Are Later Film SLRs Now Overlooked?

[roscoetuff]

Found myself going down this road, too. Consolidated by shipping off some Sony and Contax gear to dive into the Nikon system with a set of lenses usable in both digital and film, and with the F100 and D750, the handling isn't too dissimilar, too. Nice stuff! And to think all this time, I'd eschewed Nikon and AF... older eyes moved AF from the "ignore" category to "time to get it" for grand baby pictures. Less about $'s and more about the tool box.

 

[David Murphy]

I had a late era 35mm Minolta-Konica Autofocus SLR with a matching short zoom not too long ago that I was toying with (I am a pretty hard-core vintage era mechanical camera guy). I was pretty impressed at it's ability to focus and expose rapidly and accurately, as wells automatically load and advance 35mm film. The camera was made in 2000 something, right before the digital onslaught, but well done. If I'd had time I would used it - on occasion. It had a nice feel to it, the way it handled and so forth, all consistent with the best of Japanese consumer products. I liked it better than later era Nikon AF SLR's I've seen.

 

[Ste_S]

F65/F75 owners, your experience please.

Considering one of these as a light, cheap throw it in a bag camera for cycling etc.
Ticks most of my boxes apart from not being able to change ISO from the DX code (I shoot consumer c41 1/3rd of a stop over, push b&w etc). Does the exposure comp dial work well enough to get around this ?

 

[vagab0nd]

F65/F75 owners, your experience please.

Considering one of these as a light, cheap throw it in a bag camera for cycling etc.
Ticks most of my boxes apart from not being able to change ISO from the DX code (I shoot consumer c41 1/3rd of a stop over, push b&w etc). Does the exposure comp dial work well enough to get around this ?

The N65/N75 only work with 1/2 stops, not 1/3 stops. If you can work around that, they're fine cameras.

If you can't, the N90s/F90x is about 450g heavier, but it can shoot 1/3 stops and barely costs much more despite being a considerably more advanced camera.

Sent from my PH-1 using Tapatalk

 

[Contarama]

It's an intriguing question thanks Nick.

One thing I don't think has been mentioned is many of these now dirty cheap plastic fantastics were quite expensive when brand new.

I've had several such cameras...nice units especially at can be had for peanuts price point...but you all can have my eye level F2 when you pry my cold dead fingers from it. 🙂

 

[David Murphy]

I agree this is an interesting question. While many of these recent vintage film SLR's suffer from too much plastic, etc. they are often in overall better condition than better made vintage SLR's, many of which now need servicing. The later day SLR's also usually have working TTL meters that use modern batteries. For this reason they may be useful for those experimenting with film photography for the first time.

I've found the Cosina made mechanical shuttered SLR's of this genre such as the OM-2000 and Nikon FM10 to be fairly decent and reliable SLR's (for instance).

I don't know much about the late Contax era SLR's, but I did see one about 20 years old with build quality that really impressed me, especially the brightness of the finder. The Contax series mostly had electronic shutters though, which I avoid, but I think there was a mechanical shuttered version (S2 or something like that).

I think all 35mm film SLR's will eventually appreciate in value unless someone starts up production of reasonably priced models again -- same for other formats of film cameras in fact - we can only hope!

 

[Huss]

Yeah so I crumbled when I found a like new one for $8. For $8 this camera is totally worth it.
Here with my Sigma Art 50 1.4:



Yeah you can't set ISO. And Exp comp is in .5 stops. But it cost 8 freakin dollars! A Fuji disposable camera costs $9!

 

[Ste_S]

The N65/N75 only work with 1/2 stops, not 1/3 stops. If you can work around that, they're fine cameras.

If you can't, the N90s/F90x is about 450g heavier, but it can shoot 1/3 stops and barely costs much more despite being a considerably more advanced camera.

Sent from my PH-1 using Tapatalk

Cheers. I have the broadly similar F801 which will probably be on the way out as I just mostly shoot my F4 now I have a mb-20 for it.

After a lightweight camera that I'll just probably use a 50 or cheap kit zoom on, whilst also using the pop up flash to save me taking a dedicated flash unit.
Shooting my consumer C41 at half a stop over rather than a third shouldn't make too much difference...

 

[Ste_S]

The later day SLR's also usually have working TTL meters that use modern batteries. For this reason they may be useful for those experimenting with film photography for the first time.

I think the main thing for the af SLRs is that they're more consistent with their results than manual focus and/or mechanical cameras. Autofocus, matrix meters and TTL flash remove user error; electronic shutters are more accurate than mechanical.

