Yes, that about does it. Every one of those brands has a long following of good hardworking classic SLR cameras.
Steve
What are the classic 35mm SLR's
-
A
- Thread starter BradS
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale BOOK SALE! Weston, Karsh, Kenna, Worth, Sexton
- Started by AnselMortensen
-
For Sale Complete Mamiya RB67 Pro SD collections with camera bags
- Started by orbitaldebris
-
Want to Buy JOBO ATL 1500/1000 or JOBO CPP2
- Started by balazsfff
-
For Sale Foto-100 bulk roll, 100'
- Started by MCB18
-
Sold Hasselblad ELM battery adapters x2
- Started by blee1996
Forum statistics
Yes, that about does it. Every one of those brands has a long following of good hardworking classic SLR cameras.
Steve
What 2F/2F and df cartwell said.
'tis the F. The rest is personal preference.
-J
'tis the F. The rest is personal preference.
-J
IMO...
The classic professional system 35mm SLR: pre-AI Nikon
The classic amateur 35mm SLRs: Nikkormats, Pentax Spotmatics, Pentax K-1000s, Minolta SRTs, non-professional Canon SLRs (such as FT in the '60s, and FTb in the '70s)
The classic low-end automated electronic SLR for the masses: Canon AE-1
The Canon F-1 professional system is my favorite of the lot (though it is perhaps tied with Nikon F and F2, out of sheer love for the Nikon F system), but I don't see how it would fall under the "classic" definition, without getting brand specific as to the category (such as "the classic Canon professional system SLR"). It came over ten years after the F, and basically copied it in every important way. Though I feel that it was an improvement over the F, and superior to the F2 in many ways, I just cannot call it classic.
The classic professional system 35mm SLR: pre-AI Nikon
The classic amateur 35mm SLRs: Nikkormats, Pentax Spotmatics, Pentax K-1000s, Minolta SRTs, non-professional Canon SLRs (such as FT in the '60s, and FTb in the '70s)
The classic low-end automated electronic SLR for the masses: Canon AE-1
The Canon F-1 professional system is my favorite of the lot (though it is perhaps tied with Nikon F and F2, out of sheer love for the Nikon F system), but I don't see how it would fall under the "classic" definition, without getting brand specific as to the category (such as "the classic Canon professional system SLR"). It came over ten years after the F, and basically copied it in every important way. Though I feel that it was an improvement over the F, and superior to the F2 in many ways, I just cannot call it classic.
Good reasoning, though it would have led me to a different result - another vote for the Pentax Spotmatic (SPII, to be more specific).
Everything came together - size, weight, durability, ergonomics, affordability, optics, specifications and, of course, marketing.
So many are still in use today (though the youngest are 35 years old) and there's very little that can't be fixed on them - the camera equivalent of the jeep, DC3 Dakota, Sony TC105 tape recorder, etc.. Of course, there are other fine 35mm SLR cameras that would qualify as classics IMHO. The Nikon F, as above, & OM1 are obvious examples, though perhaps for different reasons. The list shouldn't be too long, though, and, for instance, however good the Pentax K1000 and MX might be they are, after all, only descendants of the Spotmatic.
Steve
As others have stated....the Nikon F, the F2 as a user.....plus the Pentax Spotmatic must be in there as well.
"Value" and "desirability" change the equation a bit.
In some ways, nearly any SLR from the 1960s and 1970s will be a classic, as well as the Exaktas from the 1940s. Also, the Contax/Pentacon models from the 1940s, as well as the Contaflex and perhaps the Icarex.
There are uncommon models from France, including the Focaflex -- a sturdy, reliable camera, as well as odd-ball models, such as the Agfa Optima-Reflex -- a combination SLR/TLR.
Then there is the Canon AE-1, which led the way to the plasticam revolution with its prolific use of plastic inside and out. They sold a ton of these.
Some of the Rolleiflex SLRs are classic pieces of junk (sadly), because the Carl Zeiss lenses are outstanding.
The Nikon F series still hold up well today, and the FM cameras are cult classics.
The Pentax K1000 has become the ubiquitous first-time camera, drawing attention away from the other excellent K- and M-series bodies.
