My third 35mm camera was a Konica T, at the time I was in college and freelancing for a couple of local papers near my school. The full time news shooter gave me a lot of grief over the shutter priority exposure, hell had a Nikon F with unmetered view finder. Then gave me more grief when the editor started to compliment me on having very consistent negatives. The Konica had a very good meter and as long I was mindful of backlight exposure was spot on. Next the motor drive, gave up the auto exposure but when freelancing for the old Sacramento Union I shot the local fashion shows. Later when shooting news for the wires, just about every shooter had a motor drive on a SLR, my second body was either a Leica or a Canon rangefinder so no motor drive. In the 70s the dept stores still had a 2 a month fashion show, the motor drive earned it's keep. In terms of AF, about 50% of the time I shoot AF in MF.
Looking for a better manual SLR
-
A
- Thread starter AndreSaulnier
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
Sold Black Nikkor 2.8cm 3.5 (s mount) with finder
- Started by Gram Nylén
-
Sold Nikon Fe10
- Started by Gram Nylén
-
For Sale M-Mount Lenses (Leica/Zeiss/Voigtlander)
- Started by Steinberg2010
-
For Sale Deardorff 5x7 (V5) Camera
- Started by Barlow
-
For Sale NEW UNUSED FIDELITY 13x18cm boxed, 4 pieces.
- Started by Philippe-Georges
Forum statistics
My third 35mm camera was a Konica T, at the time I was in college and freelancing for a couple of local papers near my school. The full time news shooter gave me a lot of grief over the shutter priority exposure, hell had a Nikon F with unmetered view finder. Then gave me more grief when the editor started to compliment me on having very consistent negatives. The Konica had a very good meter and as long I was mindful of backlight exposure was spot on. Next the motor drive, gave up the auto exposure but when freelancing for the old Sacramento Union I shot the local fashion shows. Later when shooting news for the wires, just about every shooter had a motor drive on a SLR, my second body was either a Leica or a Canon rangefinder so no motor drive. In the 70s the dept stores still had a 2 a month fashion show, the motor drive earned it's keep. In terms of AF, about 50% of the time I shoot AF in MF.
The LX winder makes much more sense than the motordrive. It uses only 4 AA batteries instead of the huge battery pack (that will have all expired now anyway), offers power rewind and despite being only 2fps, it's the fastest and slickest 2fps I've seen.
The Super-A is a dream with the Motordrive-A, despite the 8 AA batteries it handles well and provides a vertical release & grip (I still stick my elbow out though).
For cameras that reply on a disposable item to function - ie film - I find the distrust of batteries and electronics in cameras amusing. I can pick up a couple of SR/LR44 from most supermarkets. Film itself.... not so much
There's a reason cameras adopted rechargeable batteries. Ever since mercury buttons were required to lift a light meter needle, power requirements have increased. My old Nikon F601 could get though a twin cell battery in two rolls of film if the flash was on, and they cost £15 a pop in the early 1990s. Which was more expensive the shooting and developing chromes.
but the F601 is a AF, power wind camera so its drain will be significantly higher. I think @Ste_S is thinking more about those electronic shutter, maybe aperture priority, but otherwise manual cameras that were traditionally powered by one or 2 SR44 button cells--the Nikon FA, the Pentax SuperProgram, the Minolta X700, and many others. With the exception of electronics failure or bad design, these cameras tended to go forever on a single battery change. I've shot over twenty rolls on the SuperProgram and over thirty on my FA (and only 5 or 6 on the X700) and non have needed battery changes, but I do know that WalMart sells a 357 battery which is a lithium version of the SR44, so if they ever do go bad, I'll have an easier time finding the battery than a roll of FP4+.
EDIT: I should add that my favorite AF camera (and the only one I shoot regularly), the Pentax MZ-S goes though batteries at the rate of about $1 per roll. But whether that is or is not too expensive is a cost evaluation, not so much a trust evaluation. In the film world there is a lot of distrust of electronic shutters.
EDIT: I should add that my favorite AF camera (and the only one I shoot regularly), the Pentax MZ-S goes though batteries at the rate of about $1 per roll. But whether that is or is not too expensive is a cost evaluation, not so much a trust evaluation. In the film world there is a lot of distrust of electronic shutters.
Last edited:
A few AF bodies use AA or AAA, the Minolta A9000 uses AA, the Pentax SF had an adapter to use AA, while the Minolta A7000 uses AAA. I think both the Nikon F4 and 5 used AA, not sure about the N90 or F100. While the later Minolta Bodies like the 800, 600, 7 and 9 use lithium the battery grip allows use of AA.
