In your opinion, what are the best modern 35mm film SLRs ever built?

Nitroplait said:

Nikon FE2 or FM3a if you insist on newish.
Not compact but a handy size you will actually want to bring along.
F100 if it must be AF.

Click to expand...

i second F100 i have one and its a beast. Basically a contax. I also own a D810 so i can easily "polaroid" on the D810 and switch if i want though find myself not even bringing the digital camera anymore just my F100, Yaschica T5 and Pentax 645N.

manfrominternet said:

Since I'm shopping around for a new-ish 35mm film SLR, I figured that I'd ask some of you more experienced professionals about this. (I've been shooting large format and medium format film for about 8 years and am working my way down to 35mm film!)

What 35mm film SLR camera systems do you think are the best to get into right now?
Which system do you think has the 'best' lenses?

I did a little research myself and settled on three cameras that I think might qualify:

-Minolta Maxxum 7 (also known as the 'Dynax 7' or 'Alpha-7')
-Nikon F6
-Contax N1

Click to expand...

I would also add Nikon F6 or Canon EOS 1V both these cameras can be found new still ! Or wait for Pentax's new SLR soon to official!

GregY said:

24 yrs on a 15cent latch is pretty good.....don't you think?

Click to expand...

I have always been careful with every camera I have had and I have never had a latch problem. There is now an inexpensive replacement available.

GregY said:

24 yrs on a 15cent latch is pretty good.....don't you think?

Click to expand...

benveniste said:

Since that 20+ years represents perhaps 500-600 openings and closings, not really, no.

Click to expand...

If the latch fails now, the problem may be more with the age of the material used for the latch than how much use it has had.

MattKing said:

If the latch fails now, the problem may be more with the age of the material used for the latch than how much use it has had.

Click to expand...

While age may have contributed somewhat, I saw reports of the problem as early as 2005. Here's a post from apug.org from 2007 reporting the same problem:

Tony-S said:

Obviously, the Canon EOS 3.

Ignore anything anyone else says.

Click to expand...

I think it’s the EOS-1V but that’s just my thoughts

srtviper15 said:

I think it’s the EOS-1V but that’s just my thoughts

Click to expand...

Sorry, but no eye-controlled focus on the 1V. Besides, the EOS-3 is much louder on film advance. You can't draw nearly as much attention with the 1V as you can with the 3!

Tony-S said:

Sorry, but no eye-controlled focus on the 1V. Besides, the EOS-3 is much louder on film advance. You can't draw nearly as much attention with the 1V as you can with the 3!

Click to expand...

ok I’ll give you that it is definitely much louder! But I did some research on the eye focus and most people said they rarely used or didn’t use the eye focus

My all time fave 35mm SLRs are these (no particular order)


Contax S2b (all mechanical, but with a build in center-weighted lightmeter and 1/4000s max shutter speed)
Minolta XD7 black edition (or XD, XD11 into other regions than EU) simply a time less classic
Nikon F100 (for all your autofocus AF-D lenses needs, feels & handles like a Nikon DSLR)
Nikon F6 (if i'd have the money for it....because it was the pinnacle of 35mm SLR development)



fave 35mm Rangefinder

Minolta CLE (a much better "Leica" CL, Minolta CL (remember, all these are being built by Minolta, Japan,
Leica had 73-76 the Joint venture with Minolta, after the CL sold itself much better than the ugly M5, Leica
rushed out of the cooperation and canceled the production - Minolta developed the CL further into the CLE,
which was being 22 years ahead of Leica, until the Leica M7 arrived into 2002...a Leica M series like the M2, M4
series is still much more expensive...and 99% of all Leica CL, Minolta CL have a broken, or only partially working
lightmeter - this is not the case with the CLE..but you pay easy 1K for a decent, mint copy)



honorable mention

35mm SLR

Pentax MX (this was my #1 35mm SLR back into 1987, great OVF, small & handy)
Pentax K1000 (a true classic, but does have issues over the decades, no-frills, basic SLR, Pentaprism could develop issues)
Nikon FM(2)/Nikon FE(2) (again, time less classic 35mm machines....i miss my black FM...)
Minolta X-700 (more plasticky, not the same build quality as the XD series, but even bigger, better & very bright OVF) "Acute Matte"
focusing screen, once can eyeball into every corner...which that tech also was being build into various Hasselblad medium format gear.



