's decent. The exposure com-

pensation is a lever moved while your holding it, so if you want to

use it on a tripod, exposure compensation can be a problem. I think

it was originally designed as a photojournalist camera.

[jeffrey_goggin1]

With regard to the answer above, exposure compensation is easy on the Minolta XK if you simply ignore the factory's clunky approach and adjust the meter's film speed dial accordingly.

 

It's marked off in one-third stop increments and thanks to its stepless shutter, you can reliably add or subract from the meter's reading with very little effort. The same is also true with the XE series bodies.

 

One other plus the XK has is the ability to quickly interchange finders ... I often compose my photos using the waist-level finder then swap to an AE or AE-S finder to set exposure. With practice, it's maybe a 10-second job, 15 seconds if it's cold out...

 

Unfortunately, once you get past 300mm, telephoto lenses are hard to find on the used market and quite costly to boot. If you can live with nothing longer than a 200mm/4 or 300mm/5.6, though, you should be able to find good clean ones for under $100 and $300, respectively.

 

If you shoot landscapes, the 21mm/2.8 and 24mm/2.8 are quite good as well (although it pays to shop around as they do seem to vary from lens-to-lens ... of course, this could also be due to wear and tear over the years). Unfortunately, the good ones can be a bit pricey.

[colin_povey]

Lots of people have made valuable contributions, and I wanted to contribute my 2 cents.

 

For a good, long fast lens, get one of the mirror telephoto lenses. Nikon still makes them in 500 and 1000mm. Other brands are still in production as well.

 

The Nikon 500mm f/8 (old or new style) goes for around $250-400 in camera shows and on E-bay. They are just about as sharp as newer glass, though a little less contrasty.

 

Advantages:

Very small (newer model Nikkor is smaller than the older model)

 

Very light (the Nikkor 500mm f/8 mirror is just 29 ounces, and the 1000mm f/11 is just 67 ounces, compared to the Nikon 500mm f/4 ED-IF lens at 105 ounces)

 

Inexpensive

 

Focus close (newer Nikkor down to about 5 feet)

 

Inexpensive filters (the Nikkor's use 39mm filters on the back)

 

Generally work well with teleconverters

 

 

 

Disadvantages:

Slow (marked f/8, but in reality all of them are about 1/2 stop slower, since the f-stop is determined mathmatically)

 

Hard to focus (dim viewfinder)

 

Out of focus areas assume a doughnut-like apperance, due to the secondary mirror. This can be distracting, but can occasionally work to your advantage.

 

Some less expensive brands tend to have a hot spot in the center

 

 

 

In general, mirror lenses offer the most bang for the buck in long telephoto lenses.

[timothy_breihan]

I am the owner of a Nikon manual-focus system, which I find perfectly capable and of professional calibre. I have recently acquired the system, having sold a Minolta XD-5 and four MD lenses in order to finance the "upgrade." (This system was wonderful, by the way, though I found myself limited by the ever-decreasing selection of quality lenses on the used market.)

 

If one is considering an older used system, he or she must evaluate what they can reasonable expect such a system to do. This is especially relevant to auto-focus shoppers, who must remeber that most AF cameras made before 1990 or so have AF systems that are nearly useless do to a lack of speed or an overabundence of noise. The exception would be some of Canons higher-end bodies and USM lenses, of course.

 

If you are willing to forego auto-focus, you will be able to take advantage of some very good bargains on very good used equipment. For instance, my system consists of a Nikon FE2 that I purchased from a local camera-repair shop for $325 with a sixty-day warranty. I added a Nikkor 50/1.4 AI for another $70, an excellent Nikkor 28/2.8 AI-S (floating elements) for $160, and a non-ED 180/2.8 for $240. I also got the MD-12 motor-drive for $80 and a pair of ancient extension tubes for another $20. Total cost: $895. Less than a brand-new N90s.

 

Of course, I lack multi-mode metering, a quiet drive and of course autofocusing, but my system is perfectly suitable for me. Again, evaluate your needs and expectations, and then decide what you need and what you can live without. From there, buy the best that you can afford.

 

In response to the long-telephotos-at-this-price comment, W. Schiller, the camera shop in Saint Louis that I frequent, currently has two lenses, an old Auto-Nikkor 400/4.5 AI for about $600, and an equally old 500/5.6 for about a grand. While these are certainly not "premium" as status dictates, they are certainly usable, and, if you own even an AF Nikon, would make a good choice.

 

So yes, with judicious shopping, an affordable system can be built. And remember, all anyone really cares about is your photographs, not whether you own a 600/4 or not.

[de_isaacs]

I am surprised that more people aren't talking about the canon FD system. I use Canon A-1 & T-70 Bodies. Since Canon obsoleted the

FD mount, those lenses are very reasonably priced, and in many smaller metropolitan areas (like Colorado Springs) fairly priced

and available.

 

A good, high-quality used SLR, such as the Canon A-1 or T-70 would

be a nice place to start. For a macro lens I would look again at

used lenses. Of course one should also look around for used original eqiuipment camera lenses too, which can often be had at very reasonable prices.