I shot a Contax 139 for many years. It relied upon batteries. I just carried spares with me all the time. I changed them once a year and I don't remember ever having batteries fail me.
The problem is these cameras are getting long in the tooth. If the electronics fail, the camera is a doorstop. Of course you can just buy another one like if for little money if you want. A lot of us just prefer mechanical cameras because there is less to go wrong. To each their own.
My 8x10 and my Mamiya C220f don't even have meters so no batteries excect for my Pentax Spot Meters. If they fail its Sunny F16.
Last edited:
My F4 runs on AA batteries--very convenient and available practically everywhere.
I suspect that in the 90s, you couldn’t buy lithium AA batteries, so you had cameras that were willing to be big, go with 4, 6, or even 8 AA batteries (both my F4 and my N90s are big honkin’ beasts with AA batteries) and cameras that were trying to be lithe and svelt like the MZ-S went with things much smaller like two CR2 battery. As time went on, the CR2 became uncommon and now I need 2 six dollar batteries, while the F4 can get away with 4 dollar fifty lithium AAs, and last through more rolls (maybe, I haven’t actually tested the lifespan of batteries in the F4.)
When it comes to manual exposure cameras I have several that I simply rotate through: Minolta SRT-201, Minolta XD-11(with winder), Minolta X-370(winder) and a Pentax MX(winder). Were I forced to chose just one it would be a hard decision, but the MX would be it.
I was not afraid that electronics or battery will fail me. Then once battery on Nikon F3 died in the middle of shooting in Istanbul (it was fresh, but probably bad stock). Sure I replaced battery, but I have missed really nice shoot on the street, still remember the moment when I pressed the shutter and nothing happened. Couple of second too late I have used mechanical auxiliary shutter, but it was too late, the crucial moment was gone... after that I am more confident in F and F2, or M3 and M6. Still have F3, but after that, somehow I don't trust it any more. Similar situations I had with F801, and with some point and shoots, but it was not so critical as the moment with F3.
001the Canon AE-1 or AE-1P or the Nikon FM2N. Can't go wrong with any of them, provided of course they are in working order.
The Nikon, yes, but those two Canons are barely adequate for use as manual SLRs. The meters don't respond to the aperture selected, which limits their usefulness. The best reasonably priced Canon manual SLR is the FTb or FTbn. They have a fully coupled meter. If you're partial to the A-series Canons, then the AT-1 is the best choice -- manual exposure only with a cross-coupled meter. I prefer the FTb though for two reasons: 1, it isn't battery dependent (the AT-1 is) and 2, it's metering pattern is better IMO -- a 12% partial area compared to a rather weak centerweighted pattern with the AT-1.
My personal favorite for a manual exposure SLR remains the original Canon F-1, second version, aka the F-1n. But there are so many excellent manual exposure cameras to chose from, it's often my choice of a lens that will determine the camera I'll use.
My personal favorite for a manual exposure SLR remains the original Canon F-1, second version, aka the F-1n. But there are so many excellent manual exposure cameras to chose from, it's often my choice of a lens that will determine the camera I'll use.
Last edited:
If you want to stay with Minolta, I recommend the XD-11. It's the nicest they made. Aperture priority, shutter priority, and metered manual. And it's small.
What is it about that model that makes you prefer it over the earlier one... or the later "New" models.?
Thank You
My original reason for preferring the old over the new was because the old F-1 has mirror lock up and the New F-1 does not. I used the first model old F-1 for years, put hundreds of rolls of slide film through the two I owned back in the 80s. I just got so used to them, everything had become second nature to me. And I did use the mirror lock up feature. Mostly with high magnification macro or telephoto work. I especially liked the old F-1's metering pattern and the meter's accuracy.
It wasn't until years later that I finally bought an F-1n. I was aware of its advantages over the original, which is why I insisted on the "n" model when I got another F-1. What I like about it over the original are the few nice touches that Canon included on the second model. A shorter wind stroke. A plastic tip to the wind lever, making it a bit more ergonomic. A spring-loaded meter check switch (I'd left it in the "on" position before with my old ones, so this is actually a useful feature). The memo holder on the back. No more having to use masking tape and a Sharpie marker. Increased ISO, although this is a feature I've never used.
I did finally buy a New F-1 -- about six years ago. And I was very impressed at its ruggedness. I'm sure you could drive nails with that thing and it would be no worse for wear. I also discovered that I could have basically the same metering pattern as the old one with the right focusing screen -- which I bought as soon as I could find one. So I've developed an appreciation for the New one as well. But if I had to choose, I'd still take the old over the new. Mostly just because of the familiarity factor, I suppose. And the mirror lock-up, of course.
It wasn't until years later that I finally bought an F-1n. I was aware of its advantages over the original, which is why I insisted on the "n" model when I got another F-1. What I like about it over the original are the few nice touches that Canon included on the second model. A shorter wind stroke. A plastic tip to the wind lever, making it a bit more ergonomic. A spring-loaded meter check switch (I'd left it in the "on" position before with my old ones, so this is actually a useful feature). The memo holder on the back. No more having to use masking tape and a Sharpie marker. Increased ISO, although this is a feature I've never used.
I did finally buy a New F-1 -- about six years ago. And I was very impressed at its ruggedness. I'm sure you could drive nails with that thing and it would be no worse for wear. I also discovered that I could have basically the same metering pattern as the old one with the right focusing screen -- which I bought as soon as I could find one. So I've developed an appreciation for the New one as well. But if I had to choose, I'd still take the old over the new. Mostly just because of the familiarity factor, I suppose. And the mirror lock-up, of course.
Last edited:
The best of the bunch mechanicals, Nikon FM2N. The only electronics is the meter. All else is up to you. This camera enjoys a reputation for being robust and a pleasure to shoot with.
+
Great Info..... Thank You.
Which focus screen (New F1) did you like.?
I think, for 95% of the time, i prefer the 12 degree spot.
I'm not sure about the angles of each of the patterns. In the literature that I've seen, the patterns are referred to in terms of percentages. The Partial pattern, which is what I prefer is a 12% pattern. The Spot pattern is 3%. My favorite screen is the PC, the plain matte screen (C) with the 12% Partial pattern. I prefer matte because I'm often using telephotos or macro setups that are slower than f/4, so I don't have a blackened focusing aid getting in my way. I've gotten so used to matte that it has become my screen of choice. And I prefer partial because I have more precise control over exposure in unusually lit situations, which is especially good for slide photography. True, it doesn't have the precision of a Spot pattern, but I've found that often that degree of exactness isn't necessary.
10-4..... thank you
Deleted member 88956
Minolta - X500 (or 570) and not the X700, then XE-1 or 5 and SRT's, XD's have history of problems, sadly. I'd take X500 first due to overall blend of quality, small size/weight, and the ocntnually cheaper than the rest fantastic Minolta lenses
Nikon - FM2 or to go cheaper Nikkormat FT2, there are a few more, in really good shape they'll cost quite a bit, roughed up quite a bit less (and still rather fine for use)
Pentax - MX would be my first choice, but I actually like Spotmatics most, just it smells too basic for this discussion, love those old M42 lenses too
Canon - none (drum roll .. kaboom in the audience), I actually enjoy the EX, but that is half-system camera with quirks, for some reason never loved the A1, and never fell for the rest of them
Ricoh - TLS 401 for its uniqueness and recoil at every shutter release, good primer for someone who considers joining the army
, but it's a great camera and the WL view does actually work and help with many shots,
There are quite a few more SLR's, but the list of great cameras is so long, the main point is to get one that feels good, looks right, and by both stimulates use. This hobby s no longer on the cheap regardless of brand chosen. One consideration is the forward plan: going deep into lens collection and other accessories, or keeping the hardware stock low. This affects the budget long term and might allow for a superior built and top shape model with fewer add ons, or not so super yet fully unrestricting tool for a lot less.
Nikon - FM2 or to go cheaper Nikkormat FT2, there are a few more, in really good shape they'll cost quite a bit, roughed up quite a bit less (and still rather fine for use)
Pentax - MX would be my first choice, but I actually like Spotmatics most, just it smells too basic for this discussion, love those old M42 lenses too
Canon - none (drum roll .. kaboom in the audience), I actually enjoy the EX, but that is half-system camera with quirks, for some reason never loved the A1, and never fell for the rest of them
Ricoh - TLS 401 for its uniqueness and recoil at every shutter release, good primer for someone who considers joining the army
, but it's a great camera and the WL view does actually work and help with many shots, There are quite a few more SLR's, but the list of great cameras is so long, the main point is to get one that feels good, looks right, and by both stimulates use. This hobby s no longer on the cheap regardless of brand chosen. One consideration is the forward plan: going deep into lens collection and other accessories, or keeping the hardware stock low. This affects the budget long term and might allow for a superior built and top shape model with fewer add ons, or not so super yet fully unrestricting tool for a lot less.
So AndreSaulnier, three months later since your last post yet it carries on. Did you make any sort of a decision?
Last edited:
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |