So, I'm a little bit new to this...

[John_Nikon_F]

Re: the FT3, it was made for three years. 1977-79. The FT2 was made between 1975 and 1978. Batteries: both the FT2 and FT3 use the S76 battery. Just one. The FM uses two or one CR 1/3N lithium.

Make sure that whichever body you get has a properly working meter. No twitchy indications and accurate exposure. You can use your 600D to compare against. Set manual mode and center-weighted metering.

-J

 

[Tom1956]

I'm sticking with the Nikon based recommendation. I don't think most of us have any idea what things are like in England. It's a small island with a limited number of available used cameras there, unless they pay big shipping charges bringing them in off-shore. It's a 15 year old kid. I can't think of any 15 year old I ever heard of with his hands on a bag of money. This is a big deal to him. One of the Nikon products to him would be the cats pajamas. Don't you know he's really licking his chops on the idea of a Nikon F2 Photomic, but knows he can't afford one.
I'm an old guy who has been through all the camera collection days in life--I've had them all. Now I just keep an FT2 I made out of parts cameras. I'm happy. He's a 15 year old kid. Hey--good luck, kid. Knock 'em out.

 

[mr rusty]

I seem to have a big mirror between my lens and the film

Strange, when the shutter opens and I take my pictures there isn't a mirror. Don't you get some very dark images?

 

[polyglot]

'tis true, but when you are a skint 15 year old, a dose of reality is sometimes needed. There's only air between lens and film on even the most expensive camera, so measured on image quality a nice Minolta Rokkor 50mm 1.7 on a £5 Minolta X300 will give anybody's Nikon a run for the money!

Listen carefully for that is the sound of wisdom. Similar situation with the canon FD: dead end manual systems trend to be beautifully made and very cheap to buy. You can learn a lot from them cheaply and then get your dream camera later.

Another option is to use an unpopular but good modern camera like the Dynax 5 (fully featured but disgusting plastic hand-feel) for under $20. They'll take a good modern 50/1.7 ($50 used) or 50/1.4 ($200) up to the fanciest modern whatever ($2000 AF Zeiss zooms) and if/when you get cash, there are very cheap+excellent Minolta pro-level bodies that are as good as an F5.

Cheaper yet, you can put a $10 M42 adapter onto a Minolta body and use old+excellent prime lenses you found for $20, like Takumars. $30 for camera and adapter, $20 for basic lens and you're good to go... Can't do that with Nikon.

Now to play devil's advocate... skip 35mm altogether and go straight to medium format. Shoot less and shoot better.

 

[MattKing]

Look for an OM-20 (aka OM-G).

 

[cliveh]

I don't think most of us have any idea what things are like in England. It's a small island with a limited number of available used cameras there, unless they pay big shipping charges bringing them in off-shore.

We get by making pinhole cameras out of cardboard and sticky tape.

 

[Jim Taylor]

Listen carefully for that is the sound of wisdom. Similar situation with the canon FD: dead end manual systems trend to be beautifully made and very cheap to buy. You can learn a lot from them cheaply and then get your dream camera later.

I couldn't agree more.

Many people hold very strong opinions about different manufacturers/formats/systems etc. There's nothing wrong with that, but...

Get out and have a look at some of the second-hand shops in Manchester (I've had some good stuff from The Real Camera Co. on Dale St. - but there are others) - in any good shop they're more than happy to let you have a good look and get the feel for used camera gear before you buy it. Have a good chat to the staff about what they think the pros and cons of the various systems are.

By all means, settle on one manufacturer/system/format (I'm a Canon man for 35mm and Bronica for MF), but don't discount others until you've at least had a go and seen things for yourself.

As a youngster, my photography improved drastically when my camera became an extension of my physical being! A camera system that you find intuitive will be much more fun for you to use and may well yield much better photographs. It will certainly remove one (of many) variables when using film.

My main piece of advice would be "make haste slowly" - and keep on enjoying it!

 

[E. von Hoegh]

We get by making pinhole cameras out of cardboard and sticky tape.

Says the man who lives in the land of Nesbitt and Gandolfi...

 

[pbromaghin]

I've been given a lot of nice camera and darkroom equipment for free. All you really have to do is let it be known that you are into film and people with VERY NICE cameras that have been sitting in a box in their closet for years will practically beg you to take it. And you may not yet have figured out the fact that all these people on here, some of whom really know what they are doing, have such widely varying opinions of different brands, really means that there isn't a dime's worth of difference between the results you will get from one brand to another.

 

[ntenny]

And you may not yet have figured out the fact that all these people on here, some of whom really know what they are doing, have such widely varying opinions of different brands, really means that there isn't a dime's worth of difference between the results you will get from one brand to another.

Amen. With a very few specific exceptions that are well known (things like the extreme movement flexibility of a Linhof Technika---everybody agrees that it exists, whether or not they feel it's a useful feature for them), the biggest effect of specific pieces of equipment is just how comfortable you feel using them.

In the last analysis, any optic that will form an image, any box that keeps the dark in, and any medium that records light, can be used to make successful images! (For this reason, *everyone* should build a pinhole camera, at least once, out of household objects. Cylindrical oatmeal boxes are traditional, but I like Pintoid processors myself.)

On the other hand...equipment is fun, and equipment that "just feels right" can go a long way in enabling the photographer to concentrate on art rather than gear. So IMHO it's worth making some experiments with equipment, and if you have that gut-level "must have a Nikon F" feeling, maybe it's worth pursuing it---not because the gear is objectively *better*, but because it'll keep you from a distracting sense of "I wish this were a Nikon" when you pick up your camera.

