talofa
Hello
I’ve already read through this forum from top to bottom, but I haven’t really found an answer that suits me...
?
I discovered analogue photography over 10 years ago, developing my own photos and so on. I dabbled in digital photography for a while, but for the last few years I’ve always had an analogue camera with me again. As the camera (Exa 1) is only on loan and my own camera (Cosina Hi-Lite), a chance find at a flea market, isn’t very reliable and is quite heavy, I’m on the lookout for a reliable and better alternative.
?
I’d love a camera that still works mechanically. Preferably with a built-in light meter. For which there are good wide-angle lenses (I enjoy architectural and landscape photography). I won’t be connecting a flash or taking elaborate night shots.
For now, a 35mm will do.
?
And it shouldn’t really be a ‘mid-range’ model, but rather a camera for the ‘discerning’ photographer. :)
I don’t have a particular brand in mind; I just want to buy a good old camera that’s worth the money and will accompany me on my wanderings.
?
Does anyone have a recommendation for me?!
Best wishes,
Eva
?
?
piu58
Canon EOS 30 or 33. One of the last models to be produced, offering quite a range of features.
bernhardmangelsgmxde
The EOS isn’t a mechanical camera, and it’s more of a mid-range model. If you’re looking for a mechanical camera that meets high standards, the Nikon F2 sounds like the one. It’s probably not really any lighter than the Cosina, though.
Wolfgg
Hi Eva,
You can pick up a Canon A1 on eBay for between 20 and 50 euros; at prices like that, it’s no longer worth buying anything of lower quality. Back in 1980, it cost a whopping 1,400 DM! It’s a truly reliable camera without autofocus, and thanks to its electronic controls, its timing is still as accurate as it was when it was new, even after decades. No battery issues (6V alkaline), no ageing components (LED display in the viewfinder), a robust workhorse. The lenses are top-notch. I ‘snapped one up’ myself about three years ago when prices were low, back when the pixel-heads hadn’t yet realised the value of FD lenses. Everything works perfectly. Just two drawbacks should be mentioned: no internal flash metering, and in automatic mode you can’t simply close the aperture to the set value by pressing a lever to check the depth of field. The A1 has shutter-priority and aperture-priority modes, as well as manual mode.
When buying, you just need to check whether that ‘whooping cough’ sound occurs at the mirror brake. However, this can easily be remedied by applying oil to a specific spot. I bought two bodies back then; both had this issue and I was able to fix it easily, as shown here – you just need to remove the base plate, a simple task:
http://jetbutterfly.web.fc2.com/camera/e_squeak.html
There is plenty of information online, e.g.:
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/canon/fdresources/SLRs/
http://www.butkus.org/chinon/canon.htm
http://web.mit.edu/dennis/www/canon/fd-lens-info.html
http://www.photozone.de/active/survey/querylenstxt.jsp?filter=%22brand=%27Canon%20FD%27%22
http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/film/series_f.html
http://www.lomography.com/magazine/reviews/2009/03/23/canon-a-1-35mm-slr-manual-merriment
Best regards, Wolfgang
Wolf_XL
... either you're blonde – or a troll... ;-)
talofa
Thank you very much for your replies.
€
I already have a 15-year-old Canon, though I can’t remember the exact model off the top of my head. I was thinking more along the lines of a camera from the 60s or 70s.
€
I’ll have a look at the Canon A1!
Are there any older Canons that might be worth considering?
Or perhaps some from Nikon?
€
Affordable lenses would be good too. But I don’t really need a huge collection...
stefanberyll
I’m looking to sell my Pentax LX.
It comes with a few really nice lenses, including a wide-angle lens, as well as other accessories.
If you’re interested, I’d be happy to send you more details.
Best regards,
Stefan
Wolfgg
Really old cameras – that’s the tricky bit if you want to keep using them reliably. You either need a reliable source who can tell you the camera’s history – details such as how it was used (as a hobby or professionally), the number of shots taken, and when it was last serviced (oil, grease) – or you need to buy from a dealer who offers a warranty. Or the knowledge and tools to service the camera yourself. Because nothing is more frustrating than standing in front of a subject after investing a lot of time and money (and travelling miles), only for the camera to let you down. Even if it’s just because of the cold.
The period from 1970 to 1975 was, for amateurs, very much the era of Minolta; the SRT-101 was a popular choice.
