- Joined
- Nov 16, 2014
- Messages
- 822
- Format
- 35mm
Last edited by a moderator:
Three lenses, eh? Well, since cost is no object, I would pack the Canon 24mm f/1.4 L, the 85mm f/1.2 SSC Aspherical, and the 50-300mm f/4.5 L zoom. And maybe I'd sneak in a 1.4x and a 2x teleconverter also.
My favorite 35mm camera of all time is the original Canon F-1, actually the second version, the F-1n, but close enough -- followed closely by the Nikon F2. The biggest problem with taking the old F-1 is that it uses the now-extinct 1.35v mercury batteries, but I use the 675 hearing aid batteries for it now, which work well. Their only drawback is they last for only about 9 or 10 months. Not a big problem, though, since I can buy a card of 40 of them from Costco for $10. So I'd pack my old F-1 with a card of 675 batteries.
Three lenses, eh? Well, since cost is no object, I would pack the Canon 24mm f/1.4 L, the 85mm f/1.2 SSC Aspherical, and the 50-300mm f/4.5 L zoom. And maybe I'd sneak in a 1.4x and a 2x teleconverter also.
Ouch...WEIGHT!
Are you also taking the motordrive to have AE shutter priority?
Have you tried the New F-1? I like it better than the F-1 (i own both), although the old F-1 feels better made.
As for the lenses, why going for the ultra-fast series? You'd pack less weight and size if you chose the 24 f2 or the 24/2.8 (which is optically great), the 85/1.8 (very small) and i'd suggest the New FD 200/4.0, which is even smaller and lighter than the equivalent Nikon AI lens.
I've never been one to sacrifice quality for convenience( ... ) I never minded the weight it added.
I'm really happy with my current walk around kit, which is pretty close to Lamar's... Nikon F2 Photomic, 24mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.4, and 80-200mm f/4.5. Assuming the OP's money is no object statement though, the F2 would be Soverized and the 50mm would be a Noct-Nikkor.
That's pretty much my current SLR carry kit too: 24mm f/2.8, 35mm f/1.4, 50mm f/1.4, 80-200mm f/2.8, a Soverized F2SB, a Soverized (finder only) F Photomic FTn, and an SB-15. It ain't light but I can do pretty much anything I need with it and I have two bodies to work with.
Great kit! The 35mm f/1.4 is on my want list for down the road. For now I have the 35mm f/2 for when I want to go out with just one lens. The f/1.4 and the Sover overhaul will have to wait a while though. My sister and I are training for the Vermont 50 in late September, so most of my $$$ is getting funneled to training gear/supplies.
When you get your 35mm f/1.4 be aware of the thorium glass in the older versions. I bought my Nikkor-N from KEH unaware of this and found the glass was yellowed. Per several posts I treated it with UV light and it helped but there is still enough yellowing to impact color photos more than i would like and make it about a half stop slower. Works great for B&W though...
Have you tried the New F-1? I like it better than the F-1 (i own both), although the old F-1 feels better made.
As for the lenses, why going for the ultra-fast series? You'd pack less weight and size if you chose the 24 f2 or the 24/2.8 (which is optically great), the 85/1.8 (very small) and i'd suggest the New FD 200/4.0, which is even smaller and lighter than the equivalent Nikon AI lens.
I own a New F-1 with the AE Finder FN as well as the Motor Drive FN. It is a great camera, extremely rugged and very solidly built. But I've always had a soft spot for the old F-1. It was my first pro-quality camera and I put the one I owned originally through its paces. It never missed a lick and never let me down.
I don't see what this obsession with weight is all about. I don't mind packing heavier lenses so I can have the performance that they offer. Just a little FYI, I own the 24mm f/2.8 SSC, the nFD 85mm f/1.8 and the nFD 200mm f/4 IF. They are all great lenses, but not the greatest. And since this is a "cost no object" exercise, why on Earth wouldn't I want to take the best? Actually, being limited to three lenses really cramps my style because I would have liked to add the 400mm f/2.8 and 600mm f/4 to the list, as well as the 14mm f/2.8 L and 17mm f/4.
