Minimal 35s

blockend · Apr 4, 2018

TTL meters were not especially intrusive. They took a button cell mercury battery that was good for a couple of years, and had a simple needle indicator which barely stole any viewfinder real estate. Later on light meters became high maintenance, and made their presence felt in battery power and screen space.

I see where the OP is coming from, and meter-less cameras have cache, but the difference between needle metering and non-metered cameras is less externally than between meter-less and external CdS cell cameras. It's impossible to tell by looking at the camera whether it's metered or not. My Nikkormat's all have light meters, but when a battery dies I rarely replace it and couldn't vouch for their accuracy anyway, so I treat them as meter-less.

Theo Sulphate · Apr 4, 2018

blockend said:
... My Nikkormat's all have light meters, but when a battery dies I rarely replace it and couldn't vouch for their accuracy anyway, so I treat them as meter-less.

As anecdotal evidence, the meter in my Nikkormat FT2, which I've been using for a few months, agrees exactly with my Sekonic L-308S in every situation where I've felt the need to meter.

Down Under · Apr 5, 2018

E. von Hoegh said:
As for angst and the turbidity of my op, my thoughts had not quite yet gelled into text; also with the typical tetrapyloctomy that takes place here, it likely wouldn't have mattered.

(...) My favorite 35s are my 5 Nikon bodies - 2 Nikkormats, 2 F2s, and an F - total investment in the bodies $250 over 25 years.The Pentax screw mounts come next, SP-F, SP-1000, H1a $20 in all three. Then the rfs, a '36 Contax II with original Sonnar, all original accesories, papers, instructions, and the original bills of sale, I looked for exactly a year for just the right never-been-serviced Contax. Not cheap, but still a steal at $279. A pair of Kievs, 4 and 4a plus 35-50-85 fsu lenses and an as new 13.5 cm Nikkor for Contax. A pair of '49 Canon IIb Leica clones, '46 Summitar so far. Pretty basic save for the Nikons which were acquired as a working outfit, also I overhauled the Contax, stripping it to the bare casting, cleaning every part, and reassembling with modern lubricants; replaced the shutter curtains & overhauled one of the IIbs, and recemented the separated front pair of the Summitar.I repair & maintain my own stuff.

+1. We are agreeing on more and more. Soon we will be announcing a Bruderschaft or even a Blutsbruderschaft!

Tetrapyoctomy? In PHOTRIO? Who wudda thunk? Gosh, you must have got up early to find that one. (Okay, there may be some in the Digital forum, but many of us happily ignore that anyway, so no damage done.)

As for threads wandering off-course, well - as a good Socialist Democrat few appropriate terms come to my mind, such as "freedom of expression" and especially "agree to disagree", the latter being what has made (most of) APUG-PHOTRIO such a great place.

Even the contrarians in this thread have all expressed themselves well and given us much interesting (and often amusing) information to mull over.

I admire your determination and above all your courage in daring to dismantle one of them Contaxes, As I use my cameras to shoot images for publication, I would never dare tackle any of my cameras (beyond loading and unloading them with film, always a high-risk practice with some old German cameras) with anything more dangerous than a cotton bud for cleaning. All my repair work 1974-2017 was done by a trusted Rollei-trained German repairman (alas, now retired) who was a whiz at tackling almost anything in photo gear, and who always warned to stay well away from any equipment tinkered with by owners at home. I have always followed this advice, and it has served me well for all those decades.

Sirius Glass · Apr 5, 2018

A meter built into the camera does not take the camera out of the minimalist camera. It is even better if the light meter works.

E. von Hoegh · Apr 5, 2018

Sirius Glass said:
A meter built into the camera does not take the camera out of the minimalist camera. (Snip)

Yes it does. It's my thread and I say so

Sirius Glass · Apr 5, 2018

Sirius Glass said:
A meter built into the camera does not take the camera out of the minimalist camera. It is even better if the light meter works.

E. von Hoegh said:
Yes it does. It's my thread and I say so

I have always said that everyone is entitled to their opinion even though it is wrong.

E. von Hoegh · Apr 5, 2018

Theo Sulphate said:
As anecdotal evidence, the meter in my Nikkormat FT2, which I've been using for a few months, agrees exactly with my Sekonic L-308S in every situation where I've felt the need to meter.

