Looking for a better manual SLR

[RalphLambrecht]

I currently own a Minolta X-7A and its been good for a beginner camera but it is as basic as it gets for an SLR. I'd like to upgrade to something better but I'm unsure of what to get. the ones I've been looking at are the Nikon F2, Minolta X-700 and the Canon AE1. They are all pretty common suggestions that you see online but I was wondering if anyone here has any recommendations of other cameras that could be better but not as known?

Basically all im asking for is what is your favourite intermediate level SLR

hardly an intermediate SLR but, my favorite SLR is the Hasselblad 5801c.(no AF unfortunately

 

[guangong]

Again, what is the meaning of “better”? More doodads? More automation? Greater reliability? For me, nothing is worse than battery failure or electronic malfunction. Better to keep the computer in the head than in the camera. My choice would be an all mechanical camera of high quality...they are all relatively cheap now. Nikon F or F2 would be my first choice. I have Nikons and Leicaflexes. Really, much depends upon hw a particular camera feels when you are using it.

 

[Chan Tran]

Again, what is the meaning of “better”? More doodads? More automation? Greater reliability? For me, nothing is worse than battery failure or electronic malfunction. Better to keep the computer in the head than in the camera. My choice would be an all mechanical camera of high quality...they are all relatively cheap now. Nikon F or F2 would be my first choice. I have Nikons and Leicaflexes. Really, much depends upon hw a particular camera feels when you are using it.

Which version of the F2? Some version of the F2 is more expensive than a mint F5.

 

[Wallendo]

If you want pure manual, pick up a Minolta SR-1. It is built like a tank. If you want more features the Minolta SR-T 201 offers a built in meter. Some of the fancier Minolta have capacitor issues.
If you want to switch camera families, the Nikkormat is well constructed, although finding one with a working meter may be difficult. It has a strange way of setting shutter speed but is a great camera.
If you want auto-exposure, with the option for manual, it's hard to beat the Canon AE-1 (and it uses the same batteries as current electric fence dog collars so they can easily be picked up at a local pet store.)

It sounds like you current camera has shutter issues. If you are happy with it, you can have your shutter replaced, although it will probably cost as much or more than buying a new camera.

 

[Pentode]

I had Minoltas for many decades. Since you have Minolta lenses, I would strongly recommend sticking with Minolta especially since there are so many good choices.

I completely agree. The X-700 is a very capable performer that can be found very cheap.

 

[Chan Tran]

If you want pure manual, pick up a Minolta SR-1. It is built like a tank. If you want more features the Minolta SR-T 201 offers a built in meter. Some of the fancier Minolta have capacitor issues.
If you want to switch camera families, the Nikkormat is well constructed, although finding one with a working meter may be difficult. It has a strange way of setting shutter speed but is a great camera.
If you want auto-exposure, with the option for manual, it's hard to beat the Canon AE-1 (and it uses the same batteries as current electric fence dog collars so they can easily be picked up at a local pet store.)

It sounds like you current camera has shutter issues. If you are happy with it, you can have your shutter replaced, although it will probably cost as much or more than buying a new camera.

One of the problem with the AE-1 (also the A-1) is that they don't really have metered manual mode. You have to leave the lens in A, take a look at the meter and then set the lens aperture. When you turn the lens off the A position the meter no longer indicate the correct aperture needed.

 

[Pieter12]

Which version of the F2? Some version of the F2 is more expensive than a mint F5.

There are only two versions of the F2. A titanium body version was made that can be expensive. Five different finders were made to my knowledge, any of which can be attached to any F2 body, and then there is the plain prism made for the F that also fits. It is the DP12 finder that fetches high prices--though some consider the plain prism finder more desirable. An F2 with a DP12 finder is referred to as an F2As.

 

[Chan Tran]

There are only two versions of the F2. A titanium body version was made that can be expensive. Five different finders were made to my knowledge, any of which can be attached to any F2 body, and then there is the plain prism made for the F that also fits. It is the DP12 finder that fetches high prices--though some consider the plain prism finder more desirable. An F2 with a DP12 finder is referred to as an F2As.

