 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Film Photography / 35 mm / July 2007Cameras that Last AND Last AND Last... (35mm bayonette mount SLRs in particular)
On my window sill, as "decorations", like fallen soldiers, sit the conked out, worn out, shells of camera bodies from the late '70s through the late '90s. All met an untimely demise for different reasons. Some were "pre-owned" and others I bought new. Some died from a built-in fault(s) common that brand's model, and some simply wore out before their time. With the price of film cameras so extremely low these days, all are uneconomical to repair vs. buying a "new" used camera. Nikon EM - Light streaking, and, if memory serves, unreliable/"jumpy needle syndrome" (probably due to some kind of resistor failure? 2nd Nikon EM - Bought over eBay abd sent back because of same problem as above. Nikon FG - Ultra bright viewfinder with easy focusing but the lever/ gears? are locked up (no its not a battery problem or a failed circuit board as is common for this model but the gears are literally mechanically locked up. Also bought over fleaBay (the lockup happened a few months after I bought it a couple of years ago so was/is not returnable). Canon 630 - I believe it was a faulty shutter stop so the shutter no longer opens? (its been a few years now). Maxxum 600si - Totally my fault. It was raining and I didn't protect it well enough. Rain + electronics = flashing "help" signal. :-( (and yes I did try removing/reinserting the battery after the camera dried off/I dried the camera off but with no real luck.* Contax 167MT - Not on the sill (but still in my camera bag). Same problem as above but happened in a swimming pool, LOL. Minor water, not really a full dunking, dried off the electronics came back to life fine but the shutter itself no longer opens/closes.* Nikon F3 - Also bought on fleaBay and sent back because it kept on winding and winding and winding during the exposure (and after it too?), there was no catch/lock to the shutter lever/wining mechanism, the exact oppositte problem of my locked up wind lever on my FG. Also sent back to original owner. It was beat to crappish and cost about $75-$80 and I'm not sure how long and by whom it was used and abused before me no how much film went through it, anyway, up till the point I bought it and tried it out I thought that Nikon F3s were nearly indestructible (I had two that I had bought new in previous decades, long since traded in on Leica gear/whatever), boy was I ever wrong... :-( My other 35mm SLRs (Pentax ZX-5n and MZ-S) are working fine except for a slight problem with banding (lighter and darker areas within the exposure due to shutter variance of speed during the exposure, probably) in the ZX-5n which has not yet resurfaced since I got a battery grip FG that runs off of AA batteries (maybe the shutter problem was a power problem?). Anyways, I've heard that there is a plastic part that really should be metal (cutting costs?) that also causes breakdown (the kind of breakdown I can't remember) in the ZX-5n models so it may be only a matter of time before my ZX-5n (also bought used on fleaBay) goes too. Don't care about digital. Don't care about screw mount cameras. Don't care about rangefinders or Twin Lens Reflexes. Just want to know others' experiences with which _35mm SLR bayonette mount _film_ _ cameras, from any era, that are still reliable after many years of use and/or abuse. Are there any? AND have you babied your equip, use it often or beat it to heck and expose more frames than a feature length motion picture through it? Yes, film cameras are cheap(ish) to replace, but with older cameras you never know what they've been though and whether you're going to get a lemon (something bad/"sucky") or lemonade (something good/fun to drink, though I prefer apple juice to lemonade ;-)), so if/when I get another Pentax, Contax, Nikon or whatever, _used_, I would want it to last a bit longer than just past opening the UPS box I got it in ;-). Cameras are like milk, but without the expiration date written on the top of the box so younever no what you're going to get... or for how long you're going to be able to use it/keep it. My window sill is pretty well filled up, don't want to add more "decorations" to the window (or the Christmas tree ;-)) so any suggestions would be appreciated. Cameras are for using/collecting light, not collecting star dust. *Yes, I've learned my lesson with water and will only drink it, bathe in it, or swim in it from now on, sans camera ;-) Never had any problems with my Nikon F4 and I know many happy F5 users. F2 with the simple eye level prism could be a good choice. The F2's shutter seems to be quite reliable. I know some will say you should go for a Leica SL2 and some for a Canon F1, EOS1 and some for a Pentax K1000. Never tried these but have looked into a Leica SL2 viewfinder and it seems to turn green by age. Don't look into the Nikon EM, FG...etc.....it is plastic junk..... > On my window sill, as "decorations", like fallen soldiers, sit the > conked out, worn out, shells of camera bodies from the late '70s [quoted text clipped - 84 lines] > *Yes, I've learned my lesson with water and will only drink it, bathe > in it, or swim in it from now on, sans camera ;-) > On my window sill, as "decorations", like