recommend a film slr to complement digital?

[henry l]

Okay --

 

before y'all get to going off here's the scenario:

 

I sold all of my Nikon AF film SLR bodies on Ebay to finance a

digital slr amd surrounding kit, aand now I'm feeling like I made

just a bit of a mistake.

 

I want a film slr for these few situations:

 

1) very long exposures

2) using in dastardly weather, on long, ugly backpacking trips, and

when I can't be bothered with battery issues

3) when I want to feel my roots, do a little manual focusing and the

like with a sturdy, boxy, deliberate camera

4) highly affordable (not a situation, but reflects my situation)

 

I wouldn't at all mind a MF Nikon body, which I think might fit my

needs, but I'm a complete ignoramous regarding their genealogy. And

TTL flash is nice too (like to fill in long , though I suppose I

could be troubled to actually learn to use a flash too:)

 

so what body should I buy for these few times I'll use it?

 

thanks a million!

[bruce_garrett]

Complement?

[henry l]

I've published in refereed professional journals, and I'm sitting in a faculty office right now, and I could care less about my typos and any other niggling little bs grammar/syntax issues when I'm posting to an internet message board about photography.

 

So you and the rest of the grammar police can go stuff each other until your modifiers no longer dangle.

[kaiyen]

I actually haven't used MF Nikon's that much (well, any MF cameras that much, actually, other than my vintage ones), but...would you use your existing AF lenses on them or get a separate set of MF lenses? Seems like a pertinent question.

 

allan

[bwcombs]

I have a couple of old Nikon bodies that I will take on flyfishing

trips. Just stash them in a backpack. I have an old FG, and an

F301. Each has an E-Series lens (28mm and 35mm) and they

have worked well. And if they get a little dirty or wet, just wipe

them off. The 301 has actually been underwater for a few

seconds during a fall, and it dried out very well. Still works.

 

Both of these cameras were ebay purchases. Very cheap. And

MF lenses can be had for a song as well.

 

I do have an F3HP that is more than durable, but I tend to baby it

a little more, and try not to take it swimming.

 

Like you, I realized I missed the non-digital aspect, and was glad

I kept some of the old Nikon bodies.

 

Good luck. BW

[mskovacs]

<i>"I've published in refereed professional journals, and I'm sitting in a faculty office right now, and I could care less about my typos and any other niggling little bs grammar/syntax issues when I'm posting to an internet message board about photography."</i><p>Yeah me too, so what? No excuse to be an ass. Besides, wasn't its spelling and usage correct anyway?<p>The "complement?" may have meant "to complement which DSLR"? Its a valid question if you have the G lenses for example.

[dante_stella]

"Compliment" would have been wrong, Bruce.

[jim_gifford]

Truly inexpensive: Nikon EM.

 

Truly functional even without batteries: Nikon FM2, FM2N, FM3A.

 

Essentially any Nikon design from the 1970s would be a great choice.

 

Be well,

[jbq]

Nikon FE2/FM3a (which I like to call FE3).

[rick_helmke]

If you don't mind a little weight I think the F2 was about the best 35mm camera ever made. But that's me. Keep an eye out for a decent FM2, FE, FE2 etc. You won't go wrong with an 8008, 6006, an N90s. With film camera prices being what they are you should be able to pick up something for under $250 all day long.

 

I did the same thing, sold off all the film stuff and went digital. I'm quite happy with digital but missed film and went back and bought a couple of bodies. I'm glad I did.

 

Rick H.

[klix]

complement -- with an "E" is actually correct.

 

There will be differing opinions, but I would think the "camps" would be:

 

-F2

 

-F3 and its variants

 

-FM2 and its variants

 

-FM3A

 

My personal vote, given that it won't be your primary body, would go to an FM2N.

[steve g]

FM2N, compact and mechanical shutter which makes it especially great for those long exposures (it won't drain your battery as with an electronic shutter such as FE, FE2). Nice LED + 0 - meter, easier to see than most of the needle meters.

[jbq]

Stephen - B setting is mechanical on the FE (not sure about the FE2) - and the FE series allows for long metered exposure. You do have a point about +/- LEDs: they're more usable in the dark, but less user-friendly in daylight.

[fourfa]

hmm, was I a fool to pass up an F3HP in the bangkok photo flea market for $300 the other day? it appeared to be fully working and in good shape.

[mkphoto]

FM2 is very durable-- will sustain a bit of rain if it has to, is small(ish), light (compared to its contemporary F3/F2) and will keep on clicking long after the batteries cease.

 

If you like aperture priority control in addition I'd probably go for the FM3A over an FE2; the former is newer and does exactly the same thing as the FE2, with the addition of the FM2's endurance.

[bruce_garrett]

Of course 'complement' is correct... I posted it because I wondered what Henry had in

mind regarding supplementing his digital gear. Why query his own English... loathe

to mention '...couldn't care less...' in the original post.

 

Meanwhile...

[steve_chan5]

Cheap: Nikon FG - can be had for cheaper than some lens cleanings. Does long exposures, a little noisy and top shutter speed of only 1/1000. But it does all that a basic camera needs to do, and also includes AE, program mode, long exposure (in AE mode) and it is tiny.