Budget option

Minolta X-300, X-300s, X-370s, and chinese clones, like Soligor, or Seagull for instance. (Access to the great Minolta MD series of lenses,
bright & huge focusing screen, X-300 does have the best build quality here)
Yashica FX-3 Super 2000 (a cheap mechanical 35mm SLR with access to the Contax Carl Zeiss lenses, build in Lightmeter, and 1/2000 Top Speed,
or the fine Yashica FR-I. (1/1000s shutter speed)


35mm Rangefinder

Yashica Electro 35 GT/GS (not the latest of the series, but 99% the same, with a great Color Yashinon Auto DX 45/1.7 lens) Beware of the "POD" issue.

easy; manufacturers picked the best ones and marked them with either 'Nikon' or 'Canon'; some with 'Pentax' or 'Olympus' and very few with'Leica'. to make selecting them easier.

Yashica said:

My all time fave 35mm SLRs are these (no particular order)


Contax S2b (all mechanical, but with a build in center-weighted lightmeter and 1/4000s max shutter speed)
Minolta XD7 black edition (or XD, XD11 into other regions than EU) simply a time less classic
Nikon F100 (for all your autofocus AF-D lenses needs, feels & handles like a Nikon DSLR)
Nikon F6 (if i'd have the money for it....because it was the pinnacle of 35mm SLR development)



fave 35mm Rangefinder

Minolta CLE (a much better "Leica" CL, Minolta CL (remember, all these are being built by Minolta, Japan,
Leica had 73-76 the Joint venture with Minolta, after the CL sold itself much better than the ugly M5, Leica
rushed out of the cooperation and canceled the production - Minolta developed the CL further into the CLE,
which was being 22 years ahead of Leica, until the Leica M7 arrived into 2002...a Leica M series like the M2, M4
series is still much more expensive...and 99% of all Leica CL, Minolta CL have a broken, or only partially working
lightmeter - this is not the case with the CLE..but you pay easy 1K for a decent, mint copy)



honorable mention

35mm SLR

Pentax MX (this was my #1 35mm SLR back into 1987, great OVF, small & handy)
Pentax K1000 (a true classic, but does have issues over the decades, no-frills, basic SLR, Pentaprism could develop issues)
Nikon FM(2)/Nikon FE(2) (again, time less classic 35mm machines....i miss my black FM...)
Minolta X-700 (more plasticky, not the same build quality as the XD series, but even bigger, better & very bright OVF) "Acute Matte"
focusing screen, once can eyeball into every corner...which that tech also was being build into various Hasselblad medium format gear.



Budget option

Minolta X-300, X-300s, X-370s, and chinese clones, like Soligor, or Seagull for instance. (Access to the great Minolta MD series of lenses,
bright & huge focusing screen, X-300 does have the best build quality here)
Yashica FX-3 Super 2000 (a cheap mechanical 35mm SLR with access to the Contax Carl Zeiss lenses, build in Lightmeter, and 1/2000 Top Speed,
or the fine Yashica FR-I. (1/1000s shutter speed)


35mm Rangefinder

Yashica Electro 35 GT/GS (not the latest of the series, but 99% the same, with a great Color Yashinon Auto DX 45/1.7 lens) Beware of the "POD" issue.

Click to expand...

I really like this list! When I held the Minolta CLE at a camera shop in NYC and played around with it a bit, I absolutely loved it. If I were to get a 35mm rangefinder, I'd gladly skip the Leicas in favor of the Minolta CLE (or maybe the Zeiss Ikon ZM ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ ).

The Pentax MX and K models are also a terrific manual cameras. (As is the then-pro-tier Pentax LX. That said, I'm surprised that few other people on this thread mentioned Pentax compared to Canons and Nikons. Then again, save for the Pentax LX and Pentax MZ-S, it seems like Pentax never really tried to make a pro-tier 35mm camera, as if it wasn't even trying to compete with Nikon or Cannon in that department, and rather aimed at the prosumer/consumer market. It seems like their focus was on medium format.)

The same can be said with the Minolta X-700. And YES, the focusing screen is super bright and a pleasure to look through. On that note, I'm glad to hear that there are a few voices in favor of the Minolta Maxxum/Dynax/Alpha line. They're undoubtedly great cameras; if you go to photographyreview.com, you'll find that the Minolta Maxxum/Dynax/a-7 has 122 review and has a grade of 4.8 out of 5, which makes this camera absolutely stellar.

I wouldn't be surprised if Nikon decided to copy the Minolta Maxxum/Dynax/a-7 for their Nikon F6.

This thread has been beaten to death but I figure I'll throw in my 2 cents, since I've owned and used a fair number of them from various brands over the last decade or so since I got into film photography in earnest.

The right answer is, there are probably many, many right answers. I've owned and used the following 35mm cameras, and they all have their pros and cons.