fallen soldiers, sit the > conked out, worn out, shells of camera bodies from the late '70s [quoted text clipped - 84 lines] > *Yes, I've learned my lesson with water and will only drink it, bathe > in it, or swim in it from now on, sans camera ;-) Well, I have two Ricoh XR-X´s from 1980´s that suffer from sticky mirror, I know I should have them serviced but I really have not bothered. An older (late 1970´s) Ricoh XR-2 works fine and has never given any trouble. I also have a Pentax MZ-5n that works fine. My oldest (1976) is a Pentax KX, fully mechanical camera that is built like tank and works fine. My flagship, so to say, is a Pentax PZ-1p (middle 1990´s?) that also works fine. Väinö Louekari . > Well, I have two Ricoh XR-X´s from 1980´s that suffer from sticky > mirror, I know I should have them serviced but I really have not [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Väinö Louekari Not too long ago I got A Ricoh XR something that fired fine but only up-side down. Turned out to be a tiny spec of foam that landed sticky side down (of course) on the side of the mirror box and stopped the mirror on the way down. Once I saw it, it was fine. Plus that, the lenses fit the Pentax "K"s. The Ricoh 35f2.8 is one of my favorites along w/ the 135 f2.8. But I've had my best luck w/ the old Pentaxes. As far as Nikons; I had good luck, but I hated the noise. The "F" was terrible, and as far as I could see, the shots were nowhere near a Pentax. I have a Canon Ftb, which is great, but I don't care for the meter. It's accurate, but you have to be more careful than I like. Bob Hickey Some camera experiences: My Minolta X-700 is still ticking and I go through about 25 rolls/year, but after a couple severe drops onto concrete, some of the LEDs in the viewfinder are no longer functioning. I just bought another one on Craigslist for $25 because it was too good of a deal to pass up. Good cameras, but I wouldn't consider them something that will last forever. I have a Minolta SRT-101 that is bulletproof. Handed down from my dad. Never failed since he bought it in 1969 (but CLRed once). However due to sentimental value, I'm no longer using it for everyday shooting. That said, over the years, I've picked up another SRT-101 and SRT-202 on FleaBay. One works perfectly after lightly lubricating one sticky mirror return gear...the other needs meter recalibration when I have time to tackle this project. As much as I love these bricks, the X-700 cameras are just lighter and easier to use. However I keep these around because I know that they will last forever whereas I expect my two X-700s to eventually fail in the electronics department. Before acquiring my first X-700, I bought a Minolta XD-5 on FleaBaby that failed after a couple months. Electronics shot. Not fixable. I won't go near the XD series due to widespread electronics failures of the hIC circuit. My mother's Canon Elan II flaked out after a couple years of light use. I think if you get a nice mechnical workhorse that isn't beat up, and get the thing serviced by a competent repair shop, I don't see why it wouldn't hold up to heavy use and last a long time. I think the big problem is that people knowledgeable about mechnanical cameras will eventually disappear. But thats why I acquired a couple SRT cameras to try and learn some of this myself. Cheap cameras with lots of online documentation on how to fix common problems. Of course my 35mm shooting really is dwindling... --Mike On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 01:57:53 -0700, contaxman wrote: > On my window sill, as "decorations", like fallen soldiers, sit the > conked out, worn out, shells of camera bodies from the late '70s [quoted text clipped - 84 lines] > *Yes, I've learned my lesson with water and will only drink it, bathe > in it, or swim in it from now on, sans camera ;-) > On my window sill, as "decorations", like fallen soldiers, sit the > conked out, worn out, shells of camera bodies from the late '70s [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > these days, all are uneconomical to repair vs. buying a "new" used > camera. snip My first camera, back when I was in high school (graduated in '74) was a Canon FX. I traded one of my father's rifles for it-- dad quit hunting years before! At a high school reunion a couple years ago, someone made the comment that I was always going around the school with "that damn camera". I pulled out that same "damn camera" and took his picture! I have since started collecting Canon FX cameras. I am amazed at how much better condition my old camera is in compared to some of the cameras I've purchased. Typical problems include film counter not working, mirror locks up at firing and doesn't return until film is wound, lenses not stopping down entirely or at all at firing, shutter speeds off particularly at very fast or very slow speeds. > <contax...@aol.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > down entirely or at all at firing, shutter speeds off particularly at very > fast or very slow speeds. Thanks ALL, for your comments so far, I really appreciate it. Keep 'em coming!