The meter in my 53 year old FT, and my 47 year old FTN both work as they should, according to Herr Gossen.

E. von Hoegh · Apr 5, 2018

Sirius Glass said:
I have always said that everyone is entitled to their opinion even though it is wrong.

That's very generous of you, misguided though you are

k.hendrik · Apr 5, 2018

Dacora Digna(there's a B & I in it) > Agfa Isoly(and she has a B too) > Box-Tengor(she's naked I think) > Agfa Clack or/and 135mm the 'Europa EU300' shutters works 3 times a year sometimes. Love this thread

blockend · Apr 5, 2018

We should make a list of 35mm SLR cameras that were made without a light meter, after meters became standard. Meter-less rangefinders and medium format cameras were more common.

ciniframe · Apr 5, 2018

Sirius Glass said:
I have always said that everyone is entitled to their opinion even though it is wrong.

Opinion....or preference. For instance I 'prefer' my OM-1 for a full frame 35mm SLR, it checks the most boxes for me. But I'm not of the 'opinion' it is a better camera than a Nikon or Canon or Minolta or Pentax or Konica or etc., it's just what I prefer.
Like this thread though. Lots of thoughtful comments.

E. von Hoegh · Apr 5, 2018

blockend said:
We should make a list of 35mm SLR cameras that were made without a light meter, after meters became standard. Meter-less rangefinders and medium format cameras were more common.

There were the early 60s pre-Spotmatics, and wasn't there a meterless "Spotmatic"? The Nikkormat FS, weren't there meterless Alpas?

E. von Hoegh · Apr 5, 2018

ciniframe said:
Opinion....or preference. For instance I 'prefer' my OM-1 for a full frame 35mm SLR, it checks the most boxes for me. But I'm not of the 'opinion' it is a better camera than a Nikon or Canon or Minolta or Pentax or Konica or etc., it's just what I prefer.
Like this thread though. Lots of thoughtful comments.

No need to justify; I wanted a system rf camera, thought and researched quite a bit. I settled on... wait for it... a pair of Kievs, 4 and 4a, and lenses 35-50-85-135. After using them a few years, no regrets, perfectly satisfied.
The OM 1 is a sweet camera

flavio81 · Apr 5, 2018

E. von Hoegh said:
You know what looks strange? An F2 body wearing an eye level finder from an F.

narsuitus said:
Since my Nikon F2 meets the original poster's criteria, I submit it as my "favorite basic and competent 35."

However, I still prefer my homemade pinhole cameras when I really want to go primitive.

Nikon F2 + 18mm lens by Narsuitus, on Flickr

Theo Sulphate said:
That plain-prism F2 is beautiful. Give it to me.

LOL

I was going to reply that my best minimalistic camera is my F2 with plain prism. And, funny enough, the plain prism I use is the one from the F!!

Another minimalist camera I love is the Spotmatic. I own three of 'em. I also have a Pentax K1000, but for me that one is too minimalistic - it seriously lacks the depth of field preview, and a self-timer could be nice.

E. von Hoegh · Apr 5, 2018

flavio81 said:
LOL

I was going to reply that my best minimalistic camera is my F2 with plain prism. And, funny enough, the plain prism I use is the one from the F!!

Another minimalist camera I love is the Spotmatic. I own three of 'em. I also have a Pentax K1000, but for me that one is too minimalistic - it seriously lacks the depth of field preview, and a self-timer could be nice.

Nope. Can't have a meter.

flavio81 · Apr 5, 2018

Roger Thoms said:
Mine is a Rollei 35s.

Roger

I owned a Rollei 35, original german model. The least ergonomic camera I've used, save for some russian cameras. It is revolting. Even my Zeiss folding Contessa has better ergonomics, and that's another quirky camera.

I sold it and got an Olympus Pen S, which came before the Rollei and is superior in many ways. I now own three of them. In fact I consider it the best camera Olympus has made (i don't like OMs, and the Pen F has a dim porrofinder.)

Poisson Du Jour · Apr 5, 2018

An Olympus XA is my constant companion in my Crumpler Miner Riot bag. The camera is protected to a good degree by an ancient polartec drawstring pouch, originally bought from REI/Seattle way back in 1993 and still serving its purpose!

flavio81 · Apr 5, 2018

E. von Hoegh said:
Nope. Can't have a meter.

Allright, then my favorite minimalistic camera is my Mamiya RB67 pro-S. You see, it doesn't have a meter nor self-timer...