Regards, Wolfgang
jochen53
Hello Eva,
A Nikon FM or FE might be close to what you’re looking for, but with such ‘old’ cameras you always have to expect that a major overhaul will be needed (though you might get lucky and find everything still works like new); this should include, amongst other things, replacing the back cover seals and the mirror stop damper, cleaning and lubrication, and adjusting the light meter and shutter speeds. This isn’t exactly cheap and is likely to cost around €120–150, so about the same or slightly more than the second-hand body. There is a very wide range of second-hand original and third-party lenses available. Some Nikon lenses are among the best available for 35mm (without the red dot). The cameras have no battery issues and are fairly compact and handy. They are intuitive to use and have no superfluous features.
Urnes
So the F-Nikon came along, and so did the FM. Although the F eventually got an electromechanical shutter. Minolta’s SRT models are also fully mechanical, but they have a very stiff shutter release. There’s also the Minolta XE; it’s almost identical in construction to the Leica R3, and the lenses benefit from the collaboration between Leica and Minolta and are often relatively inexpensive to buy. And of course Leica should also be mentioned; the R models were fully mechanical and very purist up to the R6. Lenses are a bit pricey, though. Speaking of heavy, they’re all heavy if they’re fully mechanical. Models with an electromechanical shutter are lighter (e.g. Minolta X-300 to 700); they also generate split-second exposures with the aperture-priority mode (where available), though the capacitors do tend to fail occasionally – when that happens, nothing works at all, and repairs cost around 80 euros. When you buy one, test the light meter to see if it always shows half or double the reading when you adjust the ISO setting up or down by one stop; the same applies when you close the aperture by one stop. Of course, it’s better to have a spare light meter with you to double-check. Otherwise, always test the long exposures – i.e. the one-second exposure – first; if that’s correct (a wristwatch with a seconds hand will do), the short exposures will usually work as well.
Regards, Sven.
AchimBauer
Hi Eva,
Well, if you don’t want to use a flash, a nice old Praktica with a metal focal-plane shutter would be fine. The only downside is that whilst the original lenses are optically superb, the aperture blades tend to get stuck.
A slightly more upmarket option would be the Olympus OM-1, which can still be sent for repair. It’s a lovely, no-nonsense, robust camera, but unfortunately it has the same problem as the Praktica: the mercury battery. However, for a few spare pennies you can find an adapter on eBay so you can use mercury batteries with the correct voltage. These cost between 30 and 90 cents, depending on where you buy them.
There are also plenty of affordable lenses for the Olympus; it’s only the special ones that are expensive. And at olympusdmentix.org there’s also a repair guide for minor issues.
Regards, Achim
rlfsoso
Hi,
A few tips from personal experience:
I myself shoot 35mm film with a Nikon F2 Photomic and a Nikkormat FT2. The lenses, particularly the all-metal versions (‘Berg-und-Tal’) without Ai coupling (i.e. with the ‘rabbit-ear’ aperture drive), are top-notch and incredibly good value for money. What I appreciate about them is the handling and the display of aperture and shutter speed in the viewfinder (the Nikkormat only shows the shutter speed). I did, however, have my F2 serviced for a fair price. The price range is fairly average – well-preserved examples are correspondingly expensive. On the other hand, the F2s are pretty much indestructible. Alternatively: if you’re open to something a bit newer (i.e. with Ai coupling), a Nikon FE or FE2 would be great; here you’ll find the aperture (mirrored) and shutter speed in the viewfinder, and the exposure tracking is very well implemented. No flashing, plus an aperture-priority mode, which can sometimes be quite useful. The FM or FM2 only has a relatively simple LED indicator for correct, over- and underexposure.
Does it really have to be fully mechanical? The OM-1 and OM-2 have a much-praised bright viewfinder (better than on the Nikon).
On the old Minoltas (SRT), the display of aperture and shutter speed and the tracking for exposure control are also pretty brilliant, though the light-meters are likely to be quite aged by now. The Rokkor lenses are first-class and incredibly affordable.
My tip: go to a second-hand dealer or a photography swap meet, pick the items up and let your hands (and eyes) guide you.
R.
talofa
Wow, so many tips and replies. I’ll need a few evenings to compare the cameras and do some research... Thanks so much!!
?
?
rlfsoso, you’re right. It really is better to buy the camera directly from a retailer. I’ll have a look around to see who’s near me. Unfortunately, the next photography fair here isn’t until December.
?
I’m afraid I don’t know much about AI mounts and ‘rabbit ears’. That’s another reason to look into it more closely, including all the different lens mounts. So far, I’ve managed to put it off.
?
Stefan, yes, do send me some more info about the camera. I actually only need 1–2 lenses. But maybe it’ll work out.
?
