Which Lens would you get?

[Alan Gales]

It seems to me that you are going about your camera selection backwards. Figure out what lenses you want, then get a body that they fit. I prefer Zeiss and Leica lenses myself. Lots of people say that the lenses don't matter, but I can see a difference and I am not delusional. If you want to use Zeiss lenses there are a bunch of bodies that are good. Even the Yashica FRI is good, and can be had for a song. Leica lenses tend to be more pricey and the bodies are as well. I use Contax for SLRs and Leica for rangefinder.

Don't overlook Pentax and Minolta either, especially if you want to save some dinero.

You are not delusional, there are differences in lenses and I preferred my Zeiss lenses. I felt they were a little contrasty and made my images "pop" a little more. Some of my friends preferred the "look" of their Leitz or Nikkors though and I have seen great images taken with the other brands too.

I just feel that these differences are not huge and if you really want to see a difference then try medium or even large format film.

 

[trythis]

It strikes me as odd that anyone would bother with a Canon AE-1 or a Nikon FE, much less fiddle with adapters, if they can afford and plan on using Leica lenses.

Anyway, to answer your question:
As an owner of both cameras, I find myself drooling over almost all Nikon AI manual lenses as well as AF-D primes, since they work with the auto focus Nikons and the old manual ones. I would be happy to get any Nikon manual lens, even the E series. For FD, anything Canon labelled is desirable enough for me to scoop it up off the yard sale table.

If you ask me, I would get a FE and an E series 50 f1.8, ( about $150 total retail) run through 20 or so rolls of film with prints, then decide if you like the camera/lens combo. If you find that your work suffers because of the glass quality, get some higher end Nikon stuff (and another 20 rolls), then if that doesnt do it; resell the kit and email Japan Camera hunter. He can find the most expensive equipment available.

If I had leica money, I would throw down for a Nikon F4 with the small battery pack, a 20mm f2.8, a 50mm f1.4 (1.2 if I was really loaded), an 85mm f1.8, and a 135mm f2. Throw in a nice zoom lens or two for traveling with family, a decent bag, 20 rolls of Portra 400, 20 rolls of my favorite b&w and stop reading about equipment.

 

[benjiboy]

The Canon AE1 and Nikon FE are more than 20 years old and were consumer grade models when they were made and must nowadays be coming to end of their manufacturers envisaged design service life, I would go for neither, I would go for either the best condition Nikon F3, or Canon New F1 I could afford.

 

[Xmas]

The Canon AE1 and Nikon FE are more than 20 years old and were consumer grade models when they were made and must nowadays be coming to end of their manufacturers envisaged design service life, I would go for neither, I would go for either the best condition Nikon F3, or Canon New F1 I could afford.

Hi Ben

but most were bought as male jewelery and spent their life at bottom of drawer with knickers.

Now my F2s have been used to test steam hammer anvils...

Noel

 

[benjiboy]

Hi Ben

but most were bought as male jewelery and spent their life at bottom of drawer with knickers.

Now my F2s have been used to test steam hammer anvils...

Noel

I know Noel I used to sell cameras professionally in the days when these cameras current and as soon as reliable autofocus AE compacts came out there was a significant drop in sales of consumer grade S.L.R's, but the point I was trying to emphasise is that although these cameras were excellent value for money in those days for the average family photographer, and over the years have largely proven to be reliable, it's about 24 years since the AE1 for example was manufactured and the vast majority of them have never been serviced, and would be uneconomical to do so today, whereas Nikon and Canon pro models are I.M.O. worth repairing because the materials they were manufactured out of, and the engineering tolerances they were built to were designed for pro abuse and made to be extremely durable.

 

[jerrybro]

You are not delusional, there are differences in lenses and I preferred my Zeiss lenses. I felt they were a little contrasty and made my images "pop" a little more. Some of my friends preferred the "look" of their Leitz or Nikkors though and I have seen great images taken with the other brands too.

I just feel that these differences are not huge and if you really want to see a difference then try medium or even large format film.

+1 to format making more of a difference.