Help choosing a 35mm SLR

[Les Sarile]

Really the LX has no equal in features and looks . . .

And if you are going to use a superfast lens, you will need the biggest brightest viewfinder to nail that critical focus and there is no better.

 

[Les Sarile]

The OM3 should also be a candidate not just because it is fully mechanical but also because it is the only true spot meter in the manual focus era - not the fat spot used in others before it.

 

[cuthbert]

First 1.2 in '75? do you mean the first one made in January of '75?
Or in the Pentax brand?

Canon had a 58/1.2 in '62 and Nikon in '65.

You guys don't pay attention: the FIRST 50mm f1.2 for SLRs. In the 70s there had been a "race" to get the first 50/1.2, all the previous lenses were either 58mm or 55mm and Canon and Nikon worked hard to make the "shorter" lens. Of course this wasn't a problem for the rangefinders and Canon had a 50/1.2 already in the late 50s. The story here:

[h=1]Obsession with 50mm[/h]Having read the tale of the 55mm f/1.2 lens, did you wonder why the designer stuck to 50mm? That is because normal lenses for the 35mm format have a long history. The focal length of the normal lens was set at 5cm (50mm) by engineers of Ernst Leitz GmbH, notably Oskar Barnack and Max Berek. Then, why did they choose 50mm? There are many stories, typical of which is that the angle of view of 50mm (46 degrees diagonal, 40 degrees horizontal) is the closest to the field of view of the human eye when it is not closely focused. Other theories are that the diagonal distance of the image is close to the focal length (precisely, however, it is not 50mm), that wide lens and telephoto lens characteristics both become least evident at the focal length of 50mm and that lens characteristics are optimum at 50mm (precisely, however, such focal length cannot be limited to 50mm). In any case, only Barnack and Berek, who built this system, know the truth.


The certain fact is that the first 35mm camera of Leitz came with the Leitz Anastigmat (later called Elmax) 5cm f/3.5 as the standard lens. Camera makers of the world all started manufacturing cameras modeled after Leica, together with 5cm (50mm) normal lenses. Because of this historical background, they have been continuing producing 50mm lenses for many long years and developers and users alike have become familiar with the angle of view of 50mm lenses. Based on this history and tradition, 50mm lenses were positioned as normal. Therefore, developers at the time apparently wanted to make standard lenses for SLR cameras with the same angle of view as in the era of range-finder cameras. Designers’ obsessiveness is the seed of progress and development. The development of normal lenses started with 58mm and shifted to 55mm and then to 50mm.

http://www.nikkor.com/en/story/0049/

 

[Xmas]

Cheap and functional, but crippled. The KX is pretty much what the K1000 should have been. Full readout of shutter and aperture in viewfinder, and DOF preview. You can turn the meter off. Can be found cheaply, but not readily. The K 1000 is generally badly overpriced, probably because of photography schools' recommendations.

You are a facilities collector. Lots of people want reliability and will pay more. Simple supply and demand controls the price, the local uni just says system film camera. Web manure?

I'd never use a dept of field preview and I can still recall the shutter and aperture settings for a while.

The K1000 does have an electronic off switch if you put it back in gbag with an uncapped lens it drops the current to several years life for a silver cell, and more reliable than a mechanical switch.

It even has a battery test if the needle does not move the battery is kaput.

The K series lenses are cheap and top of range for performance and mine have a good build standard.

 

[baachitraka]

OM-1n + Zuiko 50mm f/1.2

 

[MartinCrabtree]

The LX is a pricey old camera. Mr. Sarile you're a bad bad man.

 

[baachitraka]

Occasionally I prefer to have automation, esp., photographing the street.

OM-1n & OM-2n(OTF metering and they are very good) + Zuikos.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

... Lots of people want reliability and will pay more. Simple supply and demand controls the price, the local uni just says system film camera ...

Trying to follow this discussion, I've gotten confused here. So the K1000 is better built and more reliable than the earlier KX?

I've wanted a KX for quite a while, but every one I've seen so far has been poorly cared for.

As for the LX -- sorry, guys, it's an ugly camera to me despite its features. Wouldn't take one for free.

 

[MartinCrabtree]

I don't look at equipment as a fashion show. Comes from working on Harleys for 30+ years. What intrigues me about the LX is the ability of the metering to accommodate ridiculously long exposures. And the simplicity of the system. Or the reasonable price of great glass.

Dammit you guys suck.

 

[cuthbert]

As for the LX -- sorry, guys, it's an ugly camera to me despite its features. Wouldn't take one for free.

How dare you!

I don't look at equipment as a fashion show. Comes from working on Harleys for 30+ years. What intrigues me about the LX is the ability of the metering to accommodate ridiculously long exposures. And the simplicity of the system. Or the reasonable price of great glass.

Dammit you guys suck.

Don't listen to him Martin, the LX is one of the most beautiful cameras ever, especially with the "wooden" grip:

Plus with the action finder it looks badass!

 

[M Carter]

I don't look at equipment as a fashion show...