* I went for the F3 because it was the lightest/smallest of the pro Nikon series and had aperture priority. The F4 is big beautiful (in a rugged sort of way) and quite heavy. I have used it and after awhile of portable shooting I need a third arm just to prop up one of my other arms ;-). The reason I went with the EM, FG and F3 were that they were smaller (relative to other Nikons) Nikon cameras that took my excelent Series E 50/1.8 (I know, its not multi-coated but _excellently_ sharp wide open and with pleasing complex bokeh (it tends to blur out backgrounds/background details with more"fuzziness" than other 50s of similar wide open aperture). By the way, I failed to mention that my first pre-owned Nikon EM's light streaking was due to shutter problems, _not_ from the camera back/etc. I have held/most likely fired off Minolta SRTs and they are like large well built mechanical bricks but the only lenses I still have (or want) are left over AF lenses for the Maxxum series so, though I appreciate their ruggedness, the MD (or before) MF lenses are not on my used shopping list. Most likely I will shop around for used bodies of the lenses I already own/plant to use - Pentax, Contax (AE and MM) andNikon and possibly, if I ever get the urge again, Maxxum bodies. I am familiar with the Canon EF, not the FX. Was the FX Canon's manual exposure/mechanical camera that took breech mount lenses? Glad yours is still working for you :-). Thanks again ALL and keep those comments and experiences coming :-)* *It's Deja Vu all over again again. Regards, Lewis (and CSNY) > I am familiar with the Canon EF, not the FX. Was the FX Canon's manual > exposure/mechanical camera that took breech mount lenses? Glad yours > is still working for you :-). Breechlock and FD mounts are the same, they work differently on the lens. AAvK > > I am familiar with the Canon EF, not the FX. Was the FX Canon's manual > > exposure/mechanical camera that took breech mount lenses? Glad yours > > is still working for you :-). > > Breechlock and FD mounts are the same, they work differently on the lens. > AAvK Yes, I know. Also some people thought the breechlock mount lenses were more rugged/less likely to fal off than the latter FD mount. Though I did have a plastic piece of sh*t 35-70 FD from the '80s (on a T70) whose _front_ part of the lens fell off, not the back/mount. Fortunately I was able to snap/screw it back on again. Ok, I'll rephrase that... Was the FX Canon's manual exposure/mechanical camera _from the breechlock mount era_ that took breech mount lenses? > Ok, I'll rephrase that... > > Was the FX Canon's manual exposure/mechanical camera _from the > breechlock mount era_ that took breech mount lenses? The FX is from the late '60's (IIRC), it uses what I've heard called "Breech-lock Bayonet" mount lens. The lens do not couple the aperature setting to the camera; they have only one pin that stops down the lens at firing. If the lens has a second pin (90 degrees clockwise), that couples the aperature setting to the camera for metering. The "newer" lenses with the second pin will work on the FX, but the older lenses with one pin will not work on the newer Canons, such as the TX, FTb, or AE because of the metering. The two types of lens are called FD and FL; I can never keep straight which has one pin and which has two! The FX metering is what my high school photography teacher called "Through the thumb" metering. The meter cell is located on the front beside the prism near the rewind crank. The meter has two ranges; the selecter puts a Waterhouse stop over the cell for the less sensitive range. The meter is coupled to the shutter and ASA dials, and the needle points to the /f-stop. (If the gentleman who posted about his Minolta SRT101's in this thread would like to add another to his collection, please contact me privately. I've got nice one to sell at a real good price!)  SignatureKen Hart kwhart@fullnet.com >> Ok, I'll rephrase that... >> [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > would like to add another to his collection, please contact me privately. > I've got nice one to sell at a real good price!) Hi. How abut this - the FD lenses have the coupled DIAPHRAGM (hence the "D" in "FD"). Regards, Ian. >> Ok, I'll rephrase that... >> [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > would like to add another to his collection, please contact me privately. > I've got nice one to sell at a real good price!) HI. I have a Canon EF and several breechlock lenses. The very nice thing about this body is that: When the lens was pressed onto the mount the locking ring rotates sufficiently far that the lens is held onto the body. This is due to a spring and I think that the amount of rotation depends on the aperture at which the lens was last used. This is very helpful for me - makes one-handed lens changes very easy so my other hand can hold the other lens. I don't know if contemporaries of the EF (FTb, F-1 etc) had this feature. It doesn't work with the later lenses which lacked the breechlock ring nor does it work with the T90. Now, I've not tried this but ~ I thought that older FL lenses could work on FD bodies with restrictions such as ensuring that the mirror would not hit the back element of the lens. Anyone tried it? I believe that the breechlock mount was also known as the FD mount back when the lenses were heavy and had the rotating ring (breechlock) to lock the lens onto the body. If I remember correctly, the name of the mount did not change when the