Best wishes,
Eva
Neutrino
Hi Eva,
I can recommend the Minolta SRT 101b. It was one of Minolta’s last fully mechanical cameras. The SRT is quite small and sits comfortably in the hand. It has pretty much everything you need: exposure times from 1s to 1/1000s and B; a diafragma button (I find this really handy, as unlike many modern cameras you don’t have to hold it down -> you press it and the diafragma closes, press it again and you have full brightness in the viewfinder again), a relatively bright focusing screen with microprisms for focusing, a self-timer, TTL exposure metering that was advanced for its time, and a hot shoe with a centre contact. The only drawback is the lack of a mirror lock-up. It was thought at the time that the mirror was so well damped that it could be omitted. The previous version, the Minolta SRT 101, still had one. The mirror is indeed well damped, but of course it is not entirely free of vibration. However, if you don’t intend to take any night shots anyway, this won’t be of great importance to you. Apart from that, I haven’t noticed any visible camera shake in my own night shots. Another thing to bear in mind: the button cells required for the light meter back then are no longer available due to current environmental standards. However, there are alternatives: wine cell batteries. These are manufactured specifically for such old cameras with the correct voltage. The downside is that they are quite expensive and only last about 6 months to a year. Even if you never switch on the light meter. Another option is to use a standard 1.5-volt button cell battery. The voltage differs slightly, but I haven’t noticed any difference so far. The light meter works just as well.
€
There is a huge selection of lenses available. You can choose from the MC lens series that was current at the time, as well as the successor MD lens series. Furthermore, it is of course possible to use older Minolta lenses or lenses from third-party manufacturers. The MC lenses in particular enjoy an excellent reputation. One worth highlighting, for example, is the MC 58mm/1.2. Many believe it offers one of the best bokehs around. I can only agree! However, it does come at a price. I was once lucky enough to get one quite cheaply. Unfortunately, the elements on mine aren’t quite flawless anymore, but even so, it has (when stopped down a bit) excellent sharpness and a wonderful bokeh.
€
Since you enjoy photographing architecture, the MC/MD 35mm/2.8 Shift CA might also be of interest to you. In addition to the shift function, it has a special feature which, to my knowledge, no other lens in the world has apart from the MC/MD 24mm/2.8 VFC: variable focus plane curvature. You can curve the focal plane forwards or backwards using a U-shaped rotating ring.
€
€
One thing should be said, however: I don’t think it makes much difference which camera model you use. Unlike with digital cameras, the quality of the images does not depend on the camera body. A professional camera from that era takes just as good pictures with the same lens, the same film (and, of course, the same skill on the part of the photographer) as an entry-level camera. The difference lies in the features, and even that is not as significant as with modern analogue or digital cameras. It is far more important to focus on good lenses!
€
Furthermore, it is also much more important that you ensure the camera is in good condition: in my opinion, mechanical cameras are really robust and can still be found in really good condition today; nevertheless, pay particular attention to:
€
.) The shutter speeds. It is, of course, a bit difficult to hear whether a 1/500 is actually a 1/500, but from, say, 1s to 1/30, you can hear quite clearly whether the shutter is operating reasonably correctly. With a bit of practice using a camera you know works properly, you’ll soon be able to judge whether the shutter speed is too long or too short. Minor deviations are, of course, acceptable.
€
.) Light meter. It’s best to compare cameras here too. Minor deviations are permissible due to different measurement methods or tolerances, but if it shows something completely different, that’s obviously no good.
€
.) Viewfinder. Is it dirty or nice and clear and bright?
€
.) Seals and dampers. Are they porous or still in good condition?
€
€
I hope I’ve been able to help you a little.
AntiLynd
Having used the Nikon FM myself for around 10 years, I can only wholeheartedly endorse the recommendation above. An SLR with no frills, fully functional even without a battery, and with a battery (standard button cells, which you can still find on every street corner these days), you even get a light meter thrown in. You should be able to pick up a well-maintained model in the lower double-digit price range.
€
That said: when buying an SLR, it’s not necessarily the specific model that matters most, but rather the decision to go with a particular manufacturer. Because whichever Nikon you buy, for as long as you own it, you’ll be a Nikon user—not a Canon, Minolta, etc. user—with the corresponding implications when purchasing any future accessories.
Wolfgg
For the sake of completeness, it’s also worth mentioning what you’re better off steering clear of:
If I want to work with them seriously – rather than just ‘seeing what they were capable of back then’ – I would definitely avoid models from the period between 1960 and 1980:
The early Zeiss cameras, which were undoubtedly excellent by the standards of the time, some of which even had interchangeable film magazines (!):
http://wolfgangs-photographica.blogspot.de/2008/01/contaflex-super.html
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contarex
or the Icarex, a good idea in theory, but with an unreliable shutter – it annoyed me a great deal:
http://www.ukcamera.com/classic_cameras/zeiss17.htm
The “brake pad” – your fingers start to ache after just a short while:
http://wolfgangs-photographica.blogspot.de/2008/01/exakta-varex-iib-ein-mechanisches.html
and also anything with an M42 mount; just the three turns needed to remove the lens are a nuisance.