But man, there's just something about a Minolta Rangefinder (heck plenty of the old japanese RF's). I want to recover mine with something like ostrich…

 

[GRHazelton]

But man, there's just something about a Minolta Rangefinder (heck plenty of the old japanese RF's). I want to recover mine with something like ostrich…

Ya want lovely? In a rangefinder? Try a Voigtlander Vitessa L barn door folder with the fabulous f 2 Ultron. That camera really demands a 55 Chevy BelAir convertible to properly strut its stuff. Check this link and prepare to drool! https://www.cameraquest.com/voitvitl.htm

Truly a lovely camera!

 

[Sirius Glass]

I recommend the Nikon N65, N70, N75, N90, F-100. My favorite is the F-100. I have used many Minolta SR cameras and recommend them. There is nothing wrong with Canon cameras.

 

[Chan Tran]

Just paid $17 for a perfect condition Canon A-1 and the 50mm f/1.8 FD lens. It probably never got used by me.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

How dare you!

Think of it as diversity. It's not good if everyone in a community thinks the same way.

I'll take a Pentax KX, however. I'll also appreciate a method of clearing the yellowing on my SMC 50/1.4 that doesn't damage or dry out the lens.

 

[darinwc]

Quite frankly, I dont know what all the fuss is about the Pentax LX.. Its all black.. So is the Nikon EM, Rolleiflex SLM, and a host of others.

to the OP: If you want the best made all-mechanical SLR, I think most people here would have to agree on the Nikon F2. (though many would reccomend other cameras as well.)

That said, a Nikon F2 -or any other SLR- is going to have a much different feel and sound than a leica. And of course it is larger and heavier than a leica. So rather than finding something 'like a' leica, you should define what you really want/need within the SLR world and go from there.

 

[Les Sarile]

In the Oct 1981 Modern Photography magazine, Herb Keppler put it pragmatically, "Sick of the Canon F-1, Nikon F3, Pentax LX? Who needs 'em?"

The three kings - as he referred to them, is not for everyone.

 

[cuthbert]

That said, a Nikon F2 -or any other SLR- is going to have a much different feel and sound than a leica. And of course it is larger and heavier than a leica. So rather than finding something 'like a' leica, you should define what you really want/need within the SLR world and go from there.

My LX with the mirror up sounds more or less like my Leicas.

It's also marginally lighter than a Leica M3 or M4 (570 gr. without lens) and few mm bigger (144.5x85x50 vs. 138x77x33.5), go compare it with the dimensions and weight of a F2 (not to mention the viewfinder, that is small and dim in comparison to the LX) and you'll understand all the fuss about this camera.

 

[MartinCrabtree]

Need? Who said that?

 

[cuthbert]

Need? Who said that?

YOU need one, confess it!

 

[Xmas]

Think of it as diversity. It's not good if everyone in a community thinks the same way.

I'll take a Pentax KX, however. I'll also appreciate a method of clearing the yellowing on my SMC 50/1.4 that doesn't damage or dry out the lens.

Ignore yellow works every time

 

[cuthbert]

I'll take a Pentax KX, however. I'll also appreciate a method of clearing the yellowing on my SMC 50/1.4 that doesn't damage or dry out the lens.

Strange, is it a Takumar or a K lens? If it's a Tak exposure to UV light removes the yellow that is due to the radioactive glass, but I never heard this problem with a K lens.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

Strange, is it a Takumar or a K lens? If it's a Tak exposure to UV light removes the yellow that is due to the radioactive glass, but I never heard this problem with a K lens.

It's the M42 screw mount 50/1.4 that I'd like to use on my SP500. I got the lens off eBay and didn't realize just how yellow it was. I've heard about the "wrap in tinfoil" sunlight solution, but am concerned that would dry out the lubricants or somehow damage the lens. Supposedly there's an Ikea LED reading lamp that emits enough UV to clear the lens, but I'm doubting whether such a reading lamp really does emit that much UV.

No doubt I could use the lens for just B&W.

My Pentax SP500 was my first ever serious camera. It, and its 50/2 Super Takumar, was the only camera I owned and used for 15 years. So, I'm quite fond of it and still use it.

 

[cuthbert]

Ok then it's a Takumar...yes the rear element tends to become yellow, but they are not too bad.

This a shot taken with a Canon FD 35mm f2 chrome nose:

Similar pic with a FD 50mm f1.4 WITH a B+W warming filter:

Looking inside the lens is like looking inside a yellow filter, the effect might be pleasant sometimes:

I've never seen a Takumar so yellowed, my last 50/1.4 looks like a normal lens with a skylight filter, another one is more yellowed and looks like it has a warming filter...and I use 81A and B filters very often because where I live the light is quite cruel sometimes.

So I would suggest just to let yours at daylight for some time or you can also use a tungsten conversion filter (light blue) to correct the excessive warm colour.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

In the Oct 1981 Modern Photography magazine, Herb Keppler ...

I miss those magazines and writers; what we have to read today isn't as enjoyable or satisfying (the only exceptions I can think of are Cameraquest and the MIR site). Thanks for the memory.