new-look lightweight lenses (without that locking ring but with the unlock button) appeared on the market. The way these later lenses coupled to the body (i.e. aperture coupling) mean that these lenses had to be turned by hand, they would not rotate of their own (spring powered) accord. By the way, I believe that Canon's advanced (for its day) feature of aperture control (i.e. the body can control the lens's aperture) goes back to the first F-1 which was designed with unattended photography in mind. Regards, Ian. >> Ok, I'll rephrase that... >> [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > would like to add another to his collection, please contact me privately. > I've got nice one to sell at a real good price!) Hi. How abut this - the FD lenses have the coupled DIAPHRAGM (hence the "D" in "FD"). Regards, Ian. I used to shoot a canon F1n (later model starting in the 80's) and it is a seriously solid piece_a_nugget! Completely professional level of hardware. There only leedle discrep- ency... the F1n's shutter is rated at 100,000 shots compared to the Nikon F3's 150,000 shots, and is made of titanium foil curtain of horizontal travel like the old cloth type. No mirror lock up because of a very high-end shock absorption system for the mirror... I shot hyper close macro of antique US stamps, 50 1.4 reversed onto a 80-200 two touch zoom, totaly sharp as my chisels, with which a doctor could operate. This camera takes a common silver 6 volt battery. http://search.ebay.com/search/search.dll?sofocus=so&sbrftog=1&catref=C6&from=R10 &satitle=f1n&sacat=30032%26catref%3DC6&floc=1&sargn=-1%26saslc%3D1&sadis=200&fpo s=93013&sabfmts=1&saobfmts=insif&ftrt=1&ftrv=1&saprclo=&saprchi=&fsop=1%26fsoo%3 D1&coaction=compare&copagenum=1&coentrypage=search And the old 70's SSC (Canon's own "super spectra coatings") breachlock lenses are the same quality, glass and sharpness equal to the best German, yet great color depth and perfect contrast. http://photography.search.ebay.com/SSC_W0QQa10244ZQ2d24QQa14Z25480QQa25563ZQ2d24 QQa41840ZQ2d24QQa41842ZQ2d24QQalistZa25563Q2ca41840Q2ca14Q2ca41842Q2ca42078Q2ca1 0244QQcatrefZC6QQcoactionZcompareQQcoentrypageZsearchQQcopagenumZ1QQfromZR2QQfso oZ1QQfsopZ1QQftrtZ1QQftrvZ1QQgcsZ1826QQpfidZ2595QQpfmodeZ1QQsabfmtsZ1QQsacatZQ2d 100QQsaobfmtsZinsifQQsbrsrtZd Owner's manual pdf: http://www.butkus.org/chinon/canon/canon_f-1/canon_f-1.htm ...hope this helps and good luck in your hunt, Signature}<)))*> Giant_Alex cravdraa_at-yahoo_dot-com not my site: http://www.e-sword.net/ > I used to shoot a canon F1n (later model starting in the 80's) and it is a seriously solid > piece_a_nugget! Completely professional level of hardware. There only leedle discrep- [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > cravdraa_at-yahoo_dot-com > not my site: http://www.e-sword.net/ Thanks for the links, Alex. :-) Years ago I tried a friend's Canon AE-1 with the 50/1.8 SSC lens I believe which I believe had really nice bokeh. The 50/1.4 FD lens I had was super sharp with brilliant color though really mushy in sharpness wide open. Nikon's was better in that repect. I am not a fan of the current _regular_ Canon EF lens line's color rendition (whether it has SSC or not - the exception being the L lenses which have always looked both more contrsty, sharp and _color saturated_ to me, even back as far as the FDL lenses from the '80s like the 80-200/4L? and the 100-300/5.6L? (can't remember which of hese I shot with) and the 85/1.2 FDL (magnificent lens!)) and see/feel I get better color saturation/richness with both Pentax (all the best qualities of Zeiss - color, bokeh, sharpness but not quite as fine micro-contrast or edge acutance with the possible exception of the Limited lenses (for micro-contrast) of which I've only tried the 31/1.8 Ltd. on a Pentax 6MP *ist DSLR - not the best of test cameras for sharpness/resolution vs. film) and Contax (Zeiss) if not Nikon lenses too... > Thanks for the links, Alex. :-) Years ago I tried a friend's Canon > AE-1 with the 50/1.8 SSC lens I believe which I believe had really [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > really mushy in sharpness wide open. Nikon's was better in that > repect. Thanks for the reply, but take it from me, the SSC breechlock is not the later FD mount lens. the FD mount is the result of "economizing"... try the SSC again. Because I didn't like plain FD's either unless it was that 80-200 F4 two touch. They simply did not have a genuine sharpness either. AAvK On Jul 21, 4:57 am, contax...@aol.com wrote: > On my window sill, as "decorations", like fallen soldiers, sit the > conked out, worn out, shells of camera bodies from the late '70s [quoted text clipped - 84 lines] > *Yes, I've learned my lesson with water and will only drink it, bathe > in it, or swim in it from now on, sans camera ;-) My very first camera was a Minolta XG1. That camera was taken all over wherever I went. A small camera that was well built. It never failed me. I still have it, and it still works perfectly though I never use it. It's more of a sentimental piece than anything else. http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/index-frameset.html?MinoltaXG1.ht ml~mainFrame Helen BIG SNIP helensilverb...@hotmail.com wrote: > My very first camera was a Minolta XG1. That camera was taken all > over wherever I went. A small camera that was well built. It never > failed me. I still have it, and it still works perfectly though I > never use it. It's more of a sentimental piece than anything else. > http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/index-frameset.html?MinoltaXG1.ht ml~mainFrame > Helen Thanks for the link Helen and relaying your experiences. Which camera do you shoot nowadays? > ....snip.... > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > *Yes, I've learned my lesson with water and will only drink it, bathe > in it, or swim in it from now on, sans camera ;-) Nikon F Photomic FTN. Bult to last forever, the finest camera I ever owned. Sadly, I sold it to get into MF. Current 35mm: Olympus OM2 and OM10. Solid, metal, go on forever. Michael >> ....snip.... >> [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > Michael Don't forget the Nikon F5. - Probably the finest Nikon ever built. Just as good as their new F6, except it's a little heavier, and you can pick them up in like new condition for about $500. (The F6 is $2000) Of course, anyone's choice of a film camera body depends on his/her lens set....... > >> ....snip.... > [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > in like new condition for about $500. (The F6 is $2000) Of course, anyone's > choice of a film camera body depends on his/her lens set....... When the Nikon F6 comes down to $500 - sign me up/beam my wallet up Scotty! Even an F6 (though just light enough) is rather borderline too big/ bulky for me... anybody know when the F7 is coming out (besides in my dreams ;-))? Bob: Some of the older ('80s?) Ricohs were built quite well/tough, can't speak for their foam though... Ken: Thanks for all the in-depth breech lock bayonette mount details - much appreciated :-) Alex: Will be along while before I try/buy an older Canon MF camera (if ever - I have Contax, Pentax, Nikon and Minolta Maxxum lenses all waiting for reliable bodies that wont quit out first ;-)) but if I ever do, I'll make a mental note to try some of the older SSC breechlock lenses again as well as some of the better FDs. Michael: Loved the build and the "giantness" of the OM-1/2/3? (did I try this one, I believe I did) and OM-4 Ti viewfinders. I've owned Olympii (plural of Olympus? - Olympuses is another alternative), both Pen FT 1/2 frame (great lenses but world's worse SLR eyepoint) and OM2s Program but even though I loved some of the lenses' sharpness/ bokeh, outdoors at least I was less than a fan of their color rendition, seemed to lack the saturation of my Pentax lenses, but, hey, at least in part it could have been due to flat lighting conditions, lack of flare/coatings control and/or the Kodachrome? I was shooting at the time too as the still lifes I took indoors with artificial lighting (and Fujichrome? - I hope I'm remembering right) seemed quite saturated. Warping ahead in time (from 70s/80s era SLRs)... has anybody had good/ bad experiences with the various EOS 1 flavors of film cameras? > Warping ahead in time (from 70s/80s era SLRs)... has anybody had good/ > bad experiences with the various EOS 1 flavors of film cameras? I bought two second-hand EOS 1v off Ebay. These were the 3rd group of Canon bodies I owned (first one was the EOS5, second one the EOS30). After I got the first 1v, I couldn't be happy before getting a second one (I got really spoiled, you see ;-) ). I think I have passed more than 200 rolls of film through each of them. The standard 1v (first I got, without the power booster) was pretty scratched outside (I suspect it has shot more than the 250 films in her counter). The second one (1v HS, with the PB-E2 booster) had no outside defects, sometimes in speeds over 1/500" you may see over-exposure of the first 1-2mm of the slide (probably half-frozen lubricant from the previous owner). And it can become unbearably heavy after a half hour of handling it (the standard body is much easier on the hands, in my opinion). Lenses: first one was the 50mm/1.4. Days after I bought it (new), it couldn't focus nearer than 60cm (if I remember correctly), so I exchanged it with another, which focuses at all the range (down to 45cm). The other two lenses are the 24-70/2.8L, which has proved a terrific lens, sharp and weather-sealed (albeit heavy), and the 70-200/2.8L IS (nice lens as well). Add a 1.4x TC, and you have a very capable film body pair. The worst environment I used these bodies was in a light drizzle and while snowing, without any sign of trouble. Cheers, N.F. > > Warping ahead in time (from 70s/80s era SLRs)... has anybody had good/ > > bad experiences with the various EOS 1 flavors of film cameras? [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > owner). And it can become unbearably heavy after a half hour of handling it > (the standard body is much easier on the hands, in my opinion). Does Canon still do repairs on the 1v or does the 1-2mm over exposure not bother you that much perhaps because its within/covered by the slide mount? > Lenses: first one was the 50mm/1.4. Days after I bought it (new), it > couldn't focus nearer than 60cm (if I remember correctly), so I exchanged [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Cheers, > N.F. I love the idea of a 24-70/2.8L but in reality, except for "photo ops"/ events I'm afraid the lens