... it is also far from minimalist -- interchangeable everything.

flavio81 · Apr 5, 2018

Poisson Du Jour said:
An Olympus XA is my constant companion in my Crumpler Miner Riot bag. The camera is protected to a good degree by an ancient polartec drawstring pouch, originally bought from REI/Seattle way back in 1993 and still serving its purpose!

I have considered the XA but feared vignetting and distortion. How do you feel about the lens? (the Pen S, with its 28/3.5 half frame lens, has very good image quality by many measures.)

Roger Thoms · Apr 5, 2018

flavio81 said:
I owned a Rollei 35, original german model. The least ergonomic camera I've used, save for some russian cameras. It is revolting. Even my Zeiss folding Contessa has better ergonomics, and that's another quirky camera.

I sold it and got an Olympus Pen S, which came before the Rollei and is superior in many ways. I now own three of them. In fact I consider it the best camera Olympus has made (i don't like OMs, and the Pen F has a dim porrofinder.)

Have to agree about the ergonomics, but still like the camera. It was the first “real” camera I ever bought, was 19 years old, and compared to my Kodak Hawkeye instamatic the image quality is fantastic. That being said l’ll have to check out the Pen S.

Roger

flavio81 · Apr 5, 2018

Roger Thoms said:
Have to agree about the ergonomics, but still like the camera. It was the first “real” camera I ever bought, was 19 years old, and compared to my Kodak Hawkeye instamatic the image quality is fantastic. That being said l’ll have to check out the Pen S.

Roger

I think you will like it. It has many pluses over the 35:

- same FOV but more DOF
- focusing is more precise (longer focus scale)
- focusing doesn't move accidentally so easily
- also has 3 focus preset points with stops so you can 'feel' where you are: close portrait, hyperfocal, and infinity.
- smoother shutter release
- no collapse/uncollapse needed
- lens is very recessed
- less noisy shutter
- slightly less parallax error.

Poisson Du Jour · Apr 5, 2018

flavio81 said:
I have considered the XA but feared vignetting and distortion. How do you feel about the lens? (the Pen S, with its 28/3.5 half frame lens, has very good image quality by many measures.)

No, the small faults the XA has are not enough to eliminate the camera from astute considerations. Remember it set a benchmark way, way back then in optical design and it is a very, very good lens for its time. Only very slight vignetting beyond f16. It is by and by a very sharp lens. Run a roll of TMax 100 through it and judge for yourself. There is no horizontal distortion in my pics. I get much more barrel distortion with my SMC Pentax 67 45mm or 90mm lenses!

flavio81 · Apr 5, 2018

Poisson Du Jour said:
I get much more barrel distortion with my SMC Pentax 67 45mm or 90mm lenses!

??

I had the SMC Pentax 67 90/2.8 and i don't recall it having any distortion. It was a perfect lens! In fact my first Pentax camera and lens, thanks to it, I started seeking Pentax 35mm lenses, now I have some Takumars.

As for "no vignetting beyond f16", is this a typo? Or you mean that vignetting is unavoidable?

albada · Apr 6, 2018

flavio81 said:
I also have a Pentax K1000, but for me that one is too minimalistic - it seriously lacks the depth of field preview, and a self-timer could be nice.

All K-mount (I almost wrote K-Mart ) cameras have DOF preview. You rotate the entire lens a little on its mount, as if you were starting to remove it, and the iris closes down. Clumsy, but it works.
Mark Overton

blockend · Apr 6, 2018

E. von Hoegh said:
There were the early 60s pre-Spotmatics, and wasn't there a meterless "Spotmatic"? The Nikkormat FS, weren't there meterless Alpas?

The unmetered Zenit B was available alongside the metered Zenits. The Topcon RS is the unmetered Super-D. Pentax SL was made until '68, Konica Auto-Reflex P, Praktica L2, plain prism F and F2 (arguably), Miranda Sensomat RS ('70-71), Kiev 17 (77-84), Zeiss Ikarex (-71), Exakta RTL1000 and Varex 500 (-73), Canon FP, Exa IIa (-64), last Minolta SR-1, Chinese SLRs with Minolta bayonet....

Minimal 35s

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency