Best-built SLR with great metering?

[George Mann]

As usual, these threads turn into people praising their own cameras completely ignoring OPs criteria. His second most important requirement was "amazing viewfinder" yet even I see several shit-viewfinder cameras being suggested. Just like in real life: nobody listens, but everyone likes to talk about themselves

I don't know about amazing, but none of my recommendations have a poor viewfinder.

If he can afford it (more than $500 with lenses), the Leica SL series may be hard to beat.

 

[Horatio]

As usual, these threads turn into people praising their own cameras completely ignoring OPs criteria. His second most important requirement was "amazing viewfinder" yet even I see several shit-viewfinder cameras being suggested. Just like in real life: nobody listens, but everyone likes to talk about themselves

Please elaborate on the recommendations with sh!t viewfinders.

 

[Pioneer]

The LX has the best viewfinder hands down. I have used LOTS of cameras over the years and never found a better one. It also has awesome exposure capability that I do not think can be beat by any camera made, even today. But it does not have auto focus. It has also gained an internet reputation for poor reliability but I have never had any reliability problems with mine. I have discussed the camera with Eric Hendrickson, a very well know Pentax service tech, and he can't understand why it has been trolled as bad as it has. The only thing he can point out is that it is a very expensive camera to service or fix because of all the weather sealing that has to be replaced. However, once sealed it is very robust. For sure, if I absolutely need the most accurate exposure I can get, even in the dead of night, this is the camera I want. For that reason I use it more often than all the other cameras on this list. It certainly belongs on the A list.

The Pentax PZ1p is also an awesome camera. For the things I do it is probably one of the most capable auto exposure, auto focus, film cameras I have. Although the auto focus is not the fastest, and it only has one focus point, its' predictive auto focus which activates when Servo focus is turned on is very, very accurate. The exposure is dead on the money and it is super easy to adjust aperture or shutter speed on the fly with hyper program. For high school football and basketball this is my preferred camera. Although it is often overlooked I think the PZ1p deserves a far better reputation than it currently enjoys. It is certainly a better and more competent camera than the Pentax MZ-S.

I have used the Nikon F6 but sold it. A wonderful camera and loads of fun to work with. If I were a Nikon fan I would probably still own it. Focus speed and accuracy is amazing but, with one exception, I was not as impressed with the Nikon lenses as everyone else seems to be. However the Micro Nikkor 105/2.8 is a huge exception. THAT is an amazing lens and almost worth keeping a Nikon around just to be able to use it.

I also use the Canon EOS 1n. I love this camera as well, but mostly because of those L lenses. I do not think it is possible to beat Canon's top tier lenses right now. But it is heavy, especially with the lenses. If I were a pro shooting film I would almost surely sell everything else (except maybe the LX) and use this camera exclusively. But I am not a pro and I end up grabbing the Pentax PZ1p instead of the Canon just because of the size. I will likely sell this camera soon just because I do not use it enough to stay competent with it.

I have used some Minolta auto focus cameras but not any of their top tier cameras so I can't really comment on them.

 

[Diffraction]

I just wanted to thank everyone who's chimed in so far (and thanks to @Old Gregg for trying to keep things on-topic!). Special thanks to those who took the time to read my (lengthy) list of desiderata!

It sounds like so far, the most consistently recommended cameras are the F100 and EOS 1V/1N, followed by whatever @Huss is about to sell (haha). But a number of other intriguing alternatives have been mentioned, too. The most reasonable choice for me would probably be the EOS, as I have a Canon 5D. I don't use it currently and I only have a single lens for it, so I'm not heavily invested but I suppose it would be neat to have a single set of lenses. But I do prefer the design of the Pentax LX and some of the Contax bodies mentioned (thanks, I wouldn't have thought of these!). So plenty to think about.

 

[Huss]

Which one are you selling next?

Looking at my inventory... the SLRs I have left are from Minolta (X700, XK), Leica (RE/7/9) and Nikon (F through F6).
But I have a bunch of compact scale focus 35mm cameras I should start unloading. As well as some AF ones.
And then all those medium format cameras.. eesh.

Oh wait, there is a like new (serious) Zenit EM! Now THAT is the best mechanical 35mm SLR ever!

 

[Huss]

I just wanted to thank everyone who's chimed in so far (and thanks to @Old Gregg for trying to keep things on-topic!). Special thanks to those who took the time to read my (lengthy) list of desiderata!

It sounds like so far, the most consistently recommended cameras are the F100 and EOS 1V/1N, followed by whatever @Huss is about to sell (haha). But a number of other intriguing alternatives have been mentioned, too. The most reasonable choice for me would probably be the EOS, as I have a Canon 5D. I don't use it currently and I only have a single lens for it, so I'm not heavily invested but I suppose it would be neat to have a single set of lenses. But I do prefer the design of the Pentax LX and some of the Contax bodies mentioned (thanks, I wouldn't have thought of these!). So plenty to think about.

I recently sold my Pentax LX because from my research those cameras really seem to be living on borrowed time now. So, I let mine go while was stil working. The great Pentax guru Eric Hendrickson no longer works on them...
I've had the F100 and the F80. I really recommend the F80 because the F100 is more expensive and has serious issues with failing back latches. I think the latch on the F80 can also fail (but have not seen that) - the thing is the F80 is so under the radar it is ridiculously cheap for basically a pro grade camera.

 

[George Mann]

But I have a bunch of compact scale focus 35mm cameras I should start unloading. As well as some AF ones.
And then all those medium format cameras.. eesh.

I may be interested in these types of cameras, especially any folders you may have.

 

[Les Sarile]

Hi all,

I'm GAS-ing and am musing about which next camera I might purchase. Although I'm not sure I'll actually buy anything, I have recently got curious about what my favourite late-film-era SLR would probably be, and I thought it might create a fun discussion. Here's what I'd be looking for:

• Excellent metering: something more advanced than centre-weighted. From what I've read, it seems like most manufacturers developed great metering systems in the 80s/90s, with Nikon and Minolta maybe leading the pack. From my point of view, I would like this because I might then feel comfortable leaving my external light meter behind. My most advanced camera currently is a Minolta XE-7, and while I like it, I don't trust its meter enough to shoot in aperture priority.
• Excellent viewfinder: I'd like a very big, bright viewfinder.
• Excellent build: I know it's probably superficial of me, but I love well built cameras. Ideally it would be made entirely of metal.
• Relatively low weight & size: It doesn't have to be super-light, but I wouldn't like something huge with a big vertical grip like the Nikon F5.
• Sub 500 USD in price. That rules out the F6, sadly.

Things that would be less important to me:

• Fast autofocus: I don't shoot fast-moving scenes that much, so the AF wouldn't have to be amazing. It doesn't even have to have autofocus, I don't mind manual focus.
  
• Lens selection: I might like a 35mm, a 50mm, and an 85mm, but not much more than that.

So far, my favourite is the Minolta Maxxum 9. It ticks all the boxes, with the exception of low weight, as it weighs almost 1kg. I also have a soft spot for Minolta, and like its design. But I was wondering what else is out there. The Nikon F100 seems to fit the bill mostly, but I'm not a big fan of its design, and I've heard bad things about its plastics becoming sticky over time, which sounds horrendous. I also just found the Nikon FA, which actually looks quite neat.

Anyway, curious to hear your thoughts!

Since you said big bright viewfinder, then there is no bigger or brighter then the Pentax LX by any brand or model ever. Fortunately, Pentax also provided the most eye relief as well since they gave the LX the most extensive lineup of viewfinder accessories . . .

LX Viewfinders by Les DMess, on Flickr

You want all metal as well as relatively low weight and size . . . well that again would be the Pentax LX because relative to its peers it is smaller and lighter while being "all metal" and offering the most manual features if the batteries die as all shutter speeds - sync and above, are available. Excellent build quality - selective rain testing from assembly line as it is also the only sealed and weatherproof camera among it's peers. Titanium shutters so you won't have any concern of ever pointing it at the sun in mirror lock up mode unlike all modern cameras.

Selection 43 by Les DMess, on Flickr

In fact it is the size of the non-interchangeable viewfinder SLRs.

Size Lineup by Les DMess, on Flickr

And for the pièce de résistance, you want excellent metering, well there is no other camera ever made - past or present, film or digital, by any other brand that can meter for as long as it takes to get a proper exposure or batteries die.

This one of the Hoover Dam at night on Kodak Ektar 100 that lasted over 45 minutes . . .

Untitled by Les DMess, on Flickr

In these very dark settings, that biggest and brightest viewfinder really comes in handy!

I've tested all my aperture priority capable cameras of different brands and models and none can meter long exposures of only many minutes consistently. And by very long exposure, I have tested both of my LXs to consistently meter up to many hours long which is of course recommended by the various films datasheets to verify reciprocity failure. To date, I have yet to experience any film reciprocity failures with any of the color negatives I have used . . .

Fuji 100 long exposure by Les DMess, on Flickr

 

[Philippe-Georges]

So... in constant need of expensive repairs?

No, no, with the exception of the very 'traditional' "Sticky Mirror Syndrome", nothing happend!
But, I didn't want to disregard European car makers by quoting the Toyota Land Cruiser, the Ford Bronco, the Willy's Jeep and alike... Nothing wrong with them!
As the VW Iltis isn't made anymore, the Mercedes Gelände is out of reach (not to mention the RangeRover), the beloved LandRover (Defender) came to mind.
BTW, if you treat the LR with some decency and had an appropriate amount of IMAGINATION (and kept a roll of iron wire at hand), you could have that 4X4 workhorse run for decades!
And, if you want it or not, IMAGINATION happen to be the key in photography too!

 

[Philippe-Georges]

Since you said big bright viewfinder, then there is no bigger or brighter then the Pentax LX by any brand or model ever. Fortunately, Pentax also provided the most eye relief as well since they gave the LX the most extensive lineup of viewfinder accessories . . .
...

In these very dark settings, that biggest and brightest viewfinder really comes in handy!

I've tested all my aperture priority capable cameras of different brands and models and none can meter long exposures of only many minutes consistently. And by very long exposure, I have tested both of my LXs to consistently meter up to many hours long which is of course recommended by the various films datasheets to verify reciprocity failure. To date, I have yet to experience any film reciprocity failures with any of the color negatives I have used . . .

Fuji 100 long exposure by Les DMess, on Flickr

Yes, Les Sarile, you are absolutely right, the long exposure capacities of the LX were exceptional, and the exposure latitude of the Fuji Sensia (100ASA) alike. It was as the two were made for each other. And even more, the LX continued metering DURING the exposure and modified the exposure time when the light conditions changed, genius!

I had tree bodies and two tripods (and 9 lenses), and set up two on tripods for the long exposures (with fresh batteries), mostly for very long hours, and worked with the third handheld (Sensia 400ASA) while the two others did their work in the dark. Look here what I am trying to say: http://www.photoeil.be/books/met-jou-open-ik-oude-nachten.html.
These pictures, made in Burgundy whine cellars where there was hardly any light, took almost half a day (I set +1 in the exposure compensation for reciprocity). You can imagine that waiting for this was not an option, I had to go on with the work, hence the third camera...
So, I left the two alone in the rock cut cellars (and almost forgot them).
In order to be able to know if the exposure went on, I attached a very tiny LED light to the PC socket so I could see when the camera had finished doing its work, as the PC socket stayed 'closed' during exposure...

 

[MartinCrabtree]

I was beginning to think something had happened to Les.

 

[Les Sarile]

I just wanted to thank everyone who's chimed in so far (and thanks to @Old Gregg for trying to keep things on-topic!). Special thanks to those who took the time to read my (lengthy) list of desiderata!

It sounds like so far, the most consistently recommended cameras are the F100 and EOS 1V/1N, followed by whatever @Huss is about to sell (haha). But a number of other intriguing alternatives have been mentioned, too. The most reasonable choice for me would probably be the EOS, as I have a Canon 5D. I don't use it currently and I only have a single lens for it, so I'm not heavily invested but I suppose it would be neat to have a single set of lenses. But I do prefer the design of the Pentax LX and some of the Contax bodies mentioned (thanks, I wouldn't have thought of these!). So plenty to think about.

If you think the 5D's viewfinder is exceptionally large and bright then the 1V is the same with a 0.72X magnification. This is typical of all autofocus cameras as they all depend on their autofocusing ability and not rely on the much larger magnifications on manual cameras like the LX. If you have OM lenses you can adopt it to the EOS1V . . . but of course no autofocus and you will need an external magnifier for critical focusing and the OM Magnif Finder works on it too!

EOS1 OM by Les DMess, on Flickr

Picked this 1V on local CL from a forensics lab for supercheap and in perfect shape.

As a side note, all Canon cameras I've acquire with aperture priority only goes to 30 seconds. At least they're consistent that way as the others vary all over the place!

 

[Huss]

I was beginning to think something had happened to Les.

Les' spidey sense gets triggered when the term "LX" hits the internet!

He does try to avoid car references. I think LX is a common model trim.

As far as the brightest viewfinder? I did not notice that with mine. The Leica R8/9 and Leicaflex certainly seemed better. Nikons seemed the same. It did not stand out compared to its peers that I also use, at least not that I noticed. I did notice that its meter leds are hard to see in bright light. That stood out.

 

[Pioneer]

Les' spidey sense gets triggered when the term "LX" hits the internet!

He does try to avoid car references. I think LX is a common model trim.

As far as the brightest viewfinder? I did not notice that with mine. The Leica R8/9 and Leicaflex certainly seemed better. Nikons seemed the same. It did not stand out compared to its peers that I also use, at least not that I noticed. I did notice that its meter leds are hard to see in bright light. That stood out.

Must not be selling any Pentax LX cameras in the near future.

 

[abruzzi]

The Pentax PZ1p is also an awesome camera.

it’s definitely a very capable camera, I just don’t like how big it is, or the shape of the grip.

 

[Diffraction]

Thanks everyone, and thank you @Les Sarile for the detailed info and interesting experiments on the LX! I do remain a little bit sceptical though: I think you've definitely demonstrated that the LX is excellent at metering long exposures thanks to its film plane meter. But I'm not really interested in long exposures; I'm interested in having a meter that isn't fooled by e.g. backlight, or a black object in the center of the frame. I would think that the matrix system with its image database voodoo could work this out, but if the LX is like other centre-weighted cameras, it would probably be fooled, no?

One point: I never said I think the 5D's viewfinder is exceptional. It's all right. I'm happy with the viewfinder on my Minolta XE-7, which apparently is 0.87x. That would be great! It seems the F100 has 0.76x, and the EOS 1v and 1n have 0.72x. The Dynax 9 has 0.73x. I can't find any exact numbers on the LX, but it seems that some suggest (https://www.photo.net/discuss/threads/does-the-lx-have-a-1-1-viewfinder.409616/) that it should be at least 0.9x with the right eye piece, so that's definitely very good.

 

[Paul Howell]

I use matrix with many of my Minolta A bodies, the 9000 does not have matrix, in most cases I use the average and switch to spot metering in tricky lighting. The 9000 has 3 spot modes, general spot, shadow spot and hightlight spot, so if shooting and I want to make sure I have zone 3 details meter in shadow if I want to make sure highlights are printable use spot highlight. I also carry a handheld meter which is most accurate with backlighting when used in incident mode. As I understand it, the F5, 100 and 80 has the best martix metering, well Canon Shooters may disagree. And as odd it seems the most accurate in TTl meter I have is the Sigma SA 7 and 9, Sigma matrix metering is very good, I sometime use my SA 7 with a mid rage zoom as a hand held meter when shooting MF and LF.

 

[Les Sarile]

Thanks everyone, and thank you @Les Sarile for the detailed info and interesting experiments on the LX! I do remain a little bit sceptical though: I think you've definitely demonstrated that the LX is excellent at metering long exposures thanks to its film plane meter. But I'm not really interested in long exposures; I'm interested in having a meter that isn't fooled by e.g. backlight, or a black object in the center of the frame. I would think that the matrix system with its image database voodoo could work this out, but if the LX is like other centre-weighted cameras, it would probably be fooled, no?

One point: I never said I think the 5D's viewfinder is exceptional. It's all right. I'm happy with the viewfinder on my Minolta XE-7, which apparently is 0.87x. That would be great! It seems the F100 has 0.76x, and the EOS 1v and 1n have 0.72x. The Dynax 9 has 0.73x. I can't find any exact numbers on the LX, but it seems that some suggest (https://www.photo.net/discuss/threads/does-the-lx-have-a-1-1-viewfinder.409616/) that it should be at least 0.9x with the right eye piece, so that's definitely very good.

My Pentax LX viewfinder lineup above lists the magnification (M) and diopter (D) range if available.

BTW, if you just want a "proper exposure" with film, even the bare minimum center weighted type can produce that specially if you use color negatives because all you have to do in those "tricky" front/back lit situations is to dial the compensation to overexpose by at least 2 or three stops. Compared to digis, color negatives have so much overexposure latitude. Below, I just kept increasing exposure until I thought I hit the limit of Kodak Portra 400 and Ektar 100 well beyond what I could get with the digis and thought that would be it. Well after I got the rolls back, it seems 10+ stops overexposure was not enough for Portra and 5" was certainly not enough for Ektar. As you can see, I took the 10+ overexposed Portra and with the simplest post work, I could still get a reasonable image.

Kodak Portra 400 overexposure by Les DMess, on Flickr

Just like with the reciprocity testing I do, I also test all my films to see how much over & under exposure I can get away with and still get what I need. For instance in this image captured on Fuji 100, the cameras meter recommends a "proper exposure" at 1/60 but the water flow was so weak, I needed to hold the shutter open for at least 1 second in order to get the water effect I wanted.

Fuji 100-26-26B by Les DMess, on Flickr

So avoiding the meter getting "fooled" is really simple.

 

[Huss]

Must not be selling any Pentax LX cameras in the near future.

Just sold it. At that moment it was the greatest camera on the face of the earth.

 

[Diffraction]

Thanks all, and thanks @Les Sarile , your graphic was even more informative than I realised -- great that you list the magnification! You and @Old Gregg both made the point that centre-weighted + EV compensation where needed might actually be quite a good way to go. I've been starting to use a spot meter recently, so I'm now familiar with the Zone System and feel like I could give that a try. I might shoot a roll on my XE-7 with that approach; perhaps I've been too quick to dismiss the centre-weighted meter.

 

[Helge]

My Pentax LX viewfinder lineup above lists the magnification (M) and diopter (D) range if available.

BTW, if you just want a "proper exposure" with film, even the bare minimum center weighted type can produce that specially if you use color negatives because all you have to do in those "tricky" front/back lit situations is to dial the compensation to overexpose by at least 2 or three stops. Compared to digis, color negatives have so much overexposure latitude. Below, I just kept increasing exposure until I thought I hit the limit of Kodak Portra 400 and Ektar 100 well beyond what I could get with the digis and thought that would be it. Well after I got the rolls back, it seems 10+ stops overexposure was not enough for Portra and 5" was certainly not enough for Ektar. As you can see, I took the 10+ overexposed Portra and with the simplest post work, I could still get a reasonable image.

Kodak Portra 400 overexposure by Les DMess, on Flickr

Just like with the reciprocity testing I do, I also test all my films to see how much over & under exposure I can get away with and still get what I need. For instance in this image captured on Fuji 100, the cameras meter recommends a "proper exposure" at 1/60 but the water flow was so weak, I needed to hold the shutter open for at least 1 second in order to get the water effect I wanted.

Fuji 100-26-26B by Les DMess, on Flickr

So avoiding the meter getting "fooled" is really simple.

I wouldn’t be surprised if Porta 400 has a very real 20 stop range without being pulled.
Truly amazing film with amazing resolution for what it is able to do with dynamics and real sensitivity.

(c) Tim Parkin

 

[Moose22]

My Pentax LX viewfinder lineup above lists the magnification (M) and diopter (D) range if available.

BTW, if you just want a "proper exposure" with film, even the bare minimum center weighted type can produce that specially if you use color negatives because all you have to do in those "tricky" front/back lit situations is to dial the compensation to overexpose by at least 2 or three stop...

I appreciate this Les. I already "overexpose" the Kodak films. My personal rule us +2/3 stop and, if I miss, miss over so sometimes I'm a whole stop above what the meter reads. I'm a heck of a lot less worried about overexposing with Portra now, that's for sure.

I actually had a half dozen frames of Portra to burn a couple nights ago shooting contrasty scenes in the dark. Cityscape with streetlights and building lights. Pretty sure I overexposed a couple of those, but now I'm excited to develop the roll and see what I can recover. I was just screwing around as I wanted to put a different film in that camera, but now I'm glad I did it.

 

[PerTulip]

...

• Excellent metering: something more advanced than centre-weighted. From what I've read, it seems like most manufacturers developed great metering systems in the 80s/90s, with Nikon and Minolta maybe leading the pack. From my point of view, I would like this because I might then feel comfortable leaving my external light meter behind. My most advanced camera currently is a Minolta XE-7, and while I like it, I don't trust its meter enough to shoot in aperture priority.
• Excellent viewfinder: I'd like a very big, bright viewfinder.
• Excellent build: I know it's probably superficial of me, but I love well built cameras. Ideally it would be made entirely of metal.
• Relatively low weight & size: It doesn't have to be super-light, but I wouldn't like something huge with a big vertical grip like the Nikon F5.
• Sub 500 USD in price. That rules out the F6, sadly.....
• 
  
• The Nikon F100 seems to fit the bill mostly, but I'm not a big fan of its design, and I've heard bad things about its plastics becoming sticky over time, which sounds horrendous....!

You summed it up: F100. Yes, there are some "sticky" ones, but many people own/use them without issues.

 

[AgX]

The various modes on the T-70 is a very good alternative to aperture priority. I prefer it to AP in fact.
It’s basically biased programmed modes for different kinds of lenses and action vs still.
Of course manual is also available.

Its basic AE mode is shutter-priority AE.

 

[Helge]

Its basic AE mode is shutter-priority AE.

True and I love SP!
One of the easiest ways to get maximum or minimum aperture without losing control over the all important hand hold ability.
Also makes you think about motion blur or freezing motion as an artistic effect far more often and readily than with other program modes.

The other modes for wide and tele is a superb addition.
The tele mode can always be used to just get the shallowest DoF/highest shutter speed possible and vice versa with the wide mode.
And normal Program is a nice in between.

Forgot to mention that the build quality is really superb for the T-70. The unfairly maligned body material plastic is covering a brass frame.
Never had one fail on me. Apart from an obviously bumped corner on the battery hatch frame.