The Minolta XD-11 was the first multi-mode SLR.
Olympus was always happy to go its own way, with the Pen F and then the OM-1 and also was the first to abandon film, as I recall.
This could gio on forever. As well, there are so many names that have dropped off the map: Kodak Retina, Petri, Topcon, etc.
In some ways, nearly any SLR from the 1960s and 1970s will be a classic, as well as the Exaktas from the 1940s. Also, the Contax/Pentacon models from the 1940s, as well as the Contaflex and perhaps the Icarex.
There are uncommon models from France, including the Focaflex -- a sturdy, reliable camera, as well as odd-ball models, such as the Agfa Optima-Reflex -- a combination SLR/TLR.
Then there is the Canon AE-1, which led the way to the plasticam revolution with its prolific use of plastic inside and out. They sold a ton of these.
Some of the Rolleiflex SLRs are classic pieces of junk (sadly), because the Carl Zeiss lenses are outstanding.
The Nikon F series still hold up well today, and the FM cameras are cult classics.
The Pentax K1000 has become the ubiquitous first-time camera, drawing attention away from the other excellent K- and M-series bodies.
The Minolta XD-11 was the first multi-mode SLR.
Olympus was always happy to go its own way, with the Pen F and then the OM-1 and also was the first to abandon film, as I recall.
This could gio on forever. As well, there are so many names that have dropped off the map: Kodak Retina, Petri, Topcon, etc.
I don't know about "working", but there's an amazing number of them for sale at any one time.
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2009
- Messages
- 18
- Format
- 35mm
Well i'm going for my Nikon F90X, I believe it was one of, if not the last of the Nikons to actually have the "made in japan" stamp on it. Makes it a bit of a classic I think, well it is to me anyway.
.
A question to ponder is: What gives something the ability to even become a "Classic".
I belong to a 150 member Ford Mustang car club. We have members with cars from as old as 1964 1/2 to new 2010 Mustangs. There is a small group of stuck-up car snobs that maintains that cars were never built after 1973, and that only cars manufactured during "this period" can ever become "Classic".
We were talking at a car show one afternoon, and one person was saying that "Your 2010 Mustang GT will be a classic in 20 years." How about that car over there, a person asked pointing at a Scion "shoe box on wheels" with a 1000 watt amp and giant speakers every where. "Nope" we all agreed, that will never be a classic. Will people ever go to a car show to look at a 30 year old bland white Toyota Prius?
How about cameras?
Thirty years from now, will my Nikon D1 be a classic or just an old piece of crap (it is an old piece of crap compared to a new Canon digital Rebel). How about the 50 million Canon Rebels both film and digital (if you can even tell them apart). Same goes for the Minolta Maxxxxxim's that were released every six months with a different model number.
How about other "waiting to be classic" items?
Could there ever be a "classic" computer? Will ludite's line up to get their hands on a 30 year old IBM with dual 8-inch floppy disk drives? Who will love a 20 year old "classic" cell phone "just like my dad had"?
So what, beside "the passing of time", or some "period in time" allows something to even become a "Classic"?
.
A question to ponder is: What gives something the ability to even become a "Classic".
I belong to a 150 member Ford Mustang car club. We have members with cars from as old as 1964 1/2 to new 2010 Mustangs. There is a small group of stuck-up car snobs that maintains that cars were never built after 1973, and that only cars manufactured during "this period" can ever become "Classic".
We were talking at a car show one afternoon, and one person was saying that "Your 2010 Mustang GT will be a classic in 20 years." How about that car over there, a person asked pointing at a Scion "shoe box on wheels" with a 1000 watt amp and giant speakers every where. "Nope" we all agreed, that will never be a classic. Will people ever go to a car show to look at a 30 year old bland white Toyota Prius?
How about cameras?
Thirty years from now, will my Nikon D1 be a classic or just an old piece of crap (it is an old piece of crap compared to a new Canon digital Rebel). How about the 50 million Canon Rebels both film and digital (if you can even tell them apart). Same goes for the Minolta Maxxxxxim's that were released every six months with a different model number.
How about other "waiting to be classic" items?