would scare off most non-professional people/models due to its size. Have you ever shot with the 24/1.4 or any of the other fixed normal to wide angle L lenses? > Does Canon still do repairs on the 1v or does the 1-2mm over exposure > not bother you that much perhaps because its within/covered by the > slide mount? It seems the problem has had to do with frozen lubricants or sticky leaf shutters (it was more prominent on the first rolls of film I shot when I received the camera). With more use, the symptoms have been much reduced, so I haven't proceeded to repair it. The 1v is a current model available in the catalog, so Canon obviously *has* to support it, with spare parts and all. I asked about a possible shutter assembly replacement, and I was quoted a cost over 300 Euros. I would suggest you avoid buying one used from a professional, since you cannot know how much beating has this camera got. > I love the idea of a 24-70/2.8L but in reality, except for "photo ops"/ > events I'm afraid the lens would scare off most non-professional > people/models due to its size. Sure, the 24-70/2.8L is big and a *heavy* lens, and a good camera strap is essential if you want to have the 1v (especially with the PB-E2 booster) hanging off your neck together with the 24-70/2.8L If you want something less scary and heavy, the Tamron 28-75/2.8 is much less imposing (but seems less solidly built - logical, if you compare prices). And surely the standard 1v (without the booster) is less noticeable than the 1v HS version. > Have you ever shot with the 24/1.4 or > any of the other fixed normal to wide angle L lenses? I have used the 35mm/2.0 lens with another photographer's 1Ds MkII, and it was a very pleasing experience, shooting during sunsets. Surely it feels much more sturdy and solidly-built than the 50mm/1.4. I know, it's not an L lens, but you don't really need something better at this local distance. Note that L lenses are (and remain) pricey, but they tend to hold up their price even in the used equipment market - they could be considered an 'investment' for the serious photographer. Hope this helps, N.F. > Just want to know others' experiences with which _35mm SLR bayonette > mount _film_ _ cameras, from any era, that are still reliable after > many years of use and/or abuse. Are there any? AND have you babied > your equip, use it often or beat it to heck and expose more frames > than a feature length motion picture through it? Have two Pentax ME Supers which seem difficult to kill. One is a bit damaged when I tried to dismantle it to clean dust out of the viewfinder. I don't know why I keep it really. The other one is going strong. Canon T90. With all the electronics I just await the day it gives up, but in the meantime it's pretty indestructible. As you're not interested in screwmount cameras I'll not bother to mention the Zenits that never die. They have made plenty of PK-mount bodies however, but I've never had one. Rich > Just want to know others' experiences with which _35mm SLR bayonette > mount _film_ _ cameras, from any era, that are still reliable after > many years of use and/or abuse. Are there any? AND have you babied > your equip, use it often or beat it to heck and expose more frames > than a feature length motion picture through it? My Nikon FM2n has been through various amounts of abuse, having been bounced around, bashed into things when on a neck strap, dropped a couple of times, and never properly protected from the weather. (On occasions the only protection it's had from rain has been me hunching over it when not using it.) It's still working perfectly. The foam around the mirror and back is starting to get tacky and squishy but there are no light leaks so I'm not bothered by it. I also have a Nikkormat FTN that I bought as a backup body in case the FM2n broke down. The FM2n hasn't broken down so I now use the FTN for black and white film. It's not what you'd call a quiet camera -- when the shutter fires it sounds like someone hammering a metal rod into rock -- but it works well. The only problem is that the meter judders from time to time, though that may be a dying battery. SignatureMatthew Winn [If replying by mail remove the "r" from "urk"] > Just want to know others' experiences with which _35mm SLR bayonette > mount _film_ _ cameras, from any era, that are still reliable after > many years of use and/or abuse. Are there any? It is possible to break any piece of gear, up to and including the counterweight for a boom. Anything with moving parts will also eventually wear out. Reliability is relative, not absolute. Certain things like light seals are maintenance items. A light leak in an EM shouldn't shock anyone. Even if the camera has slept in a closet for 15 years after 5 years of sporadic use, time will take its toll on foam. You can safely assume that any 20th century 35mm SLR you buy will require replacement seals. The only film camera I have left from the 1980's is a Nikon FA. I doubt I've run 1000 rolls of film through it, but I'm pretty sure I've run 500. In the more than 20 years that I've owned it, I've done three CLA's and one more extensive repair. The repair came after a 4+ foot drop onto a concrete floor in Chicago's O'hare airport. (I did not have a lens attached to the camera at the time.) Historically, the FA has