-NT

 

[pbromaghin]

On the other hand...equipment is fun, and equipment that "just feels right" can go a long way in enabling the photographer to concentrate on art rather than gear. So IMHO it's worth making some experiments with equipment, and if you have that gut-level "must have a Nikon F" feeling, maybe it's worth pursuing it---not because the gear is objectively *better*, but because it'll keep you from a distracting sense of "I wish this were a Nikon" when you pick up your camera.

-NT

NT's paragraph should have ended my post if I had the sense to think of it. The competition in 35mm from around 1970 on was so tight that nobody really ever had a major advantage in quality. The good 35mm film cameras from the major makers are all so similar in function that the choice should be based on how it feels to use. Like others have said above, go to some used camera stores, play with the cameras, see how they feel in your hands and how they operate. Heck, they might even let you take one out for a test drive. And do remember your wish - a Nikon may very well do it for you. They have for millions of others.

 

[Alan Gales]

Amen!

I used to sell brand new Nikon, Canon, Minolta, Olympus, and Pentax SLR's back in the 1980's. They were all good! Personally, I shot a Contax 139. It felt fantastic in my hands.

We used to say if your 35mm camera wasn't doing the job for you then skip trying another brand and instead move up to medium format.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

I'll put in another vote for a replacement OM body or a Minolta rig since you're on a really tight budget. But I've always been a bit of an iconoclast - my first manual-control camera was a medium format rangefinder. My first SLR was medium format. And my first 35mm SLR was a Contax. So I'm a big believer in alternative systems.

 

[Alan Gales]

But I've always been a bit of an iconoclast

So you don't believe in the sacredness of the house of Leica, Hasselblad, Ebony, etc. either.

I like how Ken Rockwell says the camera doesn't matter and everyone gets upset.

 

[Truzi]

My main piece of advice would be "make haste slowly" - and keep on enjoying it!

Isn't that a quote from Houdini?

 

[E. von Hoegh]

Isn't that a quote from Houdini?

Emperor Augustus, IIRC. "Festina lente".

 

[Alan Gales]

Emperor Augustus, IIRC. "Festina lente".

E. von Hoegh, are you sure that your E. doesn't stand for encyclopedia?

 

[Jim Taylor]

Yes... Festina Lente... I believe it is also attributed to Houdini.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

So you don't believe in the sacredness of the house of Leica, Hasselblad, Ebony, etc. either.

I like how Ken Rockwell says the camera doesn't matter and everyone gets upset.

Oh, I did have a Hasselblad (that was my first SLR, actually). But I didn't run around proclaiming it the second coming of Voigtlaender either. I've got brand preferences to be sure, but they're because the tool fits my need. Nowadays it's Contax G/RTS for 35mm, Rollei for medium format (which has become my primary camera), and Canham for large/ultra-large format. Yeah, they're all "name" cameras, but I have them because I like what they do and how they do it, not because they're "names". I'd much rather see someone out taking photos with a Minolta X700 and a Tokina zoom than pining for some Leicelbladikon and not taking pictures because they don't have it, or worse, having it but denigrating those who take photos with "lesser" equipment.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

Yes... Festina Lente... I believe it is also attributed to Houdini.

I can't understand why. I'm pretty sure it predates Augustus, but he's the first one I associate it with.

Edit - Apparently Erasmus thought highly of it as an adage. - http://people.virginia.edu/~jdk3t/FLtrans.htm

 

[E. von Hoegh]

E. von Hoegh, are you sure that your E. doesn't stand for encyclopedia?

No, sorry, it's just "Emil".

 

[Truzi]

I didn't know Houdini was quoting ancient Romans. It's nice to learn new things without having to search them out.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

I didn't know Houdini was quoting ancient Romans. It's nice to learn new things without having to search them out.

I'm pretty sure the ancient Romans were quoting more ancient Greeks... Erasmus gives the Greek as well as the Latin. When I googled it, the link to Erasmus was the only one I looked at. I've found too many errors in Wikipedia.

 

[PaperNoire]

Thank you again for all your lovely replies. I'm giggling a bit at all the off-track talk about quotes and things! I do love a bit of banter.

I was a bit quick to jump to the FM. Batteries wouldn't be a problem after all, but again I decided to dive into more research, and I want to give a thank you to the folks that immediately recommended the FT2 to me. It's definitely going to be on my list right now.

I'm still open to any and all suggestion on which Nikon to buy. So far I seem to aiming towards an FT2, or FM. Something within that price range really. A friend of my Dad's that always shot Nikon in the 80s recommended the F2 to us when approached about the FM, but alas, right now, it's out of my budget. Maybe later on, I suppose.

Currently browsing ebay for rough prices, always seems to be the guys that add like an extra £20 into the shipping price to rip you off a little. It's ridiculous, you think you've found a great price then you see that. Hopes gone!

My Dad's friend is contacting another friend that sells analog cameras, just to see what he's got really.

The current cameras I have my eye on appear to be the FM and the FT2. Again, reading through everyone's comments, there are a couple that have come up that are plausible, but most currently show ridiculously high prices on ebay. I could track down a dealer, like the one in Manchester, to see if I could get a good deal, but to be honest I think it would be higher, based upon what a friend of mine who went there to get a price on an OM10 said.

I'm fixed on the Nikon idea, sorry if that annoys anyone in anyway, and I know I may be being unreasonable, but I can't help it!

Again, open to any and all suggestions towards which camera I should be saving up for right now. I feel an FT2/FM debate is imminent...

 

[Tom1956]

Thanks, young fellow. To be sure you know everything, you DO know about the pre-1977 prong-and-index situation I hope. To me, it's no big deal. It doesn't seem Nikon without the "CLACK!-twist, click". Sure opens you up to a lot of cheaper but great Nikkor lenses.