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

[Smaug01]

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.

 

[ic-racer]

Good 35mm cameras from the early 2000s are easy to obtain too.

 

[Ray Morgenweck]

No. The top value is a Leica III.

 

[MattKing]

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.

 

[abruzzi]

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.

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.

 

[John Koehrer]

No. The top value is a Leica III.

Not an SLR though is it?

 

[Paul Howell]

There are many fine 90s vintage SLR that go for very little money, some from the late 80s are also a bargain, the Minotla 7000 and 9000, Pentax SF, Canon 1 and 1N, Nikon N90, while for not much more Minolta 7, Nikon F4. My fav 90s vintage is Minolta 800si and 600si. I bought 3 of each, rotate them 2 or 3 time a year. I see Pentax ZX 7 going for less than $20.00 I got mine at a yard sale a few years ago for 10, came with 28 to 90 kit zoom.

 

[138S]

In the nikon Range, if weight does not matter, or if it's wanted to balance big lenses (and to stabilize shots), the Nikon F5 (1996-2004) rocks, single issue is that it's not i-TTL flash compatible like the F6. The F5 is a full featured war machine to shot hard with it, it also starts VR funtion of modern lenses.

Good 35mm cameras from the early 2000s are easy to obtain too.

And way better choice, usually !!

F80 and F100 are impressive choices, the F65 is also a great choice, just an additional wheel would be more convenient for manual mode. All those, F65, 75, 5, 6, 80 and 100 do start VR function in the modern lenses, which is great in "available light" situations.

Of course, one may want the feel of a 1980's (or 1970s)camera, but if wanting VR then some 1990s cameras don't do it, for example the 601/801/90/70/4, instead the 1996 F5 starts VR function.

My feel is that in 35mm the F5 rules, to me it's best 35mm camera ever. The F6 it's more refined and it's i-TTL flasjh compatible, but it's a prosumer derivative while the F5 it's the last Pro war machine in the nikon range.

Not having tried much the F6, to me shooting an F5 is pure joy.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

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.

EOS mount EF 50, 35 and 40 lenses are small and low in price. No need in manual focusing.
I used this not expensive lens and can't recall missing the focus.
https://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/20-35mm.htm
Canon EOS Rebels are using available now rechargeable batteries.
https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_fr...h.TRS0&_nkw=cr2+rechargeable+battery&_sacat=0
No need to find them. Just pay for free shipping

 

[Ko.Fe.]

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.

Our family EOS 300 went on many intercontinental travels since purchase in nineties. It was back to Europe in 2019.
It just keeps on working. Purchased new back then for under 300$ with lens.

I also have Nikkormat purchased in 2019 for 20 CAD and all in it works.

 

[Smaug01]

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.

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.

Many of them also have viewfinders that are less attractive to me than many older, manual focus versions.
They are wonderfully inexpensive though.

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.

The plastic is a mixed bag too. For example, a plastic film door on an EOS body doesn't bend and doesn't need foam light seals to be light-tight. They almost always have a film cartridge window, so no need to have the film box end holder. The foams they use on the mirror damper seem to be a lot better as well.

My solution is to go out with a motorized camera like my N80 or N90s and bring a back-up like an FG. If it's anything more than a dead battery, just throw it away and buy another one. Or send it to a camerasmith as a parts body.

 

[Cholentpot]

I use an EOS A2, Elan II, and 500n. I didn't pay all that much for any of them and it sits nicely in my bag alongside my DSLRs. They share lenses and basic operation. I use them on the job when called for. The Elan does hiccup on occasion but nothing that flipping on and off can't take care of. The A2 eats through batteries and has a mode switch that I need to be careful with. The 500n is tiny and capable but no back button focus. These are all excellent cameras that are the best that 35mm film cameras had to offer in my opinion. I wonder how time will treat them though.

 

[benveniste]

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.

 

[Ariston]

I have three N90S cameras that are just outstanding. When I shoot E-6, I put them on matrix metering and forget it. If I didn't have Nikon lenses, I would jump all over an A2E or Elan iie, for that eye-controlled focus that you will not find on any digital camera anywhere.

Unbelievable bargains. All of them. Lucky for us they don't look as cool as the old manual SLRs, or they would cost a lot more.

 

[jim10219]

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.

 

[Cholentpot]

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'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...

 

[jim10219]

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.

 

[Cholentpot]

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 have a handful of both Nikon and Canons from the same era. The Canons win hands down.

Now, if you go back 10-15 years from that the Nikons win hands down.

 

[BobD]

Remember the ZLRs? They're cheap too (if you can find one that works).

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

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 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?

 

[Smaug01]

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.

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.

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 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.

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.

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.

 

[Cholentpot]

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.

The N70 is so bad that I don't really shoot with it.

 

[Smaug01]

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?

N6006 was a great camera. I had a buddy that had one in the 90s, and I liked it.

Try your zoom first. If it's a Nikkor, it's probably very good. I have a Sigma 28-80 f/3.5-5.6 aspherical for my Rebel G that is very sharp and light, with macro focusing, too. Aside from being slow, it's shockingly good. These are really cheap on ebay.

Failing that, the 50/1.8 D and 35/2 AF and AF-D are great lenses in fast prime form. I prefer 35 mm for most everyday situations; 50 is either too close or too far for my taste. 35-70/2.8 Nikkors are also good, but big and heavy. I could do 95% of what I need to do with a 24, 35, 85 and 200 mm prime set.

The N70 is so bad that I don't really shoot with it.

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.

Re. N70s: I remember selling N70s new in the 90s. I didn't care for the interface, but a lot of people did. They didn't like the silly cartoonish interface of the N50, but didn't need the much more expensive N90s. I didn't like the N50 either; they were too dumbed-down. I preferred the N6006, as it was basically a low-priced version of the N90s. Same interface, slower, louder motor drive, but added a built-in flash. N8008s were a step up in build quality, and the predecessor of the N90s. Same build quality, but a bit smaller, slower and lighter.

 

[AgX]

Remember the ZLRs? They're cheap too (if you can find one that works).

I know them as bridge-cameras.

 

[blockend]

Entry level AF SLRs are great if you think of them as compact cameras with reflex viewfinders. Kind of semi-disposable, tricked out, point and shoots. If you want longevity, look elsewhere.