 

Moderate: Nikon FE2 or FM2N. The FE2 is the electronic shutter, AE version of the FM2N. Small, robust, reliable, can get modern focus screens, long exposures on the FE2 with AE. Classics of the Nikon lineage.

 

Spendy: FM3A - basically the FE2 with a new shutter that operates at all speeds without batteries. Nice bright screens, compact and robust. Solid, modern SLR for folks who like manual cameras.

 

Budget auto-everything: N90s/F90x. About as good as it gets in the non-pro Nikon AF bodies. Screen is bright, but no focus aids for MF.

[Robert_Lai]

The cheap but very competent champion here is the FG. It has manual, aperture priority autoexposure and program exposure modes with any AI lens. It is extremely light and compact. They are available for about $100 in top notch condition. Make sure it still has its handgrip - they were removed for placing the motor drive on, and people have often lost them.<p>The FG's only downsides are the battery dependency (you do get a manual 1/90 speed), and lack of aperture direct readout (ADR).<p>If you want to get to the apogee of manual focusing Nikons, then head for the F3. Superb low light ability, with autoexposure times running for up to at least 1/2 hour, are available. More gadgets, gizmos and screens than almost any other F series camera are available for it. It's downside is the 1/80 flash synch speed, and a miserable tiny little red button for finder illumination in the dark.<p>I actually have both, but I use the FG more these days because it is so cheap and cheerful. But then, for macro photography or specialized uses such as on a microscope, the F3 is unbeatable.

[bob_yarsh]

Your post seems to cry for a MF Nikon, and as others have said, there are many that

are a joy to use. One deciding point is whether you want aperture priority (so you can

shoot more on the fly when exhausted on a backpack trip) or want to be completely

manual. IMHO, the MF Niknos with AP are the apex of the manual focus line -- for

your needs, I would suggest:

 

FE-2 from around 1983. You can get from KEH. Need batteries, but they are very

light and last a year anyway. Has TTL flash -- little tricky to reduce flash output for

fill flash, but can be done (see photo.net postings). KEH can also sell you an old

manual.

FM3a, Currently produced slightly updated version of the FE-2. Pricier. Easy to do -

1/2

stop fill flash.

F3 (F3HP if you wear glasses). A bit heavier, but very sturdy and some love them.

Haven't used myself, but do hanker after one.

 

We have an FM2n at home, but I find the diode metering somewhat of a pain,

especially if

you're trying to take a picture on the fly when tired during backpacking. I would

avoid the FM10,

which doesn't deserve the Nikon brand name and as far as I know isn't made by them

-- metering is awful, and it tends to break within the first 2 years. Obviously a

cheaper AF camera woud meet some of your needs (like the N80), but sounds like this

would be agood time to pick up a MF Nikon.

 

I had an old Nikkormat FS that I used to take all over the place backpacking, and it

never had a problem. I picked up an FE-2 a couple of years ago, and it performed

admirably on a 1-week bushwacking trip in Wrangell-St. Elias park in Alaska last

summer. I brought along an 85mm AIS and 35mm AF lens. I also carried a Yashika

T4 super along as a light-weight backup and for color neg film, and got great shots

from that as well.

 

Enjoy!

[nuno_campos1]

The Nikon FM2n is the Machina that you want, but if you want something less expensive you will not be disappointed with the Nikon FG, that normally is - do not ask me why - underrated.

[henry l]

My goodness what a superb list of responses -- thanks so much to everyone contributing something helpful. I really appreciate it.

 

And sorry to get all worked up. But I still COULD care less, Bruce, whatever it was about my use of language that prompted the condescending one word question. It seems my assumption about the way you think about language (like the �grammar police�) bears out in your next post. Yet from the terrific responses I got to my post (of which I want more!) it is clearly apparent that I was clear enough. There is a debate regarding a perceived, but certainly not actual, crisis in literacy, I think, embedded in certain types of condescending message board responses, responses that hoodedly champion hierarchical class and value structures, and encourage people who don�t communicate as you do to stay quiet. And I don�t like this.

 

Or maybe you just British? In that case:

 

Otto: Don't call me stupid.

Wendy Leach: Why on earth not?

Otto: Oh you English are so superior aren't you? Well would you like to know where you would be without us, the old U.S. of A to protect you? The smallest fucking province in the Russian empire. So don't call me stupid lady.

Wendy: Well thank you for popping in protecting us.

Otto: (as he leaves) Without us, you'd all be speaking German!

 

Thanks again to everyone who helped!

[john_carter_rhodes]

....and now you start having a go at the Brits?

 

Why do you jump to such assumptions, Henry?

 

First you assume that Bruce was talking about your use of English, then you assume...based on your first incorrect assumption....that he must be British. And finally you let out your inner bigotry out and start insulting us.

 

Thanks. Well I really couldn't care less about your first question till you can address those trying to help with more civility.

 

John.

[nuno_campos1]

John, do not argue with Henry. Remember the old Europe. The one before USA and Russian Empire (whatever that is):

 

«Accipere, quam facere, praestat injuriam.» (Cicero)

 

And, Henry, please...

 

«Favete linguis.» (Horatio)

 

 

Nuno.

[john_carter_rhodes]

Very true Nuno. :)

 

John.

[bruce_garrett]

In short: don't be an arsehole all your life... take a day off.