Not counting the titanium or the high speed version. If GuangGong said the F2 is relatively inexpensive then both a good F2 with the plain prism or one with the DP12 would fetch more money then a mint F5. I wouldn't call that relatively inexpensive for a 35mm SLR.

 

[Sirius Glass]

hardly an intermediate SLR but, my favorite SLR is the Hasselblad 501c.(no AF unfortunately

Mine is the Hasselblad 503 CX with the 30mm Fisheye, 50mm, 80mm, 100mm, 150mm, 250mm and 500mm lenses, 2XE extender and the 38mm 903 SWC for good measure.

 

[BradS]

Like others have asked, what does better look like?

I guess the Minolta X-7a is aka Minolta X-370. I had an X-370 and an X-700 and a few Minolta primes. The Minolta glass always struck me as under-rated. I actually preferred the X-370 over the X-700. Liked it so much that when I dropped it on concrete, I bought another, fully serviced from John Titterington. It traveled with me far and wide and always served me well.

I got rid of it (and most all of my 35mm gear at the time ) in a fit of madness - downsizing to “concentrate on large format”.

So anyway, what do you want to be better?

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Nikon FE gives you full auto or manual. They're good sturdy cameras and use a wide range of lenses that are cheap ... if you can't get all you want from using one of those then you need to work on your photography skills, not your gear.

+1

 

[cooltouch]

I'm also of the opinion that, since you already own a Minolta, why not just stick with Minolta. My favorite mid-level Minolta is the X570.It lacks the X700's program mode, but otherwise it is a better camera. Better because it has a fully coupled meter for manual shooting, while the X700 does not. The XD11 is also a brilliant choice -- probably Minolta's finest camera in terms of build quality.

 

[BMbikerider]

And if you already have some Minolta glass - and they are exceptional performers, then perhaps one of these three?

BTW, if you like a smooth working camera, the XE-7 has the smoothest film advance I've found in a manual camera.

I have always been a firm favourite of the Minolta marque. However they are not as common as they once were and getting a good one is becoming more of af stroke of luck. But as you already may have Minolta lenses why not stick with that make. Almost any of the SRT 100/101/303 models will exceed your personal capability. Being fully manual but with a built in meter they are a true workhorse. If I was in the market for another one I would try to find a SRT303.

At the other end of the scale and quite rare look for a Minolta XM which is Minoltas version of the F2, but used advanced (for the day) electronics. Metered (and accurate) exposures down to many seconds and up to 1/2000. Then there is the XE1 which was used as the basis for the 1st Leica automatic electronic SLR. Built like a tank but a beautiful camera to use. I have one of each of these last two, with the XM having the softest, quietest shutter of any slr I have used. The XE1 has the smoothest lever wind of any make I have used.

The downside of these is, there are virtually no spares for either (and probably all other Minolta models) should they develop a fault. But find one used and not abused, there is no reason why they should not give years more service. I have had both of mine checked over and they have been given a clean bill of health.

I have yet to find a 'poor' Minolta lens. My favourites are the 24/35 zoom, 35/70 zoom (also used by Leica) 28/85 zoom and the 70/210 zoom and the only prime I would buy is the 20mm F2.8 (if I could find one!) I prefer these zooms because primes to cover the same range would be quite heavy to carry

 

[film_man]

I know it will be heresy to some but one of the best cameras for manual focus+auto exposure is a Canon EOS 1N/3/1V with the Ec-S focus screen and one the Zeiss ZE lenses.

If you want some convential replies though my favourite manual SLRs are the Nikon F3 and the Leica R8/9. If I was ever going to go back to manual SLRs I'd first try the FM3a and if I didn't like it I'd go for one of those.

As others said though, if you have a bunch of Minolta stuff you like just find a Minolta body. No need to waste money switching systems. The photos with other brands are just as bad

 

[wy2l]

Recommend the Nikon FM3A or Zeiss Ikon ZM. Both very fine cameras. Not inexpensive, though.

