I think so. They are practically free on ebay, and with smart shopping on Facebook Marketplace and Craigslist. I find that sellers on those last two sites often don't research market prices, so sometimes, things are very overpriced and sometimes they are underpriced.
No. The top value is a Leica III.
Good 35mm cameras from the early 2000s are easy to obtain too.
They are the most technologically advanced.
But they are highly dependent on batteries - even for film winding - and those batteries are frequently expensive and less easy to find.
Many of them also have viewfinders that are less attractive to me than many older, manual focus versions.
They are wonderfully inexpensive though.
They are certainly some of the cheapest, but given that a lot of them have longevity issues due to the move to certain plastic parts (the first ones that come to mind are the Pentax MZ cameras that have failing mirror gears) I don't know that cheap is equivalent to best value.
Some certainly are, but pre-AI Nikkormat are still crazy cheap and will live longer than me, certain other Pentax and Minoltas have a long life span for little cost.
It's true that they are fully dependent on batteries, and they DO eat them faster than something fully mechanical. But they go dozens of rolls of film (esp. w/o flash use) so that the cost of the batteries pales in comparison to the cost of film.They are the most technologically advanced.
But they are highly dependent on batteries - even for film winding - and those batteries are frequently expensive and less easy to find.
Also true, for the entry level ones. But there are a lot of high-end ones with great viewfinders that don't cost much. For example, and EOS 630 costs about the same on ebay as a Rebel and is an order of magnitude better. Ditto for an A2 vs. Rebel.Many of them also have viewfinders that are less attractive to me than many older, manual focus versions.
They are wonderfully inexpensive though.
At least in the Nikon Range, I'd lean towards the early 2000's models. A Nikon N75 can be had for around $35-40, for example, and unlike the previous generation, allows use of manual and aperture priority modes with "G" lenses. Even an F5 only runs about $300.
It's not just you. And its not just Nikon. Many of those later electronic film SLR's can be clumsy to navigate. But they're still easier than most DSLR's. And anything can be learned and gotten used to.I've found the Nikons to be confusing and overly complicated when it comes to menus and workflow. Canon has a mode dial and some buttons. Nikon's have a confusing layout. It might just be me though...
It's not just you. And its not just Nikon. Many of those later electronic film SLR's can be clumsy to navigate. But they're still easier than most DSLR's. And anything can be learned and gotten used to.
I still have my N6006 with auto focus and PASM and other features that works flawlessly. The 35-70mm zoom is not suppose to be so sharp. But I suppose I could replace it with something else. Any suggestions?There are a lot of great plastic SLR's that came out late in the film era. The Pentax ZX series, unfortunately, aren't among them. I'd avoid them and opt for a Super Program instead, which are great cameras! I also really like the Nikon Nx000 cameras like the N2000 and N8008 for the money.
Good point about the N75, however, does it have the screw drive for older AF lenses?At least in the Nikon Range, I'd lean towards the early 2000's models. A Nikon N75 can be had for around $35-40, for example, and unlike the previous generation, allows use of manual and aperture priority modes with "G" lenses. Even an F5 only runs about $300.
I had a Super Program when I also had my K1000 SE. I didn't like the push-button arrangement for shutter speeds, but it was a great little camera otherwise.There are a lot of great plastic SLR's that came out late in the film era. The Pentax ZX series, unfortunately, aren't among them. I'd avoid them and opt for a Super Program instead, which are great cameras! I also really like the Nikon Nx000 cameras like the N2000 and N8008 for the money.
I've found the Nikons to be confusing and overly complicated when it comes to menus and workflow. Canon has a mode dial and some buttons. Nikon's have a confusing layout. It might just be me though...
It's not just you. And its not just Nikon. Many of those later electronic film SLR's can be clumsy to navigate. But they're still easier than most DSLR's. And anything can be learned and gotten used to.
Good point about the N75, however, does it have the screw drive for older AF lenses?
I have an N80, which is quiet, fast, light, but won't meter with manual focus lenses.
I had a Super Program when I also had my K1000 SE. I didn't like the push-button arrangement for shutter speeds, but it was a great little camera otherwise.
This depends a lot on the model. I've heard the F5 is needlessly complicated. But go back to the F4 and there are NO menus. My N80 and N90s both are pretty simple. The N90s is just push and hold a button, then turn the clicky-wheel to go through the options. No menus, per se.
The N80 does have one menu, for custom settings, which requires reference to a chart or the back of the manual.
N6006 was a great camera. I had a buddy that had one in the 90s, and I liked it.I still have my N6006 with auto focus and PASM and other features that works flawlessly. The 35-70mm zoom is not suppose to be so sharp. But I suppose I could replace it with something else. Any suggestions?
The member you quoted was talking about an N75, which was a different camera to the N70. They're not even close; I think the N75 is 10 years newer or something.The N70 is so bad that I don't really shoot with it.
I know them as bridge-cameras.Remember the ZLRs? They're cheap too (if you can find one that works).
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?