Film camera recommendations

[kandra]

Hello! I would like to get myself a slr film camera, but I’m torn between Nikon fm2 and Minolta srt303b. Which is better? Also what’s the difference between Minolta srt303 and 303b? Is Minolta CLE better than any of these?

 

[macfred]

Welcome to Photrio !
This is Medium formats cameras and accessories forum - If you'll stay here you will probably end up with a Hasselblad or Rolleiflex ...
Maybe Sean or an other moderator can move your thread to 35mm cameras and accessories. Good luck with your search !
Lots of useful and detailed informations here : https://www.rokkorfiles.com/

 

[Ste_S]

The Nikon FM2 is a more advanced (1/4000s shutter speed, 1/250 flash sync) and compact camera than the Minolta SRT 303b. Because of that the FM2 will be more expensive, and Nikon glass is usually more expensive than Minolta. A closer match between the SRT series in the Nikon world are the Nikkormat cameras.
The Minolta CLE isn’t a SLR, it’s a rangefinder that takes M mount (Leica) glass and will be more expensive again in terms of body and glass price.

Either way, the Minolta SRT and Nikon FM2 are both fine camera with good glass and will take good photos.

 

[R.Gould]

One good thing about the SRT range is that they are not battery dependent, they only need a battery for the meter, I have 2 SRT 101 cameras, and I use them with a hand held meter, also the Minolta c or d lenses for the SRT cameras are cheap and easily available, and very good indeed, Having used both Nikon and Minolta systems over the years I personaly would say the Minolta MF lenses are as good as the Nikon,

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Hello! I would like to get myself a slr film camera, but I’m torn between Nikon fm2 and Minolta srt303b. Which is better? Also what’s the difference between Minolta srt303 and 303b? Is Minolta CLE better than any of these?

They are both good cameras, but go with the Nikon. And I say that because of the huge used market. You will be able to get about any lens or accessory for it for reasonable money and also maintenance and service or still available.

 

[narsuitus]

Is Minolta CLE better than any of these?

The Minolta CLE is a very good camera. However, the Minolta CLE is a rangefinder camera not an SLR.

 

[guangong]

I also would go with Nikon. Reluctant about being battery and electronics dependent, I would go with an F or F2, both work horses of the camera world built to outlast the pyramids. Lenses, as already noted, are plentiful.
Nothing is worse than to have the batteries of a battery dependent camera die at the wrong time...and they only die at the wrong time, usually on the one day that the spare battery was left at home.

 

[narsuitus]

I would like to get myself a slr film camera, but I’m torn between Nikon fm2 and Minolta srt303b.

I have never owned or used the Nikon fm2 or the Minolta srt303b. I do own and use Nikon SLR 35mm cameras. I also own a few Minolta SLR 35mm cameras that were given to me but have never used them.

Nikon and Minolta made very good 35mm cameras. Nikon still makes cameras; Minolta does not. In 2003, the Minolta camera company and the Konica camera company merged. The merged company stopped making cameras in 2006. Sony acquired the merged company's digital camera production.

 

[Paul Howell]

The Minolta CL was a version of the Leica CL a compact rangefinder using the Leica M mount lens system. I've never owned a CL, over the years the Minolta version has gained a reputation as being more reliable than the Leica. The 303 was the top of the line Minolta for the all mechanical bodies. A rugged camera, only downside is that it Minolta did not make for motor drive or winder for the ST series and you need to use hearing aid batteries to run the meter. The FM has more features, takes a motor winder, and was made later than the 303. I think the 303st and 303b are the same camera. Of the 3 I would tend towards the Nikon.

 

[abruzzi]

The FM2 is also not battery dependent, some of the responses here may be misread to imply that it is. I'd also recommend the FM2, but they are near the top of the Nikon desirability list, so its hard to find a good one for less than $200, and frequently go for $300+. If you're looking for an inexpensive introduction, the FM would be good. I love the Nikkormat cameras but they are a bit funky.

 

[Ariston]

The FM2 is also not battery dependent, some of the responses here may be misread to imply that it is. I'd also recommend the FM2, but they are near the top of the Nikon desirability list, so its hard to find a good one for less than $200, and frequently go for $300+. If you're looking for an inexpensive introduction, the FM would be good. I love the Nikkormat cameras but they are a bit funky.

^^ This is a good suggestion. You can get an FM and a cheap 2-stop ND filter for much less than an FM2. Both are great cameras. I'm not familiar with Minolta's SLRs.

 

[Pioneer]

Go with Minolta and just enjoy being able to take good pictures without spending a fortune. The lenses are easily the equal of Nikon and they are much less costly.

And you will avoid the needless hype.

I recommend the SRT 101.

 

[Arthurwg]

Get a Hasselblad 503CW.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Get a Hasselblad 503CW.

Or a Hasselblad 503 CX if you do not need the power winder.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Thread moved to 35mm forum.

 

[Finny]

l own both, Nikon F2 and multiple Minoltas (101, 303, XE-5)
In my opinion, take a Minolta. Nikon cameras are very much sought after (this was already the case in the 70s), because at that time all “real professionals” and war photographers had a Nikon. It wasn't the "hard guys" who worked with Minolta, but rather people like David Hamilton ...
Anyway: Minolta has built very good, stable cameras and the lenses are great (partly adopted from Leica) and not worse than Nikon lenses, but mostly much cheaper!
I am a big Minolta fan ;-)

 

[Deleted member 88956]

In Minolta range XEs are the ones to go after. Depending on "donating" source XE, XE-1, XE-7 (all same) are the higher model. Minolta Rokkor lenses are superb by any standard. Nikon made great cameras, but priced much higher in general, although bargains can still be had.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

The Minolta CL was a version of the Leica CL a compact rangefinder using the Leica M mount lens system. I've never owned a CL, over the years the Minolta version has gained a reputation as being more reliable than the Leica. The 303 was the top of the line Minolta for the all mechanical bodies. A rugged camera, only downside is that it Minolta did not make for motor drive or winder for the ST series and you need to use hearing aid batteries to run the meter. The FM has more features, takes a motor winder, and was made later than the 303. I think the 303st and 303b are the same camera. Of the 3 I would tend towards the Nikon.

This is actually the other way around, Leica was made by Minolta.

 

[kandra]

The Minolta CLE is a very good camera. However, the Minolta CLE is a rangefinder camera not an SLR.

Hello! Thank you for replying. However, I’m new to film camera industry, possible to further elaborate the differences between a rangefinder and slr? Thank you!!

 

[kandra]

Thank you everyone for replying! Really appreciate it, take care and stay safe!
If possible, do let me know websites that sell them. Thank you!!

 

[narsuitus]

However, I’m new to film camera industry, possible to further elaborate the differences between a rangefinder and slr?

SLR and rangefinder cameras are two different types of cameras. There are many other different types of cameras (such as TLR, view, point & shoot, stereo, pinhole, panoramic).

SLR (Single-Lens-Reflex) type cameras have a built-in mirror for the photographer to use to focus the image that is produced by the camera.

Rangefinder type cameras have a built-in rangefinder for the photographer to use to focus the image produced by the camera.

The Nikon camera shown in the image below is an SLR.

The Leica camera shown in the image below is a rangefinder.

Since both cameras shown in the image below use a small-size 35mm film, both cameras are also known as small format cameras.

Some cameras use a medium-size 120 film. These cameras are known as medium format cameras. There are also SLR and rangefinder type medium format cameras.

You originally posted your question in the medium format camera forum.

The forum moderator moved your post to the 35mm Forum because all four cameras mentioned in your post (Nikon fm2, Minolta srt303b, Minolta srt303, and Minolta CLE) use small-size 35mm film.


SLR vs. Rangefinder by Narsuitus, on Flickr

 

[BradS]

Hello! Thank you for replying. However, I’m new to film camera industry, possible to further elaborate the differences between a rangefinder and slr? Thank you!!

Hi and welcome! Since you are new to film, may I suggest that you buy and read "Black and White Photography, A Basic Manual" by Henry Horenstein. Get the 2nd or 3rd edition. It's an older book from a time when photography meant film. Used copies in very good condition are available very inexpensively. This book explains the difference between SLR, TLR and rangefinder...and so much more!


Oh, and as far as which camera to get...I'd get the Nikon FM2 (or FM2N). Great camera, great optics, takes modern, widely available battery, and has a modern light meter circuit.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

How about using Google and educate yourself?

https://www.google.com/search?q=Min...7j35i39j0l6.6976j0j9&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

https://www.google.com/search?q=slr...1.69i57j0l2.6724j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

If you are using DSLR , you'll be able to find matching it SLR and use same lenses as you are using on DSLR.
Just google it.

 

[CMoore]

Hello! I would like to get myself a slr film camera, but I’m torn between Nikon fm2 and Minolta srt303b. Which is better? Also what’s the difference between Minolta srt303 and 303b? Is Minolta CLE better than any of these?

"Better" is a Very Relative, if not meaningless word.
As others have said, if you are looking for stuff, there is probably "More" available for The Nikon.
But how much do you need.?
I have had no trouble acquiring lens for my Minolta.

You would have to shoot a long time before any, functioning, SLR will much effect on the pictures you take.
Why are you torn between those two.?
They all, kind of, do the same thing.
Good Luck

 

[Donald Qualls]

There are literally dozens of good 35 mm SLR models, from at least half a dozen brands. Most of the older ones are not battery dependent, though few are as robust as the Nikon F series.

My own preference has long been for the M42 (Pentax-Praktica) mount SLRs; they have very good glass (and, like all mount choices, some pretty bad glass too), there's a fairly wide range of body features available, almost all of them fully functional without a battery except for meter, and they're easy to use. I have Pentax, Ricoh, and built-by-Ricoh Vivitar and Sears branded M42 SLRs. Many of these (due to age) will have failed meter cells, which makes them completely independent of batteries (use a hand-held meter or a metering app for your smart phone). Among M42 cameras, I'd recommend a Ricoh-built unit from the last generation; they have a metal-curtain Copal Square shutter, and ancestor of nearly all modern focal plane shutters. Later units will sync flash at 125, compared to 60 on older ones and 25-30 on many cloth-curtain SLRs.

Many M42 cameras also have split-prism focusing aids in the viewfinder, a feature that was, AFAIK, introduced by Pentax even before they had TTL metering. This makes it easier to ensure critical focus, even if your vision isn't that of an eagle. This is a common feature on newer cameras from before autofocus, but it was a big deal when it was new and is worth having.