35mm - Which system ?

[GarageBoy]

I also vote Nikon- ZF glass from Zeiss is available and the bodies are more reliable than anything from Kyocera

 

[sepiareverb]

These bodies are all kind of old these days, if reliable is a priority I'd say have three bodies and the lenses. The G is pretty noisy for portraiture. I guess I'd say the Nikon, but none of these bodies would be near my first choice. FM3A?

I agree with Godfrey, the 28/2 is the choice for Nikon 28mm. The 1.2 or an early 1.4 would be a great fit for portraits.

 

[easyrider]

Curiously, no Canon. The F1 series are great cameras. I have an EF. Built like a tank.
From Wikipedia: "The EF was built as an electronic version of Canon's top-of-the line F-1 camera. Because of this, the EF shares the F-1's rugged construction and tough metal body. Unlike the F-1, the EF does not support any motor drive for film transport. Neither does it provide any interchangeable viewfinder."

 

[unixrevolution]

I don't have personal experience or a horse in this race, but I chose the F3. The G is great and the lenses are supposedly amazing, but I think the F3 would be what I go for for the reliability issues.

My Personal choice for a small two-lens system like this, would be a Pentax LX with the SMC or SMC Pentax-M 28mm f/2 and 50/1.4 or 1.2. If you want something smaller and a bit more special, you can combine an LX with the much svelter and sharper FA 31mm 1.8 Limited and 43mm 1.9 limited lenses. The FA's and their auto aperture and AF are wasted on an LX, but if you want an AF or Digital body as a compliment they'd support it.

 

[littleearth]

I started this thread.
End up buying a Spotmatic with a 28mm and a 55mm. Invested the rest of the money on a 645.
I'm still shooting the Spotmatic, viewfinder is a bit dim and the 55mm is nothing special, but it's very reliable.

 

[unixrevolution]

I started this thread.
End up buying a Spotmatic with a 28mm and a 55mm. Invested the rest of the money on a 645.
I'm still shooting the Spotmatic, viewfinder is a bit dim and the 55mm is nothing special, but it's very reliable.

That's quite a bit off the mark, but a fine setup.

I would consider dumping the 55 for the superb and inexpensive 8-element Super-Takumar or SMC-Takumar 50mm f/1.4, if you really aren't happy with it.

 

[giganova]

The R4S is a wonderful camera (one of the best SLR ever built IMHO), but unfortunately the electronics is rather unreliable and there are no spare parts to repair it.

I'd say go with the F3 and the AI-S lenses, which are fantastic. I'd actually go with an FM2, but that's just me. Just don't expect a soft shutter as on a Leica M or even R, but more of a loud metallic CLONK that will people turn their heads in your direction. 😀

If I'd go back to film SLRs, I'd actually get an Olympus OM-1, an all-mechanical, lightweight and small SLR -- one of the most iconic SLRs ever built.

Edit: just realized that the OP already made up his mind

 

[kuzano]

My personal experience with f2 and larger aperture lenses is that the largest aperture is not really the sharpest setting. I generally find the Bokeh is great, but you don't get sharp until the second, and sometimes the third aperture.

That may be OK, but I am often surprised when the largest aperture below 50mm focal length lenses is the sharpest on the lens.

However, one can always throw money at the problem for a solutions --- big bucks and very caring selection, with personal trial... never without.

 

[Steve M.]

If you're shooing portraits w/ a 35mm camera, especially if you're shooting head shots, you really need a 90 lens or thereabouts due to distortions w/ a 50 lens when used close up. A 105-135 is even better for older folks (makes the nose look smaller).

 

[Deleted member 65559]

Seems to me like odd choices of systems. Me, i'd take a Leica M with a 35 & 50 or 28 & 50 anytime. The Zeiss glass is great but i was never sold on the autofocus bodies....or their longterm reliability

 

[Robert.M]

Contax G1 or G2 for their wonderful lens