?
Regards, Wolfgang
michael-kielgmxnet
As for the Exakta Varex: firstly, it doesn’t have an M42 mount but a special bayonet mount, and it’s not actually that unwieldy. Even so, a camera like this is certainly more of a collector’s item.
Wolfgg
Michael: M42 doesn't refer to the Exakta; that should be clear from the formulation.
?
Regards, Wolfgang
grommi
As I’ve already said, the lenses are the key factor when buying a camera. That’s why I also recommend manual-focus Minoltas, as they simply offer the most affordable top-of-the-range lenses. The latest series – the X-300, X-300s or X-500 – is also available at very reasonable prices. Only the capacitors need replacing. If you know someone with a soldering iron, it’s a job that takes just a few minutes and costs a few pence in materials. I’ve done this a few times now, on every X-series camera I’ve got my hands on. In my opinion, you should steer clear of the X-700, though. It has a second capacitor under the top cover, and removing that is quite a fiddly job.
€
The cameras are relatively light and compact; the 1.7/50 standard lens is top-notch and usually comes included as a body cap. Otherwise, this series rewards you with a large, bright viewfinder image that couldn’t be better, high-quality exposure metering with photodiodes that hardly age at all, and a flawlessly functioning aperture-priority mode with ‘exposure lock’ – i.e. the ability to freeze the exposure at the touch of a button – plus, of course, fully manual settings. Added to this are very precise, electronically controlled shutter speeds. It uses LR44 batteries, which are widely available. The cameras are very ‘tidy’ and easy to use. My tip: the X-300s. Plastic on the outside, metal on the inside, it fits perfectly in the hand, is the youngest of the lot, has an aperture preview in the viewfinder and is incredibly good value for money in the best sense of the word. Since I’ve had it, I wouldn’t be without it; the supposedly ugliest duckling among the Minoltas is my favourite. For the price of a pizza and two pints. Just make sure you get one with a cable release socket. They were actually available without one (shame on them!!!). The excellent 2.8/28 Rokkor wide-angle lens doesn’t cost much more. Among the Rokkors (that’s what the manual Minolta lenses are called), there aren’t really any duds.
€
Of course, nothing works without batteries, so for winter in sub-zero temperatures and as a ‘backup’, a fully mechanical SR-T 101 or 303 isn’t a bad idea. Or if you really do need a mirror lock-up function. You can actually give the other 100-series SR-Ts a miss; if you’re going to do it, go all out – there’s hardly any difference in price. A battery is only needed for exposure metering; everything else works without one. In my SR-T 101, a modern mercury-free PX-625 battery does the job and the exposure metering is spot on. Apparently, it measures accurately even at 1.5 volts.
Many roads lead to Rome; good luck and good light – grommi
stefanberyll
My Pentax LX is in good condition; as well as the ‘standard’ prism viewfinder, I have the FC-1 and FB-1 viewfinders and a magnifying viewfinder, plus the following lenses: Pentax 55mm f/1.8 SMC, Pentax K SMC 3.5/28, Pentax SMC 2.8/100, Pentax SMC 4/200, Sigma for Pentax K 2.8/24 (Macro),
Zeiss Planar 1.4/50 ZK, Zeiss Distagon 2.8/25 ZK.
Over the years, I have taken photographs with many cameras from various manufacturers; the LX is the best of them.
It looks great, has superb lenses, no battery worries, a superb viewfinder image, a superb light meter (with semi-automatic mode: you set the aperture, the camera finds the ‘right’ shutter speed), exposure compensation, dioptre adjustment on the viewfinder; without a battery (or in very cold conditions, when batteries occasionally fail), you can shoot from 1/75(X) to 1/2000; for double exposures, you can rewind the film with millimetre precision for each shot; there are various viewfinders, various focusing screens, mirror lock-up, and a self-timer.
Of course, even today this costs more than the simpler, good-quality cameras that you can buy on eBay for a few dozen pounds.
?
On a completely different note, my second-favourite camera was the Praktina IIa (see www.dresdner-kameras.de). Although it had no built-in light meter, it produced very beautiful photos thanks to its excellent lenses. Unfortunately, however, the viewfinder image is difficult for my poor eyesight; in fact, the viewfinder image is difficult even for eagle eyes, and very difficult for my poor eyesight.