 

[BradS]

Basically all I’m asking for is what is your favorite intermediate level SLR

Nikon F2

 

[darkosaric]

Nikon F2

With this the thread can be closed. Nothing is better than F2 (I personally love more original F, but F2 is better). And the prices are ridiculously low for what you get from the F2.

 

[Paul Howell]

I've owned F, F2, and F3, although I liked the F2 best, there are many other bodies that are just as good in the same price range, then a few that cost more but are worth considering. At this point we have left the world of intermediate cameras. Canon F1new, Olympus OM4, Leica R5 to R8, Pentax LX, Minolta KX, Contax.

When upgrading from F2 to 3 I really came close to a Pentax LX.

In terms of an intermediate camera, Konica T3, full read out in the viewfinder, flash syn 1/125th, mirror lockup all metal shutter blades, shutter speed preferred and manual exposure, meter is accurate. Meter will work with 2 hearing aid batteries. Lens are very good, over the years I have heard that the Japanese Government used the Konica 50 1.7 as the bench mark when testing 50mm lens. A basic set, 50 1.7 or 1.4, 135 2.5 or 3.2, and 28mm 3.5 will run under a $100. Lens range from fish eye to 1000mm. A few fast lens 57 1.2 35 2.0 and a 85 1.8. Konica is common, lots of T and T3 were made. The follow up camera the T4, is not as well built as the T3, but takes a motor winder.

 

[Pieter12]

Nikon F2

I wouldn't consider the F2 an intermediate level camera. It was top-of-the line, pro-level.

 

[abruzzi]

I wouldn't consider the F2 an intermediate level camera. It was top-of-the line, pro-level.

Certainly true, but it is (a) mid-range in price. And (b) it has essentially the simplest metering readout--center the needle (or center the LED). It doesn't support aperture or shutter priority, and of course, no auto focus. So today, where it has to compete with cameras that came much later, it is maybe midrange in features, and high end in build.

 

[jerrybro]

I started with an SRT and used various incarnations for a couple of years. I bought a new XD5 and used that until I started having winding issues. I've always had a eye for Nikon and a stint using a F3hp had me convinced to make the move. I now have an FM addiction, a number of Nikon lenses, a recently acquired Ftn to play with, and even a D300S for the misssus. I don't regret making the change.

There is a lot of reasonably priced, downright bargain, hardware out there now. As long as you don't have your eye on some rare, expensive, collectible, you can get a little used pro quality SLR in any brand you like and not get hurt if you decide to flip it.

 

[BradS]

I wouldn't consider the F2 an intermediate level camera. It was top-of-the line, pro-level.

Certainly, in its time, the Nikon F2 was the top of the line professional 35mm SLR. The price of a new Nikon F2 made it inaccessible to most amateurs and hobbyists but the feature content was not enormously different between the Nikon F2 and any other contemporary high-end amateur SLR. Today, however, Nikon F2 prices on the used market are not out of reach of amateurs . Furthermore, and arguably more importantly, we really only have the used market. We must therefore, consider not only purchase price but also the cost and existence of experienced repair technicians for a particular model, the serviceability of the model, and whole host of other non-obvious factors around robustness and survival. The fact that the Nikon F2 was designed for professional use means that it was designed from the beginning to be robust, reliable and relatively easily serviced - factors that matter more today (to me at least) than features and price.

 

[narsuitus]

Back in my film only days, I used the intermediate level Fuji and Pentax SLRs when I did not want to put my top-of-the line, pro-level, Nikon F2 SLRs in harms way.


Fuji and Pentax SLRs by Narsuitus, on Flickr

 

[__Brian]

The price of a new Nikon F2 made it inaccessible to most amateurs and hobbyists but the feature content was not enormously different between the Nikon F2 and any other contemporary high-end amateur SLR. .

I ate peanut butter for a month in 1978 to get my F2a. 40+ years later, still operates perfectly, and I still like peanut butter. The last F2 I picked up was $25, a jam fixed in 10 minutes.

 

[BradS]

I wouldn't consider the F2 an intermediate level camera. It was top-of-the line, pro-level.

Ok, fine...
Nikon FM3a