Are 1990s SLRs the top value in 35 mm film cameras today?

[darkosaric]

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.

Yes, it has. I have F75 and F80, F80 sits better in hand, but there is nothing wrong with F75 (except that rewinds whole film on load and counts backwards = how many shots are left).
F75 also does not meter with manual focus lenses, for that best cheapest option is F801 imo.

 

[Smaug01]

Yes, it has. I have F75 and F80, F80 sits better in hand, but there is nothing wrong with F75 (except that rewinds whole film on load and counts backwards = how many shots are left).
F75 also does not meter with manual focus lenses, for that best cheapest option is F801 imo.

I like this. It's unconventional, but it can prevent us from fogging our exposed film and we know exactly how many shots we will get from the roll. I think it should be the convention.

My Canon Rebel G does this too. I have to admit that just last week, I accidentally popped the back open, as I thought I had finished the roll. Half the roll was still left, so I fogged a few frames, at least. I quickly snapped the back shut, then fired 3 shots with the lens cap on to get by the frames that were exposed. All my already-exposed frames were safe in the cartridge.

Yes, it was my fault, and I should've checked, but it saved a few frames anyhow.

 

[MattKing]

I like it too, except when I'm photographing something where I am trying to keep track and the order of the frame numbers matters.
You end up with your first shot on frame 36, your second shot on frame 35, ... and your last shot on frame 1.

 

[Ariston]

There are pros and cons. I like having the option to put my camera in a bag and cut out what I've exposed so far so I can go ahead and develop it.

 

[film_man]

Yup. I really think the EOS 1N is the best value camera ever. I got mine for £90 which gives me a rugged camera, excellent metering, a fast motordrive, every EF lens ever made with stabilisation, good AF, a 100% viewfinder and for an extra £15 I put an Ec-S screen to make manual focusing a breeze. It is just excellent. Sure, I use the Leica M4 a lot more than the 1N but £800 of 60s mechanical perfection will never win in "value" terms.

Actually scratch that. I have a EOS 300 in a drawer somewhere that still works. You can get one of these for twice the price of a lens cap nowadays and it does all the above the 1N does. It's just a bit slower and a bit flimsier. But...£5. Can't argue with that. It's value doubles whenever I load fresh batteries in it...

 

[Paul Howell]

I agree, in terms of pure value the early pro level cameras are a steal, not only the EOS 1 and N, Nikon F4, Pentax PZ1, and although in many ways an odd camera the Minolta 9si, although doesn't have a mental body, has lots of feature, fast motor drive, and top shutter speed of 1/1200 of a second, I paid $15 for mine, gave it way to a friend who wanted to start shooting film. .

 

[ciniframe]

Plastoblob (my made up word) 35mm SLR cameras may be a good value, in some cases cheap enough to be disposable. Buy 3 or 4 now and throw them away if or when they fail.
But...for me at least, they evince no joy in holding or use. And since most all of them were autofocus their screens were optimized for viewing but not manual focusing.
For a little more money I’d rather have something like, oh how about a Nikkormat FT2. Still not expensive, good for photography and in a pinch can substitute for a hammer. (Yes, I know, a bit of hyperbole but well, you get the picture.)
For sheer joy, I still get a thrill from holding and using my Pen F and OM-1 cameras. (As an aside, Olympus should should be SHOT for calling one of their digital cameras a pen f, there is only one Pen F and it uses 35mm film.)

 

[Smaug01]

I like it too, except when I'm photographing something where I am trying to keep track and the order of the frame numbers matters.
You end up with your first shot on frame 36, your second shot on frame 35, ... and your last shot on frame 1.

Agreed, that's annoying. If it was the only camera I shot, I would get used to it, but it's not so it's annoying.
The intended customers likely had it for their only camera.

