Are Later Film SLRs Now Overlooked?

[David Hughes]

The trouble, or perhaps the point, is that some batteries are expensive for some cameras and have to be disposable batteries. You have to take them on trust and they can fail after being dropped or knocked. And they have a limited shelf life.



OTOH, the cameras that take AA's or AAA's can use rechargeable ones and every other shop sells the disposable ones, at a price.


Regards, David

 

[Ste_S]

The trouble, or perhaps the point, is that some batteries are expensive for some cameras and have to be disposable batteries. You have to take them on trust and they can fail after being dropped or knocked. And they have a limited shelf life.



OTOH, the cameras that take AA's or AAA's can use rechargeable ones and every other shop sells the disposable ones, at a price.


Regards, David

You can also say some of that for film itself.
I've not found batteries to be as fragile as you're suggesting, and carry spares as much as I would carry spare film.
Just bought a box of 10 CR123A for £12 for my Nikon F80.

If you're worried about consumables I'd suggest digital cameras (carry a spare rechargeable battery) might be the way forward for you.

 

[Prest_400]

You can also say some of that for film itself.

Very much agree. Come to think of it, the cameras need to eat as well.
But in some terms, think of it. One of these SLRs with a 50mm is a very solid and high quality choice. No Leica but the 50mm f2 double gauss design is very well performing.
And I can trot them around without worries of them being an expensive loss in the case of that happening.

A club member said of trading an auto Pentax SLR (a3000) with a 50mm for some film.

Think I wrote earlier about getting a F801s and F90 for cheap. Great machines albeit a bit heavy.

I miss the F80. Its automation was very very convenient for one handed beach duties and the built in AF and diopter are fantastic for use without glasses.
Makes me want to look for another...

 

[HHPhoto]

I've not found batteries to be as fragile as you're suggesting, and carry spares as much as I would carry spare film.
Just bought a box of 10 CR123A for £12 for my Nikon F80.

+1.
And there is even a nice battery grip for the F80, the MB-16. With it you can use standard AA batteries or rechargeable AA batteries. I am using it with Sanyo Eneloops, works perfectly.

Cheers, Jan

 

[Solinar]

Batteries, schmateries - Oh my -

Batteries, schmateries - Oh my -

Isn't there an icon on the LCD information panel to warn the user when the battery charge becomes low?

Originally purchased for one my Speedlight SB30 , I found that rechargeable lithium CR123A batteries can last for multiple films in F80/N80.

With regards to the camera - I leave it in a desk drawer at work. It came with a kit lens that was praised by Ken Rockwell, which I found to be mediocre at best. As the sole bidder on the camera and lens camera, they came to be mine for $35 with shipping.

 

[Solinar]

With regards to the MB-16 battery grip - it would probably cost as much as what I paid for the camera with shipping. 🙂

 

[HHPhoto]

Isn't there an icon on the LCD information panel to warn the user when the battery charge becomes low?

Yes, of course. It is on afaik every modern film SLR: F75, F80, F90X, F100, F5, F6.
In all the decades I've never run out of power out in the fields with these kind of cameras.

Cheers, Jan

 

[HHPhoto]

With regards to the MB-16 battery grip - it would probably cost as much as what I paid for the camera with shipping. 🙂

When I bought mine used it was cheaper than the camera. But even if that wouldn't have been the case: Using it with rechargeable AA batteries saves you lots of money over the years. The MB-16 pays for itself.

Cheers, Jan

 

[David Hughes]

FWIW, my comments have been based on experience and I have the bills to prove it. And I have been buying batteries for cameras since the 1960's.



Regards, David

 

[BernardL]

@NickTrop: Are Latter-Day Film SLRs Currently the Overlooked Film Camera? I agree they are effective. I was given an EOS 500 (strange how this thread revolves around Nikon plastic SLRs) with a Tamron 28-200. Exposure is OK, AF is accurate and fast enough for me, package is relatively light and compact for the versatility and performance it provides. Up to here, I'm with you.

But, when going for a walk or a hike, I rather reach for, e.g., a Retina or a Contaflex, despite their being less effective (and the contaflex + Pro-Tessars is definitely heavier).

 

[Huss]

How long have batteries been used in kameras now? 50 years? And some people are still complaining about batteries?
Are these the same people that say getting around on a horse is better than in a car, cuz cars need petrol?

 

[ZivcoPhoto]

Actually, when I need an autofocus film SLR from film days , I just grab the F5 I purchased several years ago for $275. - iit is, what I consider my $15 film SLR - with matrix metering and all the other features it offered. Any time else I’ll grab a Nikon F or Leica M or even my also inexpensive Leicaflex SL

The point is all these professional cameras are inexpensive (cheap).