Canon Elan II: Probably my first choice most of the time. I came to film after years of shooting digital. My workhorse DSLR is a 5D Mk II, and the ergonomics and controls of this are a nearly perfect match. I also already have a good collection of excellent EF-mount glass. So while not all of this necessarily generalizes to everyone, this camera is fantastic for me. I love having autofocus. I love having electronically accurate shutter speeds all the way up to 1/4000th in half stops. When I'm shooting 35mm, a lot of the time I'm looking for a faster, less technical approach for the day anyway, and this camera fits that perfectly. Canon EOS bodies in general are criminally undervalued these days. I picked up this Elan II for $30 a few years ago.

Canon Rebel G: I interited one of these about a week ago. It has largely the same advantages that the Elan II does, but it's an obviously lower-tier body. The biggest thing I miss compared to the Elan II is the thumb wheel for aperture control. I'm not going to keep the camera; it's redundant. I will find someone who can give it a good home.

Olympus OM-G: I love it for how compact it is, and the access to excellent and well-priced OM Zuiko lenses. I'm not in love with the shuttter speed controls on a ring around the lens. I know some people love it, but it's not for me. Not a deal breaker though. The Olympus winder is really inexpensive right now, so I have one that basically lives on here. It's not as well-designed as the Canon winders, but it's nice to have. My biggest complaint is that the shutter will fire at something like a fixed 1/60 even if the camera is set to off or the battery is dead. I'd rather it just didn't fire, I have wasted a roll of film shooting at the wrong shutter when I thought it was shooting at the speeds I set on the dial.

Olympus OM-1: Got this at the same time as the Rebel G. This one I'm keeping. All mechanical, battery only needed for the meter. It has a self timer and mirror lockup. It has a ridiculously good viewfinder. Best I've ever looked through with the possible exception of my buddy's Pentax MX. Huge, clear, has a split image prism. Meter needs a 1.35v battery. My current solution is a cheap brass adapter that lets me use a 1.4v, size 675 zinc air hearing aid battery to get accurate meter readings. I may install a resistor in the meter circuitry to allow for a silver oxide 1.5v battery, the zinc airs have stable voltage, but I have to pull them out and expose them to air if they've been in the camera awhile, and they don't have the best lifespan.

Canon AT-1: This camera gets the least use of my 35mm collection now. I may give it away. There's absolutely nothing wrong with it. But I like the AE-1 more in every category.

Canon AE-1: I know it's overpriced due to the cult following, but frankly it's a really great camera. I love using it. I have a Canon winder that sits on it full time. It uses a modern battery. The meter in the viewfinder is very intuitive to me. I also love that it doesn't need to be switched on and off - it's smartly designed so that it's essentially always on, but preserves battery when not truly in use. I know it doesn't have the 'fully mechanical, built like a tank' thing going for it, and I suppose it will eventually die an electronic death. But I love shooting it, and I baby my cameras, so I think it will last for years to come. Canon FD lenses are good of course if you get the good ones, but they're not a particularly great value these days, since they adapt well to a lot of mirrorless cameras and they're a very recognizeable brand name.

Canon FTb QL: I think either this camera or the OM-1 will be the one that outlives me. All mechanical, heavy, indestructible. Battery only needed for the meter. Same issues with battery voltage as the OM-1. This is essentially the equivalent of my OM-1, with a few minor advantages and a few minor disadvantages. Biggest thing this has over the OM-1 is the control scheme. I like having the DoF preview on the same springloaded lever as the timer. I like having a shutter speed dial on top instead of around the lens. I wish this camera could take a winder. I wish I could get a split-image focusing screen for it, I don't like having only the microprisms. It's also not a particularly bright finder. Still, a solid camera that I like to use when I'm taking a more methodical, slow approach but still want to use 35mm film. The quick-load feature is nice, but not really necessary.

Zorki 5C: I hated this camera and gave it away. The film loading was horrible from the bottom. The focusing was difficult and imprecise. The lens was nothing special despite being of the cool retractable variety (I had an Industar-22). The rangefinder was dim. The viewfinder and rangefinder being in separate viewing windows was very inconvenient and frustrating to me. Many of these issues are ones that I can't chalk up to it being a poorly executed copy of a Leica. I don't want the Leica either. I'm just an SLR guy, I suppose.

So there's my unnecessarily detailed review of all the 35mms I have experience with. For what it's worth, I like shooting most any of them (with the obvious exception of the Zorki). I could be fine if any one of my collection was my only 35mm. But I like having the slight differences and subtle advantages of the different cameras for different types of shooting. And if I was coming to the world of 35mm from large format, I think the OM-1 is probably the one of these I'd choose.

