Hey chuck. We should meet up sometime. Maybe you're actually willing to give helpful advice in person. In exchange, you can take a picture of me.
(I must be poor.)
I like Minolta just fine in general. Their lenses are a known quality to me, and a good one at that. But every time I look at an
XK, I'm a little put off by the size compared to something like the
Pentax LX. I am going to take my newer
XD, 24/2.8 Rokkor, and newer heavier-duty tripod out for some night shooting to test it out (both on tripod and handheld), but I don't have a lot of confidence in its dampening given my experience with the previous copy I owned.
That said, how much stock do folks put in the idea that, as we are so far removed from the era when these 'cool' 35mm SLRs were being manufactured, and with the used camera market being a crap shoot mostly of stuff that other people didn't care for, camera condition matters more than whatever the original specs claimed in regard to things like shutter/mirror dampening?
Speaking of the
FE, it would be on the short list if I wasn't somewhat let down by the performance of its cousin the
FM in the 1/30-1sec range. But given the above question, I'm not sure if my prejudice is rightly directed against the Copal Square as such. Maybe the poor performance is simply due to wear & tear.
As for why I haven't bought an LX yet, two reasons. 1.) I don't know much about the lenses. I need to do more research, especially into what the good wide angle is among the SMC Takumars, its availability, and if it's reasonably priced. (I only need one good WA. Anywhere from 20-28, as long as it's
good. A good 50 is a given, and a good tele would be icing on the cake) I've been burned on so many 35mm SLR used lenses (mostly for Nikon), that I'm very hesitant to commit to any system until I can sniff out the availability of good condition, quality lenses. 2.) Even though I love the way it looks, I'm concerned that for the price of a relatively flawlessly-functioning example would too close to that of a newer camera to justify the risk that comes with age. I guess I could say that about the Minolta, Nikon, Olympus, etc. etc. cameras as well. But that's why I'm asking the forum. Maybe one of these various brands of old-timers is better than the others for my purposes.
Les Sarile, that you can prove the suitability of your camera with the photos you share and accounts you give of its use makes me think that the LX
is the choice for my purposes - among the subset of older pro-level 35mm SLRs, at least. Would you share how you acquired yours? Things you would look out for if you were buying another?
I think I'm making progress here. My choices seem clearer. Here's where I think I stand right now, with selections based on the advice shared in this thread.
- Nikon (FE/FE2/F4, etc.) - Not considering. Bad experience with FM. F4 too heavy. F2 (with horizontal cloth shutter and MLU) might be nice, but so far I haven't been impressed with the Nikon WA lenses that I've used. This may be unfair on its face, but most manual Nikkors I've come across on the market seem to have been used so extensively and banged around that even "EX" rated copies now suffer from bad centering and the like. Pristine copies are expensive collectibles.
- Canon EOS - Not considering, solely due to appearance. Too much like a DSLR. More likely to offend candid subjects and increases likelihood of theft.
- Minolta (XD? XK? SRT) - Maybe considering. Perhaps it's because they weren't part of a 'pro' system, but the lenses I've used generally seem to have stood the test of time better than the Nikkors at similar price points. Some question as to whether the newer/more compact bodies have adequate dampening without MLU.
- Olympus (OM-2n/OM-4, etc.)- Should consider. I've heard that there are a couple of very highly-regarded OM wides out there. Some question as to whether the newer bodies have adequate dampening without MLU.
- Pentax LX - Frontrunner among classic 35mm SLRs. Concerns addressed above.
- Voigtlander Bessa (T/R) - Frontrunners among modern rangefinders. Relative affordability, lack of mirror, and availability of newer stock are enticing. Just need to decide if the combined RF/VF is worth it. A whole world of simple and solid LTM lenses, with some superb wides.
- An alternative not mentioned in the thread so far: Bessaflex TM - Body is expensive, but modern and thus assumed more reliable(?) Need more info on availability & pricing of good, quality M42 wides. A world of cheap lenses out there, though. A slick-looking camera, equal to the Pentax LX in my estimation.
- Priced out: Leica (M and R), Contax (G and SLR).
It's going to be a good long while before I make a decision. Unless I cave and pony up for a Bessa R or Bessaflex TM, I am going to be very, very selective, and wait until I know I have something functionally flawless (i.e. practically good as new in terms of functionality, not necessarily appearance) at a reasonable (even if high-ish) price. I'll probably wait until I've worked out which of my medium format cameras I'm going to keep before I start seriously shopping for a new 35mm camera. That's going to be two or more months down the road, so any more advice or suggestions anyone has would be welcome in the meantime.
One thing I haven't addressed is the possibility of using a high quality compact/P&S camera for my purposes. The focal length and max aperture selection is much more limited, though. I guess the XA4 or Ricoh GR series (or maybe even the Contax T4 zoom) could be adequate. Any thoughts on those?