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

[Sirius Glass]

Then it's an easy choice: Canon EOS. They have the best autofocus and the best image stabilization you can get in a film camera which will help get sharp hand held photos in low light.

This might help decide on a body: https://global.canon/en/c-museum/camera.html?s=film&s2=eos

Then you never tried the Nikon AF cameras. Both are quite comparable.

 

[Les Sarile]

I agree. I should have been a bit more specific: As I'm a landscape photographer who frequently shoots large format/medium format in the evening in restricted areas, I'd like to be able to use a 35mm film camera near night, without a tripod. The ability to meter at night and slower shutter speeds are a must. I'd also like for my potential 35mm film camera to be lighter than at least my medium format cameras (Fuji GF670/Fuji GW690III). Manual forcusing would be ideal as I've had nothing but bad luck and soft images with the Minolta Maxxum/Dynax/a-7; this camera practically forces me to use its autofocus as there's no split image screen for the Minolta Maxxum/Dynax/a-7. :/

Just to be sure, when it comes to night time shooting there is none like the Pentax LX. It is the only camera ever made that can aperture priority auto expose a shot for as long as it takes or batteries run out. All the while monitoring the scene for changes in lighting and adjusting exposure accordingly.

I have taken aperture priority autoexposures lasting hours long. This night shot of the Hoover Dam taken on Kodak Ektar 100 took about 45 minutes.

Kodak Ektar 100_31-12 by Les DMess, on Flickr

Was a real pain taking shots that last this long as there is no external indication when exposure is done. I had to keep looking through the viewfinder to see if the mirror had gone back down. Which on unpredictably long exposures was a pain. Fortunately, another user pointed me in the direction of using the flash port and I was able to device an LED indicator that would show it was done.

Shutter open indicator B by Les DMess, on Flickr

The Pentax LX also has the most variety of interchangeable viewfinders and focusing screens as well as largest viewfinder magnification.

LX Viewfinders by Les DMess, on Flickr

The Pentax LX is definitely lighter than any medium format camera. Despite it having interchangeable VF, it is more similar to fixed VF cameras like the FM3A you point out.

Size Lineup by Les DMess, on Flickr

Not like it's peers in terms of size and weight.

Three Kings by Les DMess, on Flickr

 

[manfrominternet]

Just to be sure, when it comes to night time shooting there is none like the Pentax LX. It is the only camera ever made that can aperture priority auto expose a shot for as long as it takes or batteries run out. All the while monitoring the scene for changes in lighting and adjusting exposure accordingly.

I have taken aperture priority autoexposures lasting hours long. This night shot of the Hoover Dam taken on Kodak Ektar 100 took about 45 minutes.

The Pentax LX also has the most variety of interchangeable viewfinders and focusing screens as well as largest viewfinder magnification.

The Pentax LX is definitely lighter than any medium format camera. Despite it having interchangeable VF, it is more similar to fixed VF cameras like the FM3A you point out.

Thank you so, so much for your Pentax LX comment! (I've been eyeing the Pentax LX as it is.)

I should have asked from the start, which SLR will give me the best results when using it at night? That said, I think a meter that can evaluate complex night lighting, is much more important than any other feature. I think I need a really good built-in light meter.

Can any one else chime in on this? Should I go with the Pentax LX if I want the best results for night photography?

 

[Les Sarile]

Thank you so, so much for your Pentax LX comment! (I've been eyeing the Pentax LX as it is.)

I should have asked from the start, which SLR will give me the best results when using it at night? That said, I think a meter that can evaluate complex night lighting, is much more important than any other feature. I think I need a really good built-in light meter.

Can any one else chime in on this? Should I go with the Pentax LX if I want the best results for night photography?

You previously stated "ultra-low shutter speeds", do you mean the ability to take long exposures? If so, about how long of an exposure? Also, manually using bulb mode or in aperture priority mode or both?

 

[manfrominternet]

Yes! I mean the ability to take long exposures using aperture priority. Since I have a tendency to photograph near restricted areas, I sometimes need to save as much time as possible and calculating out exposure length using bulb mode just isn’t really a possibility.

 

[OAPOli]

@Les Sarile The results speak for themselves but I wonder how the LX exposes correctly given the reciprocity characteristics of film?