Could there ever be a "classic" computer? Will ludite's line up to get their hands on a 30 year old IBM with dual 8-inch floppy disk drives? Who will love a 20 year old "classic" cell phone "just like my dad had"?
So what, beside "the passing of time", or some "period in time" allows something to even become a "Classic"?
.
TONS of them are still working today. Look at KEH, ebay, even walking around town. When I spot a Minolta (and as a Minolta user, I am usually - even if unconsciously - looking for Minoltas...) I'd reckon 1/4 of the ones I see are 7000's and 5000's. They don't seem to have a pension for the notorious LCD bleed that so many 1st Gen "computerized" cameras seem to have.
I have a 9000 (w/o LCD Bleed as well) that still works like new...
I got into photography as an 8 yr old kid in the early 80s. To me the classics are the best of that era's cameras, the ones i drooled over as a kid but couldn't have cause my dad wouldn't buy a little kid a top-of-the-line pro camera, lol
Nikon F3
Olympus OM-4T
Canon New F1
Pentax LX
Minolta Maxxum 7000 -this camera looked SO COOL to me as a kid. Today I despise cameras with all those electronic pushbuttons, lol But it is still a classis..the beginning of the modern electronic/computerized camera. Cameras like the OM-4T and even the later Nikon F4 had complex computers in them but it wasn't obvious, they worked like traditional cameras.
Nikon F3
Olympus OM-4T
Canon New F1
Pentax LX
Minolta Maxxum 7000 -this camera looked SO COOL to me as a kid. Today I despise cameras with all those electronic pushbuttons, lol But it is still a classis..the beginning of the modern electronic/computerized camera. Cameras like the OM-4T and even the later Nikon F4 had complex computers in them but it wasn't obvious, they worked like traditional cameras.
In my book 'Classic' refers to one I like to shoot with.
F3
OM2n
RTS
EOS3
F3
OM2n
RTS
EOS3
Well, if that is what it means.....in order of preference:
Canon F-1 '70s type (I have one each of the early 1971 version and the later 1976 version)
Nikon F (c. 1967)
Canon FTb (early)
Nikkormat ('60s)
Pentax Spotmatic ('60s)
Canon EOS 3 (borrow one sometimes...great camera...but don't own one as I do not generally need anything it offers over the old manual cameras)
Minolta SRT 101 and 102 (no longer have them...gave them to a friend)
Pentax K-1000 (no longer operational...needs film advance repair...got it in a lot...prefer everything about the Spotmatic, so it might just sit forever...though I might get it fixed some day just to have a body on which to mount any good K lenses I come across for cheap)
Canon AE-1P (have had several of these go into and out of my life...great backup or "so what" cameras)
Canon EOS 1 (same as what I said about the EOS 3, though I highly prefer the 3 for many reasons)
Minolta X-700 (loaned it to a beginning student three years ago and have not seen it since...don't miss the camera itself, though it does bother me still...probably the worst metering setup I have ever seen in any camera...it only gives you a lighted dash next to a shutter speed, so you can't see what shutter speed to use in low light...dumb!)
Olympus OM-2 (got it for $5 with 35-70 f/4...never liked it...couldn't stand the ergonomics...sold kit for $25)
Last edited by a moderator:
Leica M3
...Visoflex?
To me, "classics" are those cameras that did something for the first time that since every other camera did.
As such an M3 with Visoflex comes close.
But only close.
As such an M3 with Visoflex comes close.
But only close.
