The FE does meter through the lens.
I meant TTL flash...
One benefit of staying with prime lenses is that they have an impact on how we photograph. I see zoom photographers moving around much less than people with prime lenses. Perspective cannot be changed with focal length, one needs to change the viewpoint to change perspective. Zoom users seem to lose some of that.
As much as I love my Rolleicord I really do need to get myself an SLR for family shots and less serious stuff. Have been using Nikon as 135 all my life and see no reason to change now. I've given myself a budget around $500 and would like a good body, a wide, a normal and a zoom. Am in no hurry as money is still being saved, so to speak.
On KEH I have my eyes on the following line-up
Camera: Nikon FE2
Wide: Nikkor 24 f2.8
Normal: Nikkor 50 f1.8
Zoom: Nikkor 80-200 f4
I figured if I stay manual focus I can afford better lenses and I just plain like focusing. I'm weird that way. This would be about $550 including shipping.
Anyone wiser than me having any comments on this. Is there a better bargain to be had with other body/lenses?
Awaiting comments this gray, bleak April Sunday morning when the spring seem to have retreated back to the warmer places. It's 3 degrees C outside and I have taken all the pictures of snow I need for a long time. Would be nice to try some Velvia. But you need colors for that. Sigh!
r
Mats
...If you can stretch, I would add the 85mm f1.4 lens or the 105mm f2.5 in the future. These are wonderful lenses. I'm not sure you need a third lens right away anyway.
-Laura
Pick the body you like, but honestly, I'm a bit partial to the N90s/F90x. I've got an F2, an F3, a couple of Nikkormats, an FM2n, and an F100. The F100 is really nice sees a lot of use, but I don't think you can get one and stay within your budget. The N90s doesn't give up very much if you're using it with AI and AIs lenses. They're cheap to come by, and use the inexpensive and ubiquitous AA batteries.
On lenses... The 24 f/2.8 and the 50 f/1.8 are both excellent lenses and will serve you well. I'm a little sketchy on the 80-200 zoom. I have a few zooms and none of them get much use at all. I find them to be, for the most part, wholly inferior to primes unless you opt for the very expensive f/2.8 versions. For me they work a bit better for making color images than for making B&W images.
To fill out the longer end of the scale, the 85 f/2 is a hard one to beat and isn't too expensive. The faster versions of the 85 may be better, but they are spendy and you don't get all that much more bang for your buck. The 200 f/4 is another gem. It is small and light for a 200 mm lens and very sharp. But, as with all long lenses, a steady hand, a fast shutter speed, or a steady support is crucial.
...The AF cameras proposed will normally not focus manually very well. Manual focus screens can be installed, but a manual focus viewfinder system tends to be different form an AF one in any case.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?