 

[Les Sarile]

Yes! I mean the ability to take long exposures using aperture priority. Since I have a tendency to photograph near restricted areas, I sometimes need to save as much time as possible and calculating out exposure length using bulb mode just isn’t really a possibility.

I previously recommended a Canon EOS 1V and 3 and after testing those - as well as other Canons I have with aperture priority capability, I found out that Canon limits them all to 30 seconds max.

Given this limit, similar shot of the Hoover Dam at night taken on Fuji Velvia 100 came out underexposed even with the lens wide open at f2.8 compared to the Kodak Ektar 100 shot above. At that time, I didn't realize that the EOS 3 was telling me the shot was underexposed due to the 30 second limit in aperture priority.

Fuji RVP100F_06-22 by Les DMess, on Flickr

So if you need longer than 30 second aperture priority autoexposure then the EOS line isn't for this application. In fact, most other recommendations here may not qualify depending on how long of an aperture priority exposure you need.

 

[Les Sarile]

@Les Sarile The results speak for themselves but I wonder how the LX exposes correctly given the reciprocity characteristics of film?

Of course the LX does not account for film reciprocity. In fact there's not a camera that does. So I checked out some C41 film data sheets and they all state to test under your conditions and times. So I did.

This with Fuji 100 . .

Fuji 100 long exposure by Les DMess, on Flickr

This with Kodak Gold 100 . .

Gold 100 long exposures by Les DMess, on Flickr

Since I didn't notice any reciprocity issues I didn't bother doing anymore of these tests on other films. Instead, I would just shoot them and so far so good.

 

[JensH]

Of course the LX does not account for film reciprocity. In fact there's not a camera that does.

... except special cameras for microscopes like the Zeiss MC63.

 

[Les Sarile]

... except special cameras for microscopes like the Zeiss MC63.

I meant that there is no camera that would automatically determine reciprocity compensation as in a database of films reciprocity compensation. As I understand it with this Zeiss, you still have to manually dial in a number right? And for that you still have to read the film data of which there are none for the length of exposures that I use as they simply state to test it yourself. Judging from my results, there doesn't seem to be any compensation required. In that respect, the LX does it automatically . . .

 

[JensH]

I meant that there is no camera that would automatically determine reciprocity compensation as in a database of films reciprocity compensation. As I understand it with this Zeiss, you still have to manually dial in a number right? And for that you still have to read the film data of which there are none for the length of exposures that I use as they simply state to test it yourself. Judging from my results, there doesn't seem to be any compensation required. In that respect, the LX does it automatically . . .

Hi!
On the controller of the camera you set the dial "recipr." manually to a number matching how much reciprocity compensation the film you use needs.
Eg. "0" for acros, "3" for FP4+. This is not a simple factor for all shutter speeds...
In "Auto" mode compensation is then done automatically resulting in exposure times up to 40 minutes.

Jens

 

[ph]

Sir,

Autofocus devices are not made for manual focussing even if they have a mirror and a matte screen, so if you go for a Canon, make certain that you get the special screen for focussing. And if using an EOS for focussing manually, one may easily adapt the excellent manual Nikon, Leitz and Zeiss lenses while utilizing Canons lightmetering . Canons own lenses are useless if you decide to switch bodies.

The original Leitz R8 (late series) and R9 usually still work, even if Leitz has given up on long time servicing their own products. Contax is also an orphan, but a used one will cost less than a professional overhaul and their viewfinder is reasonably large, bright and accurate. Today I have had to choose between putting a film in my Leitz R8 or my Contax ST, the ST won beause of the versatile, contrasty and sharp 35-135 zeiss, even though it is bulky .

p.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

If autofocusing is even remotely important then just get a Canon EOS 1V and be done with it.

 

[Bill Burk]

Just had my OM-3 repaired/CLA by John Hermanson. I sent him a couple OM-4 too but he said they’re uneconomical to repair.

When buying used you want to make sure the camera has been properly stored. You want to suss out and avoid cameras that were thrown in a box in the garage.

You also don’t want cameras that have been tampered with. Look for tool marks on screws and scratches on dials, tell-tale signs than an inexperienced repair had been attempted.

I’d prefer nice looking not working un-opened cameras to working cameras with tool marks. Almost anyone can get a camera working by tinkering. But they likely oiled parts that should be dry and used the wrong lubricants. Maybe weakened fragile electrical connections.

A bit of projection in what I say because I have done all this. I prefer opening up an untouched camera that I have experience with, knowing what I know now, to opening up one that I tampered with while I was learning.

p.s. the OM’s have a surprise booby trap under the lens mount. I’d leave those to John.

 

[Les Sarile]

Just had my OM-3 repaired/CLA by John Hermanson. I sent him a couple OM-4 too but he said they’re uneconomical to repair.

Congrats as I don't see many OM3 users!
I've used John before who did a great job on my Pen FT.

 

[dave olson]

Leica R series, built like tanks, R lenses are superb
Canon F-1N, Canon EOS 3, Canon 7D
Nikon FE 2, FM 2, keep going and going

 

[Bill Burk]

Congrats as I don't see many OM3 users!
I've used John before who did a great job on my Pen FT.

Thanks!

I’ve long thought the OM-3 would be the answer to all my problems. All my other cameras have quirks that I can workaround.

But I think the OM-3 is going to be my M2 replacement.

The camera that will take a picture when I press the shutter release.

I’ve had so much experience with cameras that don’t. The OM-4’s that John said would be uneconomical to repair are cases in point.

ES-II has been serving me well but last weekend I left the shutter at 1000 after loading. I was trying to be quiet in church as I changed film and so I wound off the first few shots at 1000 (but forgot to switch back to automatic). The expected speed was around 125 so I didn’t hear it was wrong until I got to my buddy’s birthday party.

Wish you all could’ve been there it was a fun time.

 

[bryans_tx]

I just tend towards Nikon. Just like some people choose a car brand.
Currently very happy with a F5 main battle tank and N90s medium tank. Scored a sort of trifecta of lenses on local Craigslist 50 1.4, 28-70 f2.8 and hmm what was it a 17-35 2.8.
I had an eos3. Maybe one day I’ll get another but I only have one good lens…well two, but the second one, a 70-200 2.8 belongs to the GF. The other is a 40mm pancake, lol.

 

[ph]

I retract my comment above ad the Contax viewfinder being accurate and easy to use. Yesterday when I compared an ancient Ultron equipped Vitomatic IIa to a CX ST with its 35-135 Zeiss zoom, I discovered that to focus in a hurry the Voigtländer double image type rangefinder was more accurate than the split image in the Contax.. The next time i compare museum pieces, I will use the Leica.

P.

 

[manfrominternet]

I'm surprised that there's little love on here for the poor Minolta Maxxum/Dynax/a-7 or Minolta Maxxum/Dynax/a-9.

Any reason for this?

 

[M-88]

I'm surprised that there's little love on here for the poor Minolta Maxxum/Dynax/a-7 or Minolta Maxxum/Dynax/a-9.

Any reason for this?

Probably because Maxxum 9 was top of the line so pretty expensive even in digital era and Maxxum 7 saw the sunlight at the dawn of digital era, so it ended up in obscurity?

And besides, what does Minolta AF system do that Nikon AF or Canon EOS do not?

 

[benjiboy]

I personally believe the best professional quality manual focus 35 mm film S.L.R.,with a full range of custom made accessories to make it suitable for most applications a pro. user would require is the Canon New F1 AE.

 

[benjiboy]

Probably because Maxxum 9 was top of the line so pretty expensive even in digital era and Maxxum 7 saw the sunlight at the dawn of digital era, so it ended up in obscurity?

And besides, what does Minolta AF system do that Nikon AF or Canon EOS do not see.

 

[manfrominternet]

I think I personally would prefer a P67II. I like the 35mm style of body over most MF.

Would you use a Pentax 67II over a Mamiya 7II or Bronica GS-1?

 

[Pioneer]

I own the Minolta, nice camera.

I have owned the Nikon F6 but sold it because my Minolta and Canon EOS 1n were better for me.

But even though it was not on your list I would vote for the Pentax LX. Les Sarile has done a great job of reviewing it.