 

[David Hughes]

Huss,

The problem is not the batteries themselves but the various rules and regulations that make them difficult and expensive. In this country you can't send a lot of types of batteries in the post and so have to rely on dealers having them and that usually means camera dealers and they are few and far between. So a bargain camera could be a bit of a white elephant.

Luckily the AA's, AAA's, CR2's, CR123A's and SR44's are easily available but one or two are not; mostly the double type. I think the problems with those laptops and those nasty batteries without the overheating protection (using the third contact) started it all.

Regards, David

 

[Ste_S]

Actually, when I need an autofocus film SLR from film days , I just grab the F5 I purchased several years ago for $275. - iit is, what I consider my $15 film SLR - with matrix metering and all the other features it offered. Any time else I’ll grab a Nikon F or Leica M or even my also inexpensive Leicaflex SL

The point is all these professional cameras are inexpensive (cheap).

Hmm. It appears your definition of cheap ($275) isn't my definition of cheap (<£40).

 

[Ste_S]

Huss,

The problem is not the batteries themselves but the various rules and regulations that make them difficult and expensive. In this country you can't send a lot of types of batteries in the post and so have to rely on dealers having them and that usually means camera dealers and they are few and far between. So a bargain camera could be a bit of a white elephant.

Luckily the AA's, AAA's, CR2's, CR123A's and SR44's are easily available but one or two are not; mostly the double type. I think the problems with those laptops and those nasty batteries without the overheating protection (using the third contact) started it all.

Regards, David

I live in Birmingham, UK. The countries second biggest city. If I wanted to, I could readily obtain any of the batteries I need for my film cameras tomorrow (a Saturday). Film however.... there's only one shop I can obtain film from on a Saturday and their supply is erratic and expensive.

I don't find them difficult and expensive to obtain outside of that in the UK. Had a 10 pack of CR123A delivered to an Amazon locker for £12 today after ordering yesterday.

Like Huss I don't get the fear of batteries and electronics in cameras.

 

[Huss]

Actually, when I need an autofocus film SLR from film days , I just grab the F5 I purchased several years ago for $275. - iit is, what I consider my $15 film SLR - with matrix metering and all the other features it offered. Any time else I’ll grab a Nikon F or Leica M or even my also inexpensive Leicaflex SL

The point is all these professional cameras are inexpensive (cheap).

You're completely missing the point of the thread.

Thread title is:
"Are Latter-Day Film SLRs Currently the Overlooked Film Camera?"

Cameras like the F5, F6 etc are not overlooked. Everyone is familiar with those pro spec cameras. The thread refers to those cheap, lightweight, small AF slrs that most have seemingly forgotten about. Which is why they are so cheap now.

While $275 may not be much money to some, you can buy 30 Nikon N75s for that. Thirty.

 

[css9450]

How long have batteries been used in kameras now? 50 years? And some people are still complaining about batteries?

The Barnack Leica didn't use batteries, therefore we shouldn't use them either. Forever and ever!

 

[Huss]

The Barnack Leica didn't use batteries, therefore we shouldn't use them either. Forever and ever!

You make a point. Not a very good one. But you definitely make a point.

😀

 

[NickTrop]

You're completely missing the point of the thread.

Thread title is:
"Are Latter-Day Film SLRs Currently the Overlooked Film Camera?"

Cameras like the F5, F6 etc are not overlooked. Everyone is familiar with those pro spec cameras. The thread refers to those cheap, lightweight, small AF slrs that most have seemingly forgotten about. Which is why they are so cheap now.

While $275 may not be much money to some, you can buy 30 Nikon N75s for that. Thirty.

And lest we forget, these plastic wonders autofocus with modern G-series glass without spending F6 dollars. For Nikon shooters who mostly shoot digital and have a collection of D and G glass, which is a fair number of folks I reckon, given the cost of these bodies, well worth it to have for when you get the film itch. But in addition to this, they're simply great cameras with all the modern trimmin's plus they're light as hell. These are as light as P-n-S and with any 50/1.8 -- from Sigma, Nikon, Tokina, brand X will produce images that blow away nearly every overpriced point-n-shoot with their pedestrian simple tessars... even those with (lol) "T* coating" (or whatever name the Zeiss marketeers devised...)

 

[css9450]

You make a point. Not a very good one. But you definitely make a point.

😀

A sarcastic point, yes. 🙄