suggest a camera

[tballphoto]

need a new camera,, my canon elan fried itself and well i need something. Needs are simply

1. decent and affordable glass
2. limited electronics, that if fried do not hinder use of camera in manual modes
3. low cost camera
4. smaller size is best

 

[AnselMortensen]

Nikon FM
Pentax Spotmatic F

 

[Huub]

Pentax MX: small and only the exposure meter needs a battery.

 

[Don_ih]

Get another Canon slr. You have whatever lenses you had for the Elan. Those cameras are perfectly good and basically free.

 

[removed account4]

a big rangefinder kodak retina

 

[Chan Tran]

Get another Elan.

 

[Paul Howell]

I agree, another Canon, even a Rebel, very cheap, has most features, small lightweight, last models were introduced in the early 2000s. If you really want to change brands then an AF Minolta, entry level late model Minolta 5, early A5000 or 7000, most early 5 pin lens are inexpensive and Minolta made some of the best glass.

 

[abruzzi]

I suspect any EF Canon is going to be very dependent on the electronics, aren't they?

I'm a Penatx and/or Nikon person, but Nikon glass is noticably more expensive than Pentax lenses, so I'd second the Pentax MX. For Nikon I'd either go with a Nikon FM (I'd recommend the FM2n, but prices on them have gotten a little nuts.) If you don't ming going a little larger, I'd get a Nikkormat FT-2. Its still very cheap, built like a tank, and it takes pre-AI glass which is cheaper than AI lenses, and unlike the FTn (which is my favorite Nikkormat) can take normal modern batteries.

 

[runswithsizzers]

You probably ought to define what you mean by "affordable" and "low cost" as those terms are very relative to one's circumstances.

I use the Pentax MX with 3 or 4 SMCP-M lenses. But except for one lens, I have owned my Pentax gear for a long while, so I don't know how much it would cost today. More recently, I bought a Konica Autoreflex T4 with a 50mm f/1.7 Hexanon lens for $60. It needed light seals, so add another $15.

Either of those cameras would meet your criteria for size and electronics. There is a better variety of lenses available for the Pentax, but I am finding the Konica lens to be very good.

 

[tballphoto]

Ideally id aim for something without the need of electronics but the nikons are looking ok.

Yeah, the EF family cant do crap without electronics.

 

[Paul Howell]

All mechanical cameras are going up in price, some like the Pentax K1000 are sought after and overpriced. Bodies that were under the radar are not catching up. For a MF all mechanical body look for Konica T, T3, T4, standard primes are not too expensive and very sharp, Konica did not make a bad lens. Fast glass does cost. Konica made a few pretty good zooms in the day as did Vivitar and Soligar. On the inexpensive side are the entry and mid level AF bodies. Not small, rugged, going for very little money without a lens is the Nikon N90, prices as low as $20, buy 2 or 3. Lens range from kit lens 3rd party kit lens to very high end fast glass, the N90 will work well with up to D lens. G lens will work in crippled mode, like P or A mode. Same with Minolta, Pentax, and Canon, pick a body, buy 2 or 3, get a couple of mid level lens. Find a few bodies you think you would like then research those bodies. Avoid Miranda, Petri, Kowa and Topcon leaf shutter 35mm, Topcon RE mount are fine but lens are scare and repairs are almost impossible.

 

[Bronson Dugnutt]

Very good recommendations and advice so far.

Deciding which to pick up is a matter of taste and market conditions at this point. Essentially all mechanical SLRs were contemporaries and the glass from all major manufacturers was superb.

I'm a Nikon fanboy myself but wouldn't hesitate to recommend a Spotmatic to someone eschewing auto-focus. Pentax and Olympus offered slightly more compact bodies.

One detail concerning compactness is the availability (and cost!) of a pancake lens for the SLR system in question. I find the FG-20 (only 1/90s mechanical) w/ 45mm f2.8 pancake a nice balance between compactness, features, and manual/unpowered usage. The Hexanon AR 40mm f1.8 looks pretty sweet though.

 

[Sirius Glass]

NIkon F100

 

[McFortner]

70s Leica CL. Opens up both LTM and M-Mount lenses in a compact package that doesn't need the light meter to work.

 

[tballphoto]

I suspect any EF Canon is going to be very dependent on the electronics, aren't they?

I'm a Penatx and/or Nikon person, but Nikon glass is noticably more expensive than Pentax lenses, so I'd second the Pentax MX. For Nikon I'd either go with a Nikon FM (I'd recommend the FM2n, but prices on them have gotten a little nuts.) If you don't ming going a little larger, I'd get a Nikkormat FT-2. Its still very cheap, built like a tank, and it takes pre-AI glass which is cheaper than AI lenses, and unlike the FTn (which is my favorite Nikkormat) can take normal modern batteries.

Pentax MX How easy is it to use the M mount glass on them, ? and what is the state of the 250 film back?

On the nikon cameras, any of them use the newer manual controled macro lenses that are sold online for under 300$?

 

[mehguy]

Olympus om2. There doesn't seem to be as many problems with the electronics of the OM2's as there is with the OM4 and OM2Spot.

 

[ciniframe]

Can’t use M mount on any SLR, the lens flange distance is way too short for an adapter. Almost any older 50mm manual focus macro made by Nikon, Minolta, Olympus, Canon, Pentax etc should be well under $300 used in good condition.

edit; Except the Olympus OM 50mm f2 macro, that is a rare and pricey lens. The regular Oly 50mm f3.5 are cheap and fairly common though.

 

[Don_ih]

Vivitar made a great macro lens in pretty much all mounts (I think - I have it for Nikon).

 

[tballphoto]

You guys were a good help, pointed out some good choices and some not so good choices.

Ended up on the pentax mx. the build got me, smallest mechanical slr ever sounds right for me. And the ability to use m42 screw mount is going to be interesting.

 

[Swordman]

If you want interchangeable lenses, go for a Pentax MX.

If you can stick to just one focal length (40mm), the Rollei 35 may just be for you. It is focus by guesswork, but that's half the fun.

 

[film_man]

You haev the lenses. The cheapest option would be to spend $5 on a Canon EOS 300 or whatever else. If you buy another system how many $5 EOS cameras could you have gone through before it pays back?

 

[Craig75]

You guys were a good help, pointed out some good choices and some not so good choices.

Ended up on the pentax mx. the build got me, smallest mechanical slr ever sounds right for me. And the ability to use m42 screw mount is going to be interesting.

It's nice little camera. Lenses aren't pricey and you can just throw it in a bag

 

[tballphoto]

You haev the lenses. The cheapest option would be to spend $5 on a Canon EOS 300 or whatever else. If you buy another system how many $5 EOS cameras could you have gone through before it pays back?

I have one EF lens,,, so swapping to a different family is no issue, and i really dont want to worry about dealing with electronics..

Sure i could spend 30 to 60 an a single EF family 35mm camera, and hope it works, and HOPE it works a long time, but when the only camera you have from that line shorted itself out and required about an hour of dissaembly in the dark to get the partial film out... yeah it really builds confidence

 

[George Mann]

Not small, rugged, going for very little money without a lens is the Nikon N90

The F801/N8008 series is basically the same camera, and just as cheap.

 

[GKC]

In desperation, migrated from self destructive Canons to a NIkon F2 years ago, and have never looked back.