 

[Ariston]

Plastoblob (my made up word) 35mm SLR cameras may be a good value, in some cases cheap enough to be disposable. Buy 3 or 4 now and throw them away if or when they fail.
But...for me at least, they evince no joy in holding or use. And since most all of them were autofocus their screens were optimized for viewing but not manual focusing.
For a little more money I’d rather have something like, oh how about a Nikkormat FT2. Still not expensive, good for photography and in a pinch can substitute for a hammer. (Yes, I know, a bit of hyperbole but well, you get the picture.)
For sheer joy, I still get a thrill from holding and using my Pen F and OM-1 cameras. (As an aside, Olympus should should be SHOT for calling one of their digital cameras a pen f, there is only one Pen F and it uses 35mm film.)

I think your opinion is in line with most new film shooters, which is is probably what keeps the prices of these cameras so low. I understand not wanting to use a camera that doesn't inspire you. On the focusing issue, though, most of the Nikons I've handled have a focus meter that (for me) works even better than a split prism for my aging eyes.

 

[Smaug01]

.. I understand not wanting to use a camera that doesn't inspire you.

I'm surprised sometimes by what inspires me. I thought for the longest time that it could only be a mechanical 35 mm SLR.
Then, I opened my mind a bit to a camera with aperature priority and mechanical B and flash sync speed. I love it.
Then, I opened my mind a bit more to consider the AF cameras I used to sell and turn my nose up at in the 90s. I remember the N90s being particularly nice. So I bought one for $20 on ebay and got an AF lens for it. I love it. It feels DIFFERENT, and not as satisfying from a tactile point of view, but I found that on my street photography outings downtown that I missed far fewer shots and got more keepers with an AF body and zoom lens than with a MF body and a prime. With a good enough zoom lens and enough light, I usually couldn't tell the difference anyway.

That got me thinking: The results are better with an AF camera and a zoom lens, why am I pushing myself so hard toward MF and primes?

What it is is that with a good AF body on one of the auto modes and a good zoom lens, the technical aspects of making the photo disappear and it becomes a more pure photographic experience; less gear-centric and more composition-centric.

At some point, this madness will probably bring me full circle back to digital, until I realize it has no charm and start all over again.

On the focusing issue, though, most of the Nikons I've handled have a focus meter that (for me) works even better than a split prism for my aging eyes.

That little focusing aid dot is great with a slow lens and low light, even with my middling eyes. (was 20/20, but now that I'm 43, I suspect it's declining a bit)

 

[wiltw]

Plastoblob (my made up word) 35mm SLR cameras may be a good value, in some cases cheap enough to be disposable. Buy 3 or 4 now and throw them away if or when they fail.
But...for me at least, they evince no joy in holding or use. And since most all of them were autofocus their screens were optimized for viewing but not manual focusing.
For a little more money I’d rather have something like, oh how about a Nikkormat FT2. Still not expensive, good for photography and in a pinch can substitute for a hammer. (Yes, I know, a bit of hyperbole but well, you get the picture.)
For sheer joy, I still get a thrill from holding and using my Pen F and OM-1 cameras. (As an aside, Olympus should should be SHOT for calling one of their digital cameras a pen f, there is only one Pen F and it uses 35mm film.)

^^^
Once all the manufacturers started cramming more information into the viewfinder, the magnification of the focus screens were lowered in order to fit all the extra stuff into the viewfinder. And then AF diverted half the light to the AF sensor, causing manufacturers to brighten the view by using less coarse (and less accurate!) focusing screens.

I still think the heyday of the SLR was during the 1960's and 1970's, when focusing screens were accurate for manual focus and magnifications were 0.90X and higher. AF technology may be great for aging eyes, but not for assessment of focus accuracy with manual focus adjustments. OTOH, I have found little need to manually adjust what AF has set!

 

[Paul Howell]

I understand not wanting to use a camera that doesn't inspire you.

When I was a working PJ i could see my editor face when I told I miss a story because my F2 didn't inspire me, I guess my unemployment check might inspire me. Must just be me, the camera is tool, what inspires me is the shot, getting the shot, and printing the shot.

 

[mgb74]

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. ... They are wonderfully inexpensive though.

My fav 90s vintage is Minolta 800si and 600si.

Case in point. Those Minoltas use a 2CR5 lithium battery which is somewhat hard to find and expensive at the local retail outlet. But I buy Panasonic or Varta on ebay, well within date, for fairly cheap. And if/when they are not available, I have a grip for the 800si that uses AAs. If you go upscale, the Minolta Maxxum 9 used cr123 batteries. Those are much more available and will be around for a long time.

You can find these bodies for $20-40. And A-mounts lenses fairly cheap also. Cheaper than equivalent Nikon lenses.

 

[Prest_400]

That got me thinking: The results are better with an AF camera and a zoom lens, why am I pushing myself so hard toward MF and primes?

What it is is that with a good AF body on one of the auto modes and a good zoom lens, the technical aspects of making the photo disappear and it becomes a more pure photographic experience; less gear-centric and more composition-centric.

At some point, this madness will probably bring me full circle back to digital, until I realize it has no charm and start all over again.

Basically use everything, I've got different ranges. I've steered my 35mm use into P&S and AF cameras. Thrifted a mju I which is neat to carry and have a Nikon F90 as well.
I'm gonna tell something, I just rely on the automation without regret. My thought out film shooting is done on a Medium Format camera that is unmetered and fully manual, and that's where I put more effort and carry a handheld incident meter.
And it's good. The frames of the Mju and Nikon F90 printed quite well, didn't need to adjust enlarger exposure and contrast grade most of the time.

I have a Pentax MX that I adopted as "dead meter" and due to that, had it staying at home more than I'd like to admit. Turns out that when I put batteries the meter wasn't dead. Just having that simple centreweighted meter does much more favour for me to use it, specially now as I can carry it in my coat pocket.

 

[Smaug01]

Basically use everything, I've got different ranges. I've steered my 35mm use into P&S and AF cameras. Thrifted a mju I which is neat to carry and have a Nikon F90 as well.
I'm gonna tell something, I just rely on the automation without regret. My thought out film shooting is done on a Medium Format camera that is unmetered and fully manual, and that's where I put more effort and carry a handheld incident meter.
And it's good. The frames of the Mju and Nikon F90 printed quite well, didn't need to adjust enlarger exposure and contrast grade most of the time.

I have a Pentax MX that I adopted as "dead meter" and due to that, had it staying at home more than I'd like to admit. Turns out that when I put batteries the meter wasn't dead. Just having that simple centreweighted meter does much more favour for me to use it, specially now as I can carry it in my coat pocket.

Must be a big coat pocket and a small lens! ;-)

 

[Prest_400]

Must be a big coat pocket and a small lens! ;-)

Yes, the 40mm 2.8 pancake. As of the topic, I've seen Canon Rebels with the respective pancake lens being a recommended combination.
Its results may be equal or better than P&S such as Contaxes. Certainly you could get many AF SLRs instead of a Contax T these days!

 

[ciniframe]

I understand not wanting to use a camera that doesn't inspire you.


When I was a working PJ i could see my editor face when I told I miss a story because my F2 didn't inspire me, I guess my unemployment check might inspire me. Must just be me, the camera is tool, what inspires me is the shot, getting the shot, and printing the shot.

Fortunately for me it’s always been just an interesting hobby. All outlay, no income.

 

[blockend]

Must just be me, the camera is tool, what inspires me is the shot, getting the shot, and printing the shot.

Agreed. I don't lack an appreciation of fine objects, and there's a certain charm in tweaking precision turned dials. However when a shot reveals itself to me, I really don't care what camera I have. You have to work harder with manual cameras, continually adjusting exposure to be ready for the shot, so it's nice to have one automatic mode for the grab shot, but it isn't a big deal.