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2009
- Messages
- 580
- Format
- Multi Format
By classic I consider what change the game: Nikon, F2, F3,
In Canon we would have to include:
F-1, F-1n, New F-1, A-1, AE-1, AT-1, EF(shutter priority)
Olympus:
M-1, OM-1, OM-1n, OM2, OM2n, OM-4 T
Minolta:
SRT-101, XD-7 (XD-11)
Autofocus:
Nikon N8008s, F90X, F-100, F4, F5, F6
(I prefer the F4 because it accepts ALL lenses of the Nikon Line)
If by "classic" we include the rangefinder; then:
Leica
Yashica Electro 35 GSN, Yashica Lynx 14e IC
In Canon we would have to include:
F-1, F-1n, New F-1, A-1, AE-1, AT-1, EF(shutter priority)
Olympus:
M-1, OM-1, OM-1n, OM2, OM2n, OM-4 T
Minolta:
SRT-101, XD-7 (XD-11)
Autofocus:
Nikon N8008s, F90X, F-100, F4, F5, F6
(I prefer the F4 because it accepts ALL lenses of the Nikon Line)
If by "classic" we include the rangefinder; then:
Leica
Yashica Electro 35 GSN, Yashica Lynx 14e IC
Maybe the best criteria is that if it's old AND still works, it's a classic. The computer analogy, and maybe even digital cameras, will be tested by time. There aren't many (any?) 8inch floppy disks made nowadays, in 40 years will you still be able to use the things? Likewise, some of the early memory card formats are nearly impossible to find now.
But concerning the many, or few, working Maxxum 7000's out there, I'd call it a classic. You can still take great photos with one and it WAS the first of its kind. Personally, from Minolta's stable, I'd add the X-700 and Maxxum 7, which are quite excellent cameras. The 800si has I believe the most powerful built-in flash ever put in a 35mm SLR and mine runs like new, xx years after it was made.
It is also fairly easy to say what is NOT a classic camera from way back when. Fujica's notoriously crappy AX-3 comes to mind, but it's a late 70's - early 80's bird that some might lump into the classic era.
But concerning the many, or few, working Maxxum 7000's out there, I'd call it a classic. You can still take great photos with one and it WAS the first of its kind. Personally, from Minolta's stable, I'd add the X-700 and Maxxum 7, which are quite excellent cameras. The 800si has I believe the most powerful built-in flash ever put in a 35mm SLR and mine runs like new, xx years after it was made.
It is also fairly easy to say what is NOT a classic camera from way back when. Fujica's notoriously crappy AX-3 comes to mind, but it's a late 70's - early 80's bird that some might lump into the classic era.
that's right leica M3 with visoflex
I have also a Canon A1 and a T90 , although they had some ground breaking technology in them at the time that they were marketed, the T90 was about ten years ahead of It's time, although they are both good cameras I find it hard to consider cameras with so much plastic in their construction a "Classic", which is why I didn't list them in my list of my classics.
To me, "classics" are those cameras that did something for the first time that since every other camera did.
As such an M3 with Visoflex comes close.
But only close.
That is basically how I define classic as well.
Expanding on what Wolfeye said...
I was thinking about this post last night and would agree with what Wolfeye said about the classics will be those that still work. Perhaps most of the cameras that have an electronic shutter will be paper weights in 100 years and no one will consider them as anything but junk. This includes film cameras as well as digital. I expect that the sensors on digitals will fade in 25 years or less and even if they work otherwise, will give pictures that are faded and have to be enhansed on the computer. Replacements sensors will probably be unavailable or very expensive. However, today you can still get a used Rolleicord or Yashica TLR, or a Nikon F that are built like a tank and other than the meters, you can still use them with a handheld meter. Maybe digitals will last 200 years and the old manuals will be obsolete, but at least if film is still available, a good repairman can make a lever or have a gear made for a Nikon F. That may not be the case if you are looking for an IC chip for a Nikon F6. Time will tell. Ric.
I was thinking about this post last night and would agree with what Wolfeye said about the classics will be those that still work. Perhaps most of the cameras that have an electronic shutter will be paper weights in 100 years and no one will consider them as anything but junk. This includes film cameras as well as digital. I expect that the sensors on digitals will fade in 25 years or less and even if they work otherwise, will give pictures that are faded and have to be enhansed on the computer. Replacements sensors will probably be unavailable or very expensive. However, today you can still get a used Rolleicord or Yashica TLR, or a Nikon F that are built like a tank and other than the meters, you can still use them with a handheld meter. Maybe digitals will last 200 years and the old manuals will be obsolete, but at least if film is still available, a good repairman can make a lever or have a gear made for a Nikon F. That may not be the case if you are looking for an IC chip for a Nikon F6. Time will tell. Ric.
Im surprised noone mentioned the Leica R6 (or R6.2).
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |