Give Me Your List: 35mm SLR Great emi-Pro Bodies

[SilverGlow]

What do you think is a great semi-pro AF 35mm SLR body/s that you think is the one to have, and why (no wrong answers, and give more then one if you want) and again, no pro bodies please:

I'll start:

Canon EOS-3, with battery/vertical grip.

Why?:

1. Eye control focus point selection. Minimizes re-composing.
2. E-TTL flash logic that makes nearly any flashing job a no-brainer.
3. Quiet rewind mode.
4. 45 focus points to choose from. Minimizes re-composing.
5. Up to 7 frames/second.
6. Under $200 in excellent condition used.
7. Separate light meters for body & flash.
8. Uses one's existing EF mount lenses.
9. Shutter life rated at 100,000 actuations.
10. Dust/Moisture sealed.
11. Compatible with over 60 EF lenses, several flashes, and dozens of EOS accessories.
12. 18 Custom Functions
13. 1/8,000s shutter speed

Dislikes:

1. Will fog IR film.
2. Shutter is very loud.
3. LCD prone to fading eventually.
4. Unless one has the optional battery/vert grip (takes 8 AA bats), this camera will die once the 2CR5 battery is no longer made.
5. It is a bit big and heavy.
6. Flash synch just 1/200s.

 

[ron110n]

Nikon F5

Why:
1. As a mostly rangefinder shooter, the Nikon F5 with it's AF feature and strong motor, is my alternative for a faster camera than my Leica M7.
2. My older AI-S primes from my Nikon F3HP is compatible, utilizing a Nikon Type L Focusing Screen.
3. Convenient for a bifocal spectacle person like myself on lenses over 75mm, But truthfully over 50mm frame for my eyesight.
4. There are tons of other features the F5 can offer that I can't utilize as a candid and night club shooter. I need to make a quick decision and capture the moment quick.

Cons:
1. Big and Bulky
2. Like any SLR, it is very intrusive for candid shots.
3. Flash, Tripod and Monopod dependent in low light.
4. Too many wheels and buttons that I don't need. All I need is the AF and strong motor.
5. I use the extra over head shutter at the bottom corner, only by pressing it by accident.
6. Will release the shutter when camera is on unlike my F3HP that need to be cocked.

I love my rangefinder hand held @ ISO400.

 

[2F/2F]

Canon EOS 3. They are the best bang for the buck. They sell for about $300, and often for under $200, yet they have the same exact auto focus performance as the 1V, plus ECF, which the 1V does not have. All things considered, this is the best all around AF camera that Canon has ever made, IMO.

The HUGE drawback is that they will not accept manual focus lenses, which a Nikon will. Well, they will take other brands' lenses via an adapter, but you lose auto aperture and distance scale accuracy.

 

[mudman]

Nikon F100
Pros
Smaller and Lighter and batteries last longer then the F5
Compatible with all of my AI'd and AI MF lenses
Fast shutter speed 5fps with battery grip
Quiet
battery grip is cheap now
can use any AF selection point with MF lenses sweet!
Focus indicator tells you which way to go to get in focus
Well priced now.


Cons
Wish I had the Eye control focus I used to with Canon
Uses batteries
LCD screen will fade eventually.

 

[SilverGlow]

Nikon F5

Why:
1. As a mostly rangefinder shooter, the Nikon F5 with it's AF feature and strong motor, is my alternative for a faster camera than my Leica M7.
2. My older AI-S primes from my Nikon F3HP is compatible, utilizing a Nikon Type L Focusing Screen.
3. Convenient for a bifocal spectacle person like myself on lenses over 75mm, But truthfully over 50mm frame for my eyesight.
4. There are tons of other features the F5 can offer that I can't utilize as a candid and night club shooter. I need to make a quick decision and capture the moment quick.

Cons:
1. Big and Bulky
2. Like any SLR, it is very intrusive for candid shots.
3. Flash, Tripod and Monopod dependent in low light.
4. Too many wheels and buttons that I don't need. All I need is the AF and strong motor.
5. I use the extra over head shutter at the bottom corner, only by pressing it by accident.
6. Will release the shutter when camera is on unlike my F3HP that need to be cocked.

I love my rangefinder hand held @ ISO400.

Ron, really cool picture of the drumer & bassist!

 

[SilverGlow]

Canon EOS 3. They are the best bang for the buck. They sell for about $300, and often for under $200, yet they have the same exact auto focus performance as the 1V, plus ECF, which the 1V does not have. All things considered, this is the best all around AF camera that Canon has ever made, IMO.

The HUGE drawback is that they will not accept manual focus lenses, which a Nikon will. Well, they will take other brands' lenses via an adapter, but you lose auto aperture and distance scale accuracy.

2F/2F, I didn't know that about the EOS-3 & manual focus lenses...I was thinking somkeday of buy manual focus fast 50mm prime for the 3...perhaps an adapter so I can use a zeiss lens someday...

 

[lgrabun]

Minolta Dynax/Maxxum 7.

Cheap and great lenses, honeycomb display at the back with exposure values of the scene, neat AF point selection, small and lightweight can be still used by big handed boys when grip is attached.

EDIT: Did I mention the function of storing the data of 8 last exposed rolls i.e. aperture, time and method of measuring the light?

 

[2F/2F]

2F/2F, I didn't know that about the EOS-3 & manual focus lenses...I was thinking somkeday of buy manual focus fast 50mm prime for the 3...perhaps an adapter so I can use a zeiss lens someday...

No EOS camera takes Canon manual focus lenses (except the T/S lenses, of course). This is Canon's largest drawback nowadays, IMO. I would lick their boots if they would manufacture a digital body that takes FD lenses. For the time being, I just mount my '60's Nikon glass on my 10D (and my 50 1.2L The only EF lens I have).

As far as putting an expensive manual focus lens on your 3, my POV is that the Canon EF 50mm 1.4 is a better option, unless you NEED a decent depth of field scale. It is fine as far as optical quality, it is low in cost, and any decent AF lens is a MF lens if you want it to be.

I have used all three currently available Canon 50mm lenses, and think they are all good. I have actually owned and used the 1.8 and the 1.2 extensively, and have borrowed the 1.4 several times from a friend. With the L, you pay for a metal body, a hood, and a half a stop...that's it physically, though I find images from the L do have a special something that I have only ever got from my FD 55mm f/1.2...something about the color and the way they render out of focus areas is really nice compared to the 1.4. The 1.4 is great, though. Everyone should have one on their EOS film body. The 1.8 is a piece of crap in every possible way...except for the images it forms, which are perfectly adequate. The only one of the three that has ever actually broken is the L. A $1,400 metal bodied lens, and they top it off with a plastic retaining ring.....idiots.

 

[white.elephant]

Why?:

1. Eye control focus point selection. Minimizes re-composing.

I've never shot an EOS 3. How does the eye control work?

 

[Chazzy]

I've thought about picking up an EOS 3, but I'm worried about the unusual battery and what will happen when it is no longer available. Would the Elan 7ne be a better choice?

 

[flatulent1]

I've thought about picking up an EOS 3, but I'm worried about the unusual battery and what will happen when it is no longer available. Would the Elan 7ne be a better choice?

The required 2CR5 is pretty standard, I can find it in my local Walgreens. Otherwise you could get the power booster PB-E2 (takes eight AA cells) or the dual-power battery pack BP-E1 (my personal favorite, smaller and lighter, takes four AA cells AND/OR a 2CR5).

My own pick for a good semi-pro SLR is an EOS RT. Five fps, non-moving mirror, pretty quiet, as close to a motor-driven rangefinder you're ever going to get. If I want to use C/FD lenses I use a T90 or F1N.

 

[SilverGlow]

I've never shot an EOS 3. How does the eye control work?

When you place your eye into the view finder, you move your eye around the finder and the focus point you look at when you press the shutter half way down, it lights up, and that is the focus point you use for the shot. This is great as it discourages photographers from the dreaded Lock-Focus-Recompose dance. It means evaluative metering is more accurate, and critical focus is more accurate, especially when shooting close to your subject and fast in aperture. The EOS-3 provdes a staggering 45 focus points to choose from. Now you don't have to use eye-control, and when you turn it off, focus point selection is the conventional way.

 

[c-mo]

The N90s is head and shoulders above the rest in terms of bang for your buck. When I bought my setup from KEH recently, I got an EX+ N90s, LN- 50/1.8, and BGN battery grip for the price of an EX F100 or EOS 3 body. While it's not the "best" semi-pro SLR on the used market, I figure if it was good enough for scads of National Geographic photographers (Galen Rowell, Jodi Cobb...) as recently as a few years ago, then it's certainly good enough for the likes of me.

I would even direct a beginning photographer towards the N90s over the old manual cameras. It's often as cheap or cheaper because it's not a collectible or nostalgia item. If you're like me (blind as a bat and hate wearing contacts), it becomes a no-brainer. I also have a Spotmatic on loan from my dad, but I hate using it because of the squinty finder that can scratch my glasses.

 

[Chazzy]

When you place your eye into the view finder, you move your eye around the finder and the focus point you look at when you press the shutter half way down, it lights up, and that is the focus point you use for the shot. This is great as it discourages photographers from the dreaded Lock-Focus-Recompose dance. It means evaluative metering is more accurate, and critical focus is more accurate, especially when shooting close to your subject and fast in aperture. The EOS-3 provdes a staggering 45 focus points to choose from. Now you don't have to use eye-control, and when you turn it off, focus point selection is the conventional way.

And wearing glasses doesn't make a difference?

 

[Paul Howell]

Vintage: Nikkormat EL, even had a winder, less vintage FA/FE, Cannon T90, very vintage Mirdanda EE, Alpha, Spotmatic F.

 

[flatulent1]

And wearing glasses doesn't make a difference?

Well... If you always wear glasses, do the calibration dance with glasses on. If you SOMETIMES wear glasses, I think you have a decision to make as I think it makes a difference to the camera's eyeball-rotation-sensing device.

I wear glasses, and my right eye is useless (due to a brain injury a few years ago) so I shoot with my left eye. I had no difficulty calibrating my EOS 3 ECF for left eye with glasses, and it works fine. Not that I use it often, ECF is still a bit of a novelty for me.

 

[mudman]

For glasses wearers and the EOS 3 or Elan 7ne - program one of the ECF sets for glasses, and one for contacts. That's what I always did with my Elan before I went Nikon.

 

[SilverGlow]

And wearing glasses doesn't make a difference?

For many glasses wearers, the eye-control focus will work, but you need to calibrate it first.

 

[Paul Jenkin]

I'm in the process of building a collection of cameras I owned, traded and regretted or couldn't afford in the first place! I already own one of my favourites - the Nikon F100. My most recent acquisition is one of my all-time favourites and recommends - the Olympus OM2n. Next on my list is any one from the following:

* Canon F1 / F1n
* Canon A1
* Canon T90
* Nikon F3HP
* Nikon F/F2
* Pentax LX

They all seem very cheap these days (so long as you don't wanta mint / boxed example) so I can see my store cupboard becoming a bit of an Aladdin's cave over the next couple of years. Thank heavens for an understanding (nay, encouraging...) wife!

 

[white.elephant]

For many glasses wearers, the eye-control focus will work, but you need to calibrate it first.

Wow, that just sounds amazing. I do the 'focus, recompose, shoot' dance all the time. I have an EOS-1n, and I like the camera (it seems to have many of the plusses and minuses of the EOS 3, not as many focus points), but it doesn't have the eye-control.

I'm currently going through a phase where I'm evaluating exactly which film cameras I own and which I should own (lenses, too). With film camera prices so low, it seems like I can sell what I have an swap using ebay or something with little overall cost if I plan correctly.

This thread has entered the EOS 3 into the equation. I have a suite of Canon auto focus lenses, (and a smaller selection of FD gear) and that feature is really very attractive. Thanks for this thread.

 

[james23p]

F100 with MB-15

Rugged and fast the Cam 1300 is still one of the best AF systems around.
Similar in feel and interface with my D200 so they interchange nicely.
I can use all my old MF lens as well as the newer high tech AF-S VR lens thats over 35 years of compatability!!!!!!!
Can be small without the MB-15 or large with the MB-15.
Last it just feels right and the meter has never let me down when shooting Kodachrome!

Jim

 

[Chaplain Jeff]

Hello,

Why just AF bodies?

I made more money with my Nikon FM2 / MD-12 and a Metz 45CL-1 shooting events in Dallas in the 80's and 90's than I ever made afterwards with my F4 and F5. Shooting the FM was how I paid the rent (and ate) for three years of grad school - and no one was obscessed with how "cool" my camera was if the pictures were great.

Given your conditions though, I'd say for the semi-pro photographer should look at the Nikon F100.

My personal favorite is still the F4e - shoots and matrix meters every Nikkor lens I own.
If you're shooting anything but action sports, the AF is just fine - even if not as fast as the F5.

The list would be very different if you lifted the restrictons:


Leica M5 or M6 and Nikon F comes to mind as "decent" choices...

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

The new Zeiss ZE mount lenses should work on any EOS body, for those who want high quality MF lenses for EOS. The first three available are the 85mm, 50mm, and 21mm, but eventually all the Zeiss SLR lenses will be available in ZE mount. I looked through the 85mm on a Canon body at Photoplus, and from that quick glance, it looks like a very nice lens--crisp in the sharp areas and super smooth in the soft areas.

 

[nsouto]

I'd have to go with the F100. Don't particularly like it over other Nikon bodies, but since you limited to semi-pro, that'd be my choice.

Its meter is almost as good as the pro bodies, the AF is excellent, the ergonomics are quite good and it has one feature that I like a lot: it can record exposure details to download later with an MV100, so that proper EXIF info can be created for scanned images.

The only serious downside I have with it is the inability to see the aperture setting on non-D, non AF older lenses. I suspect mine also has a slight focusing problem, but still have to prove it to myself.

Having said all that, there are some Minolta bodies I'd love to try. They had what to me still is one of the best line-ups for film slrs and lenses. Unfortunately, I have too much invested in N glass to consider a switch at this stage.

 

[Shelley-Ann]

F100 with MB-15

Rugged and fast the Cam 1300 is still one of the best AF systems around.
Similar in feel and interface with my D200 so they interchange nicely.
I can use all my old MF lens as well as the newer high tech AF-S VR lens thats over 35 years of compatability!!!!!!!
Can be small without the MB-15 or large with the MB-15.
Last it just feels right and the meter has never let me down when shooting Kodachrome!

Jim

I echo everything Jim said - except the Kodachrome part. Never used it.
I also really liked the F4s.