been the least reliable of Nikon's "mid-sized" line (FM/FE/FM2/FE2/FA/FM3A), and these weren't designed to stand up to as much abuse as the larger "pro" cameras. But it's a rare pro camera that's had as little use as my FA. Even fewer were banished to a sedentary life after being babied through a couple of vacations and family get- togethers. So it's not terribly surprising that a random eBay Nikon F3 or Canon F1 has been beat into inoperability. But even when such gear was new, the pros I knew always took a backup camera into the field. I doubt very many pros got through a year, let alone a career, without having to switch to backup. I'm most familiar with Nikon gear, but in your situation I'd look for a Nikon F3HP or Canon T90 and have it checked out and a CLA done by a reliable repair shop. In particular, because they are FD-mount cameras and were introduced just before the EOS switchover, T90's sell for less than F3HP's yet frequently show lighter use. SignatureMichael Benveniste -- mhb-offer@clearether.com Spam and UCE professionally evaluated for $250. Use this email address only to submit mail for evaluation. >> Just want to know others' experiences with which _35mm SLR bayonette >> mount _film_ _ cameras, from any era, that are still reliable after [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > before the EOS switchover, T90's sell for less than F3HP's yet > frequently show lighter use. The OP's post was an excellent source of the reason that nobody should buy a camera sight unseen. My F3 has survived a drop onto concrete from should level (the quick release on the tripod head was a bit too quick). It also survived being outside in a severe rainstorm. I bought that camera at a swap meet because it looked and acted like brand new. I haven't used it much since I bought my D70 though. But, places like Ebay are an excellent parking spot for cameras that need expensive repair. Somebody will come along and overpay for it. Jim > >> Just want to know others' experiences with which _35mm SLR bayonette > >> mount _film_ _ cameras, from any era, that are still reliable after [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] > The OP's post was an excellent source of the reason that nobody should buy a > camera sight unseen. SNIP > Jim A much belated thanks for your understanding of my point(s) and standing up for me/re-enforcing what I said (or at least tried to say), Jim :-) I believe I did mention in a later post that my Nikon EM had a shutter problem, not a foam deterioration light seal problem. The whole point of this thread was to find out which cameras, eBa or otherwise, have withstood the test of time without problems. No more window sills for me ;-). Regards to you both, Lewis > On my window sill, as "decorations", like fallen soldiers, sit the > conked out, worn out, shells of camera bodies from the late '70s [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > your equip, use it often or beat it to heck and expose more frames > than a feature length motion picture through it? The grand-daddy of them all - Pentax K1000. Pros - totally mechanical. The meter does have a battery, but if the battery dies ONLY the meter stops working. You can always shoot using calibrated eyeball, sunny 16 or external meters. Cons - no DOF preview. One drawback; they ain't being made anymore, so prices do seem to be going up slightly for good ones. I paid $125 for mine many years ago. If I had to replace it with one in as good shape now, it'd cost me at least $200. I'm kind of rough on equipment, more from banging around in the back of old duece'n-a-half trucks than abuse. Anywhere I went, the cameras went with me, and I went a lot of uncomfortable places. The K1000 has held up well. As have my other Pentax cameras (LX, Super Program, PZ-1P, *ist-D ... only had the K-10D for about 3 months, but so far, I'm impressed). >The grand-daddy of them all - Pentax K1000. > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > >The K1000 has held up well. Another solid performer is the Minolta SrT-102. Yeah it uses a battery but doesn't need it to function. Yeah it's a mercury battery but putting a diode in series with the battery corrects for the V difference and brings the meter into specs with a common modern battery. It uses some very common and excellent lenses and the mechanics of the body are very robust. > The grand-daddy of them all - Pentax K1000. > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > I'm kind of rough on equipment, more from banging > The K1000 has held up well. > As have my other Pentax cameras (LX, Super Program, PZ-1P, *ist-D ... > only had the K-10D for about 3 months, but so far, I'm impressed). There's a way around that: get a KM for much less and just make believe it has no DOF preview or self timer. I never understood why the K-1000 cost more. And the last ones were Malaysian, which is a polite way of spelling plastic. The P3 and P3n were nice too. Plastic but really quiet. My last was a ZX-30, which was very quiet. beautiful. But it had so many modes, it took forever to do a simple thing. It had AF, which lost so many shots, I just sold it. It got so advanced, it was unusable. Now I just use a KM and a Spot F. Not to forget a great Rollei 3.5E. Bob Hickey On Jul 21, 6:57 pm, contax...