You know, back in the day when I shot a lot of slide film, I did carry a three lens kit and it served me very well. Along with my old F-1, I carried an FL 19mm f/3.5, a Vivitar Series 1 28-90mm f/2.8-3.5 and a Tamron SP 60-300mm f/3.8-5.4. This outfit provided me with better than 90% of my walking around photographic needs. These days if I was really after saving weight, I'd pack a modern AF camera with modern lenses. I'd probably pack an EOS 3, an EF 14mm f/2.8L, 24-105mm f/4 L, and a 100-400mm f/4-5.6L, although this kit would probably still be a bit on the heavy side. But so what.
However, I've always been a F-1N fan but recently under Cooltouch's instigation I was able to get a F-1n for a cheap price, IMO the old model has a better mechanical "feel", it's smoother, the mirror is damped in a very pleasant way, the rewinding lever is likewise a pleasure to operate (while the F-1N is pretty rough, but I assume it depends by the steel heavy duty gears it needed for the powerful motordrive) and it's also better looking (gloss vs. matt finish),
I agree with you fully, except for the mirror damping. The F-1N has excellent mirror damping as well.
Yes, the F-1 "old" not only feels better made, but it is the best-made SLR i've ever seen or held (and i'm including the Leicaflex SL in this comparison). Better than the Nikon F and F2 as well. I have a mint, fully working "old" F-1, but I don't use it at all because the viewfinder on the New F-1 is much better.
If you want to talk about smooth, I'd have to favor the Minolta XD-11 (XD-7 in Europe), the Nikon FE or FE2 over the Pentax LX. But the LX is such a cool little camera, with amazing low-light ability as well as a full range of other features, including MLU which none of the above three have (well, the FE and FE2 raise the mirror when the self-timer is used, so they sort of have MLU), so I'd still lean toward the LX even if it isn't quite as smooth as the others..
If you want to talk about smooth, I'd have to favor the Minolta XD-11 (XD-7 in Europe), the Nikon FE or FE2 over the Pentax LX. But the LX is such a cool little camera, with amazing low-light ability as well as a full range of other features, including MLU which none of the above three have (well, the FE and FE2 raise the mirror when the self-timer is used, so they sort of have MLU), so I'd still lean toward the LX even if it isn't quite as smooth as the others.
The only thing stopping me from using my LX right now is it has that dreaded sticky mirror -- which is not so bad in itself, but apparently a condition that accompanies it is the mirror doesn't sit right in the box, throwing off focusing. I've checked mine with an M 50/1.4 mounted and it's showing an actual 14 feet as being over 25 feet. So it is unusable as it currently sits. And since Eric, the Pentax repair guru, wants $200 to repair it, I'm gonna have to wait a while before I can afford that bill.
that a "feature" of the vertical Copal shutter is the raising of the mirror when the self-timer is employed. It isn't limited to the FE and I doubt very much it was a sales gimmick, since most amateurs who might respond to a gimmick have likely never even heard of mirror lock-up and why it should be used.
Okay, after reading your comments, I went and spent some time with the cameras I mentioned to make sure I'd remembered them accurately. I think I would have to stand by my original claims.
Flavio, I own a couple of FEs and an FE2 and my cameras are quite smooth in their operation. The film advance is very smooth on those cameras, and the shutter vibration is minimal. And it's my understanding -- I was told this by a camera tech years ago -- that a "feature" of the vertical Copal shutter is the raising of the mirror when the self-timer is employed. It isn't limited to the FE and I doubt very much it was a sales gimmick, since most amateurs who might respond to a gimmick have likely never even heard of mirror lock-up and why it should be used. I'm not saying it wasn't a feature that sales people used to sell the cameras, but I doubt it was a sales pointer provided by Nikon. I could be wrong, of course, but if I am, I'd want to see the Nikon literature pointing it out.
Cuthbert, perhaps the reason why my LX isn't smoother than it is is because of the sticky mirror issue. Hey, I wonder, does your tech in Italy take in work from other countries? I think the repair cost plus postage to Italy and back would be considerably cheaper than what Eric charges -- $200, which I think is rather steep to be honest.
With the mirror up I wouldn't regard mine as quiet. There's a noticeable metallic ring it makes when firing by itself. I compared it to my F3 with mirror up just now. The sounds are different, the LX's is more low-pitched for one thing. The F3 doesn't have the ring, either, but the volume is about the same. And, yes, I realize I'm comparing a vertical and a horizontal shutter, but so what? It's still comparing the noises made by two pro cameras that were contemporary with each other. And I really don't hear a volume difference between a vertical and horizontal shutter. At least, not with these two particular cameras.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?