Glad someone mentioned the Nikkormats. I paid $15 for my FTn. And the meter still works. Guess I need to buy some more if they’re appreciating in value. One day they may achieve Leica status!
Let us not forget Nikkormats. Built from cast iron and held together with ocean liner rivets.
These days in Australia they can be picked up for less than A$100, sometimes with a 50/2.0 lens attached.
In time the wheel of fate and fortune will turn and they will be worth much, much more. So says the gentleman who bought three from me last year to add to his collection of several dozens. A clever cookie. I reckon he will clean up big in time.
I have kept my two FT2s and a few F lenses and still use them now and then. The goodest (best) part is most early 'mats do not need batteries as they are fully manual, the EL being the notable exception.
I have never been into Canons but I did own a Minolta SRT 101 in the '70s. A wonderful camera which gave me super good results. I sold it when I went to Nikkormats. Also a Pentax K1000 which I used when traveling around Asia with a macro Takumar 50 and Hanimex wide angle and tele lenses, which is another story entirely. For another time.
All from that long ago era when men were men and cameras were built to last. Sadly vanished. The camera part, anyway.
I know that we have a lot of Nikon fanboys on this site. I am glad that many of you enjoy your Nikon cameras but I do not consider them the best bang for the buck. As a rule they are more expensive to buy, and almost always more expensive to service, than some of the other cameras mentioned here.
Very interesting observations so far.
I know that we have a lot of Nikon fanboys on this site. I am glad that many of you enjoy your Nikon cameras but I do not consider them the best bang for the buck. As a rule they are more expensive to buy, and almost always more expensive to service, than some of the other cameras mentioned here.
I seriously doubt that any one of you could reliably pick a print made by a Nikon vs a Canon vs a Minolta vs an Olympus vs a Pentax. My point is that most beginning film photographers who have very little extra cash to spend will get very reliable and very inexpensive equipment by looking at Minolta. And their results will be as high quality as their skills allow. In other words, their equipment will not be the limiting factor.
I agree with you, Pioneer. I love my SRT 201. Glad you posted this as I forgot it's sitting on the shelf with a roll of HP5 in it.
I think your choice is definitely a truly awesome camera and another one that I haven't taken out and about for at least a year. Maybe when the Minolta fun wears off I'll have to take the old girl out for a spin.My personal best bang for the buck is OM-1n black edition which I got for €25 with all working shutter speeds.
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?