@aol.com wrote: > Don't care about digital. Good on you! > Don't care about screw mount cameras. hmmm, as in screwed-mount? ;-) > Don't care about rangefinders or Twin Lens Reflexes. Pity. The new ZeissIkon is a real beauty. So are the Bessas. And nothing beats a ZI with a Leica lens on it! > Just want to know others' experiences with which _35mm SLR bayonette > mount _film_ _ cameras, from any era, that are still reliable after > many years of use and/or abuse. Are there any? AND have you babied > your equip, use it often or beat it to heck and expose more frames > than a feature length motion picture through it? Reliable? You mean like my 60s Nikon F which still doesn't miss a click? :-) But I've got better for you: - get hold of a F2AS, send it to Sover Wong for CLA and you'll have a camera to last you a lifetime! - get a F4 with the small MB20 handle and the MF23 data back andyou'll never regret it. Although some can have film registration issues, that inbuilt MD is not the best I've seen... - Failing all that, get hold of a FM2n or a FE2 with a MD12 and forget all about pain: either of those two will outlast and outshoot anything modern. As to either of the above lasting, I've got them all and none has had the slightest problem. They all are used quite often - no "window sill" here - together with the 6x7 stuff. > Don't care about digital. > > Don't care about screw mount cameras. > > Don't care about rangefinders or Twin Lens Reflexes. Personally, I think you would be happy with the medium format rangefinders, especially the Fuji 6x9 models (these are 100% mechanical, light and well built, with wonderful lenses). Go ahead, try one - I think you'll be hooked ;-) Cheers, N.F. > contax...@aol.com wrote: > > Don't care about digital. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Cheers, > N.F. Ibelieve either I and/or a friend tested out the Fuji 6x9 (I think this is the largest format rangefinder they make unless they have a 6x12) quite a few years agao. Although a 6x9 transparency is very nice to look at, like all rangefinders it has parallax problems (what you see is not what you get), you can't see bokeh/selective focus effects and there is no way I could get the same kind of deep depth of field you can with a stopped down 35mm format wide angle. So, though I appreciate the suggestion, its not a thing I would likely buy and rarely rent. Thanks for the suggestion, though :-). >Ibelieve either I and/or a friend tested out the Fuji 6x9 (I think >this is the largest format rangefinder they make unless they have a >6x12) quite a few years ago. Try 6x17! http://www.lensandrepro.com/RENTAL/fuji.html There was also a 6x12. All are now discontinued. >Try 6x17! > >http://www.lensandrepro.com/RENTAL/fuji.html > >There was also a 6x12. All are now discontinued. The GX617 was a viewfinder camera, not a rangefinder camera. Focus was by "visual estimation." See: http://web.archive.org/web/20070322152730/http://www.fujifilm.co.uk/professional /cameras/camera_01_gx617.html http://snipurl.com/1oroj Horseman still makes a 6x17 system. SignatureMichael Benveniste -- mhb-offer@clearether.com Spam and UCE professionally evaluated for $419. Use this email address only to submit mail for evaluation. > >Ibelieve either I and/or a friend tested out the Fuji 6x9 (I think > >this is the largest format rangefinder they make unless they have a [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > There was also a 6x12. All are now discontinued. :-( It might have been the 6x17cm we tested whilst my other friend had a (interchangeable lens?) 6x7 Fuji rangefinder. My fondest memories of these "Texas Leicas" were that I was still in Santa Barbara... Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh, Santa Barbara......... :-) :-) :-) I believe the test shots were done from a stairs/balcony in the now defunct? Del's camera. Seemed as if every week or other week my friend and I were doing rentals (Nikon lenses, Leica?, Fuji, etc.). "Bring in defunct, bring in da noise" ;-) >> >Ibelieve either I and/or a friend tested out the Fuji 6x9 (I think >> >this is the largest format rangefinder they make unless they have a [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > >"Bring in defunct, bring in da noise" ;-) LOL! Mmmmm. Santa Barbara. Beautiful place, beautiful people! > On my window sill, as "decorations", like fallen soldiers, sit the > conked out, worn out, shells of camera bodies from the late '70s [quoted text clipped - 84 lines] > *Yes, I've learned my lesson with water and will only drink it, bathe > in it, or swim in it from now on, sans camera ;-) My 1969 Nikon F is working just fine.. had the FTn meter recalibrated for the alkaline batteries and life is good. My Dads F3 is now in the hands of sister and is functioning perfectly as it always has... dang it Dad, you couldn't have given it to me? Ok my sis takes some great photos with it and couldn't afford anything like it. Probably better he gave it to her. But that is one sexy camera. My Nikon N90s is a work horse... perhaps the best prosumer camera ever built. My other sisters FG is still working fine but she has moved to a P&S Nikon Digital.. don't know which one. I would like to get the FG from her for my collection. SignatureJim <jen....not....home..remvdots...@....yahoo |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.