70's Full system 35mm

[Sirius Glass]

While not built as tough as the early Nikons, I found that I got good reliability and wear with the Minoltas.

 

[Chan Tran]

If your friend wants a 70's system then the Canon New F1, Pentax LX are out. You may count the Nikon F because it was still available in the early 70's I think. If he has the bucks I would suggest a Nikon F2 system with a primary DP-12 (AS) prism, the DE-1 plain prism, the waist level and the sport finder. The MD-2 and its MB-1 battery pack. The DS-12 EE aperture control. The bulk film back and the Polaroid speed magny back. It would be 1 big system.

 

[M Carter]

I think I was a "pro" shooter in the film days - American Airlines, JCPenney, Blockbuster, ad agency work, stuff like that - and I never once needed an interchangeable finder for 35mm.

I wasn't shooting volcanoes or icebergs, just fashion. The highest-level 35mm camera I owned was a Nikon N90s - spent my cash on lenses and lights. I had an 8008s for a backup, and an 8008 with a polaroid back (still own and shoot those, though rarely the polaroid). Used MB10 grips on the N90 and the 8008s. Nobody ever questioned my gear, other than clients saying "nice camera". These days, the kids all want chrome and leather, but the electronic shutter pro--ish-level cameras I've found to be much more dependable and accurate. And when I was shooting, if you showed up for the average major-national-brand 35mm gig with a chrome and leather camera, I think you would have gotten some funny looks.

One of the most outrageously screaming deals on a pro-level camera these days is an 8008s for $25. They're all over the place. Or an N90s for under $100, but the 8008 has that awesome built-in multi-exposure - I used the hell out of that!

 

[Les Sarile]

I think I was a "pro" shooter in the film days - American Airlines, JCPenney, Blockbuster, ad agency work, stuff like that - and I never once needed an interchangeable finder for 35mm.

I wasn't shooting volcanoes or icebergs, just fashion. The highest-level 35mm camera I owned was a Nikon N90s - spent my cash on lenses and lights.

I was under the impression that ad agency type work was dominated by larger than 35mm format. Was that a myth?

 

[jimjm]

Lots of great cameras mentioned here, but OP's original recommendation was for a 70's-era 35mm system camera with interchangeable finders, screens and motor drive capability.

The only ones I can think of that fit that description are the Nikon F and F2, and Canon F1n (not New F1). Minolta XK had a special motor-drive capable version and I don't believe Topcon had a motor drive at all.

 

[Paul Howell]

Topcon beat Nikon to motor drive enabled built in, the early Fs had to modified. Topcon not only made a motor drive and bulk film back also a motor winder. I think the motor drive was one of reasons the Navy selected Topcon. There is a story that the Navy bought Topcon because it was marketed by Bessler and thought it was made in the US. The few Navy guys I talked to at the time told me that the Navy beta tested Nikon, Canon, and Topcon and Topcon beat the competition. I know that the Air Force field tested the F2 against Canon, Topcon and Olympus and kept Nikon. I am sure having a large inventory Fs and of lens was part of the decision. I talked with my friend last night and convinced him to be come a member so he can read all of the comments, as he shoots full frame Canon digital I have told him to buy a EOS 1, 1N or 1V, but he really wants a MF legacy outfit.

 

[bdial]

Having owned two Nikon F's, and more recently an F3, all bought new, my recommendation would be an F2, if he has reason to want lens (some) compatibility with newer cameras. Because, they will be slightly fresher than any F's, and they are a little better ergonomically. Issues like battery compatibility for meters will be there either way.
Otherwise, Nikon, Canon, Minolta, Pentax, whatever pick one, they're all good.