BHuij said:

Olympus OM-G: I love it for how compact it is, and the access to excellent and well-priced OM Zuiko lenses. I'm not in love with the shuttter speed controls on a ring around the lens. I know some people love it, but it's not for me. Not a deal breaker though. The Olympus winder is really inexpensive right now, so I have one that basically lives on here. It's not as well-designed as the Canon winders, but it's nice to have. My biggest complaint is that the shutter will fire at something like a fixed 1/60 even if the camera is set to off or the battery is dead. I'd rather it just didn't fire, I have wasted a roll of film shooting at the wrong shutter when I thought it was shooting at the speeds I set on the dial.

Click to expand...

I too am very fond of the OM-G/OM-20 - it complements my other three OM bodies (OM-2n, OM-2sp, OM-4T) very well.
In my mind, the Self timer implementation on the OM-G is one of the best around.
But I think you have it wrong about the "Off" setting, or if the battery is dead.
If the battery is alive, the camera will give you Auto exposure if you have it set to Off but you release the shutter. You won't see any indicators in the viewfinder, but the auto-exposure system will turn on for a moment and use the OTF metering system to control the shutter speed.
It is only the Manual setting on the dial that disables the metering system.
And if the battery is dead or out of the camera, the mirror just locks up.

I don’t remember if I posted already but the best one ever built has to be Minolta A9 and A7.
WHen it comes to ergonomics and functions Minolta A9 and especially A7 are IMHO top of every other.
Quick Note for cheap camera the minolta A5 is small, cheap and the only one with great spot meter.

MattKing said:

I too am very fond of the OM-G/OM-20 - it complements my other three OM bodies (OM-2n, OM-2sp, OM-4T) very well.
In my mind, the Self timer implementation on the OM-G is one of the best around.
But I think you have it wrong about the "Off" setting, or if the battery is dead.
If the battery is alive, the camera will give you Auto exposure if you have it set to Off but you release the shutter. You won't see any indicators in the viewfinder, but the auto-exposure system will turn on for a moment and use the OTF metering system to control the shutter speed.
It is only the Manual setting on the dial that disables the metering system.
And if the battery is dead or out of the camera, the mirror just locks up.

Click to expand...

This is good to know - I have never used the auto mode on my OM-G (at least not on purpose). Perhaps the autoexposure isn't functioning properly on mine. All I know is I ran an entire roll through it once without remembering to switch it from "off" to "manual" and the roll came out more or less unusably thin.

manfrominternet said:

I really like this list! When I held the Minolta CLE at a camera shop in NYC and played around with it a bit, I absolutely loved it. If I were to get a 35mm rangefinder, I'd gladly skip the Leicas in favor of the Minolta CLE (or maybe the Zeiss Ikon ZM ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ ).

The Pentax MX and K models are also a terrific manual cameras. (As is the then-pro-tier Pentax LX. That said, I'm surprised that few other people on this thread mentioned Pentax compared to Canons and Nikons. Then again, save for the Pentax LX and Pentax MZ-S, it seems like Pentax never really tried to make a pro-tier 35mm camera, as if it wasn't even trying to compete with Nikon or Cannon in that department, and rather aimed at the prosumer/consumer market. It seems like their focus was on medium format.)

The same can be said with the Minolta X-700. And YES, the focusing screen is super bright and a pleasure to look through. On that note, I'm glad to hear that there are a few voices in favor of the Minolta Maxxum/Dynax/Alpha line. They're undoubtedly great cameras; if you go to photographyreview.com, you'll find that the Minolta Maxxum/Dynax/a-7 has 122 review and has a grade of 4.8 out of 5, which makes this camera absolutely stellar.

I wouldn't be surprised if Nikon decided to copy the Minolta Maxxum/Dynax/a-7 for their Nikon F6.

Click to expand...

Thank you. Well, i own the X300 black & silver, black X300a. Also X600, X700, XD7 (2x black), F80, F100 (2x), S2b, and within the next 2 weeks my CLE again...also the Electro 35 GL...further into collection the FR-I, FX3, FX3 Super, FX3 Super 2000, Electro 35 GT, GS, GTN, GSN...and some Contax bodies...my #1 SLR back into 1987 was the MX with 50/1.7 SMC-A prime.

Into short, i do really like the CLE here, and i am happy i have it way soon again, even it costed me 1k EUR into as good as new condition, with original Box. Waiting for the delivery. Have a black genuine leather half case since the past weeks already for it. Still, haven't decided for the matching prime lens yet, either way the original M-Rokkor 40/F2, or i'd go with a Voigtländer 40mm F2.8 Heliar, or Voigtländer Nokton 40/1.4 MC....but i won't buy this before spring 2024...so there's enough time to decide.

About the Canon 35mm SLRs, i've had & owned the Elan II, or as its being called here EOS 30/33V, EOS 650, EOS 10, EOS 5 & EOS 3....and i really have to say, #1 i never liked the thumbwheel, but arranged myself with it within the EOS 10D-50D, also my film bodies before, and with the 5D/5D II it's the same. Especially, the Canon 35mm AF SLR bodies are for my personal taste being way too huge, and too plasticky (if one doesn't own a EOS 1 series, for instance i'd prefer always & forever my F100 to any EOS 3)...into short, it was never a comparsion to 35mm Nikon SLRs, YMMV here... ;-)

rectoverso said:

i second F100 i have one and its a beast. Basically a contax. I also own a D810 so i can easily "polaroid" on the D810 and switch if i want though find myself not even bringing the digital camera anymore just my F100, Yaschica T5 and Pentax 645N.

Click to expand...

The F100 is fine, i have 2 decent (mint) copies...but it's not a Contax for sure, Contax is a different thing. Nice collection of gear. I couldn't myself ever justify a 36 MP Sensor, personally, 24 MP is already being "Overkill" for my taste. I shoot digital from 6 to 24 MP bodies, but mostly film, but the latest price increase (cough) of 35mm film brought me to shoot a bit more digital, than i wanted to...sadly. Because it does cost nothing. When i see the eye watering prices of a
135-36 Ektachrome 100...it's >25 EUR...which is being insane...also Ektar 100 is up to ~16 EUR into EU...crazy. Anyway, i shoot >90% of 35mm film only b&w.

Ektachrome 100 and Ektar 100

rectoverso said:

I would also add Nikon F6 or Canon EOS 1V both these cameras can be found new still ! Or wait for Pentax's new SLR soon to official!

Click to expand...

I'd really love to buy it, if it's not being too expensive, too ugly, and a fine 35mm SLR. Remember about the spare parts situation, and usually 24 months of warranty, here into the EU. If Pentax would create some Contax-esque 35mm SLR, i'd being sold...think about the K3-III, it's a way cute DSLR, albeit APS-C...

Tony-S said:

Obviously, the Canon EOS 3.

Ignore anything anyone else says.

Click to expand...

Just a reminder the question was answered a year and a half ago!

Tony-S said:

Just a reminder the question was answered a year and a half ago!

Click to expand...

The EOS 3, never. Just a plastic bricket. I've had it, as said before. I prefer my L lenses on my 5D II, sold the EOS 3 many moons ago.

Yashica said:

The EOS 3, never. Just a plastic bricket. I've had it, as said before. I prefer my L lenses on my 5D II, sold the EOS 3 many moons ago.

Click to expand...

But if you had to pick a film camera for your L lenses, what would it be?

miha said:

But if you had to pick a film camera for your L lenses, what would it be?

Click to expand...

EOS 1(n,v) But i'm not a Fan of the 35mm Canon EOS SLRs. Always Nikon, when it does come to AF. I've had bought the EOS 650, EOS 10, EOS 33V (Elan II), EOS 5, EOS 3 (35mm AF).

Thanks.

Yashica said:

Always Nikon, when it does come to AF.

Click to expand...

Care to explain why? As an ex Nikon user (from the times when F90 was recent ) I never cared much about the EOS system, however one's perspective changes over time...

miha said:

Thanks.

Care to explain why? As an ex Nikon user (from the times when F90 was recent ) I never cared much about the EOS system, however one's perspective changes over time...

Click to expand...

Said it serveral times, thanks. 1) Ergonomics (no silly "thumb wheel", but became used to this over the decades..) 2) no huge, plastique-drastique body 3) it does feel better into at least my hands, and looks better, but your milage may vary... Nikon FM, F90, F90x, F60 (yes, and love it for it's simplicity here) F80 & F100 here, digital: D70s, D40, D60, D80, D90, D7000 & D700. And i don't start with my Minolta, Yashica & Contax.

Thanks for your insight. Camera body, however, is just one side of the equation; lens is the other. I remember missing the far superior AF and IS of the EOS system from the late 90s. And since you mentioned Yashica - TL Electro-X was my very first SLR, sporting a fast f/1.4 Yashinon lens. I'm still looking for a pristine example of it on the S/H market for sentimental reasons only.