 

[Paul Howell]

Case in point. Those Minoltas use a 2CR5 lithium battery which is somewhat hard to find and expensive at the local retail outlet. But I buy Panasonic or Varta on ebay, well within date, for fairly cheap. And if/when they are not available, I have a grip for the 800si that uses AAs. If you go upscale, the Minolta Maxxum 9 used cr123 batteries. Those are much more available and will be around for a long time.

You can find these bodies for $20-40. And A-mounts lenses fairly cheap also. Cheaper than equivalent Nikon lenses.

I have battery grips for both which uses AAs, also for my Minolta 9 and 7. The F4 and 5 uses AA, I think they take 8. After I had a alkaline battery blow up in a Konica T 4 motor winder I've started to use standard AA, don't last as long, get them at the Dollar store 4 for a buck.

 

[Smaug01]

Yes, the 40mm 2.8 pancake. As of the topic, I've seen Canon Rebels with the respective pancake lens being a recommended combination.
Its results may be equal or better than P&S such as Contaxes. Certainly you could get many AF SLRs instead of a Contax T these days!

I have that combo: Rebel G and the 40/2.8, and yes, it is great. It's very light and portable, but not pocket sized, hence the demand for the Contax P&S, Yashica T4 and Stylus Epic. I would say the Canon 40/2.8 is better than those lenses in the subcompact P&S cameras, as they did not need to vignet the corners of the frame to cram it into a small body...

I have battery grips for both which uses AAs, also for my Minolta 9 and 7. The F4 and 5 uses AA, I think they take 8. After I had a alkaline battery blow up in a Konica T 4 motor winder I've started to use standard AA, don't last as long, get them at the Dollar store 4 for a buck.

You're talking about the "General Purpose" or "Heavy Duty" batteries? They've got about 1/2 or 1/3 the life of alkaline. Yes, they are cheap, but it is a lot of environmental waste. Have you considered some of the long shelf life NiMH Sanyo Eneloop AAs? (they hold 80% of their charge after 1 year.) I like to use those, then keep a set of expensive lithium AAs as a back-up. Those are super light, (about the same as your dollar store ones) don't leak and have a lot more capacity of alkalines or NiMH.

Sanyo Eneloops (4) w/charger: $17 - https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/prod...c_k_kj17mca4ba_eneloop_4_place_charger_4.html

Energizer lithium AAs (4): $12 - https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/prod...57_eulaa8d_ultimate_lithium_aa_batteries.html

 

[neilt3]

Must be a big coat pocket and a small lens! ;-)

I have a Pentax ME Super with a 40mm pancake lens on it , that fits in my coat picked nicely too .
The lens isn't much thicker than a lens cap , and the bodies very compact too .
I think the MX is quite compact as well .

 

[AgX]

... but it is a lot of environmental waste.

There likely are empty-batteries dumps for recycling available to most of us.

 

[neilt3]

There likely are empty-batteries dumps for recycling available to most of us.

In the U.K , most places the sell batteries take the dead ones back off you to recycle them under the WEE regulations .
Don't know about the rest of the EU .

 

[Paul Howell]

The city I live in recycle old batteries along with electronic gear a couple of times a year. The batteries I use are heaty duty non alkaline, I've been thinking about rechargeable AA, don't know they they tend blow up leak like the alkaline did it's only happened just one time, but once is enough.

 

[Smaug01]

The city I live in recycle old batteries along with electronic gear a couple of times a year. The batteries I use are heaty duty non alkaline, I've been thinking about rechargeable AA, don't know they they tend blow up leak like the alkaline did it's only happened just one time, but once is enough.

The NiMH AAs don't blow up and leak. But DO get the Sanyo Eneloop, as others don't hold a charge while sitting the same way. They're also a reputable battery company; have been making rechargeable batteries since at least the 80s. Watch out for some of the off brands like Watson. Many of those are not certified by a 3rd party safety lab (like UL) and they're known to cause fires.

The link I posted above has a charger included. They also charge a flash a LOT faster than alkaline or heavy duty; almost as fast as lithium. If you buy that set and don't like it, I'll eat my shoe.