 

[vagab0nd]

Cheers. I have the broadly similar F801 which will probably be on the way out as I just mostly shoot my F4 now I have a mb-20 for it.

After a lightweight camera that I'll just probably use a 50 or cheap kit zoom on, whilst also using the pop up flash to save me taking a dedicated flash unit.
Shooting my consumer C41 at half a stop over rather than a third shouldn't make too much difference...

I've got a similar setup going on - N90s / N65 / FE / Nikkormat FT2, with plans to add an F4.

It took me a little while, but once I realized that I a) prefer to invest in glass over bodies, b) don't like mount adapters, and c) like having diverse body styles available to shoot, it became obvious that Nikon is the route for me.

 

[Ste_S]

F65 arrived today and it's not working quite right with my 50mm f1.8 af-d (which works fine on F801 and F4). Auto-focus doesn't always engage and I'm getting 'err' on aperture priority mode. Ideas ?

Ahh - maybe ignore me. You can't use the aperture ring as the camera doesn't have the ai tab and have to use the dial to change aperture, right ?

 

[vagab0nd]

F65 arrived today and it's not working quite right with my 50mm f1.8 af-d (which works fine on F801 and F4). Auto-focus doesn't always engage and I'm getting 'err' on aperture priority mode. Ideas ?

Ahh - maybe ignore me. You can't use the aperture ring as the camera doesn't have the ai tab and have to use the dial to change aperture, right ?

Correct. In all settings modes, including M, you have to set the lens to minimum aperture and make exposure adjustments via the wheel and compensation dial.

 

[farlymac]

Can't believe you all are still going on about this. But I have to say that I've bought and used quite a lot of the cameras mentioned in the above posts, and some have their weak points, but all were usable. That's what matters in the end.



And for the all mechanical purists like Huss, no need to get worked up over cheap automatic camera fun. You can find the same kind of action in old non-interchangeable lens rangefinder cameras (and those without rangefinders too). The Ricoh 300/500 series comes to mind quite quickly for capable but cheap today cameras. My favorite small non-rangefinder is a Braun Paxette.



Anyway, the main thing is to find something for little money that makes you happy to use, whatever it is made out of.



PF

 

[Huss]

Yeah so I crumbled when I found a like new one for $8. For $8 this camera is totally worth it.
Here with my Sigma Art 50 1.4:



Yeah you can't set ISO. And Exp comp is in .5 stops. But it cost 8 freakin dollars! A Fuji disposable camera costs $9!

Can't believe you all are still going on about this. But I have to say that I've bought and used quite a lot of the cameras mentioned in the above posts, and some have their weak points, but all were usable. That's what matters in the end.



And for the all mechanical purists like Huss, no need to get worked up over cheap automatic camera fun. You can find the same kind of action in old non-interchangeable lens rangefinder cameras (and those without rangefinders too). The Ricoh 300/500 series comes to mind quite quickly for capable but cheap today cameras. My favorite small non-rangefinder is a Braun Paxette.



Anyway, the main thing is to find something for little money that makes you happy to use, whatever it is made out of.



PF

Hey I caved!

 

[john_s]

Feature- and capability-wise, my best film camera is probably my Nikon N90s. Obviously not as pretty as my F2 or my Rolleis but unlike those cameras it has PSAM, center-weighted, spot or matrix metering, several frames per second motor drive, all-mode autobracketing, fantastic flash capability, etc, etc... Too many to even remember. But it wasn't $9 or $25 or even $100. I bought it new in 1996 so it was full price! Hard to believe its been 23 years.

This camera is by far the most comfortable to hold of any SLR I've tried. I have small hands. The contours of the right side of the body just fit perfectly. And mine was full price, new also. (F90x in this part of the world)

 

[john_s]

Like Austintatious, I too bought an N90s brand new, and still have it, though I've had to remove the goo from the back that was supposed to act as easy-grip. But that was it's only problem.
..................


PF

Nothing that some carefully applied duct tape can't fix. Even some later Nikon SLRs have this problem which I think is bizarrely extraordinary for such a smart company which make products of such lasting value (P+S models excluded).

 

[Ste_S]

A quick initial impression of the F65 i got today

It's small for an af camera with built in motor drive and pop up flash, not far off the FE/M chasis size. Quite impressive really.

In black it looks quite nice and whilst it's made of plastic it doesn't feel cheap. With the grip and the back ridge for your thumb it's actually really nice in the hand. Something you can use with a wrist strap without issue.

For a SLR with af, flappy mirror and motor drive it's reasonably quiet. The af motor makes a nice 'whooshing' sound with an af-d lens as opposed to the nails on blackboard noise of earlier Nikon af cameras

The viewfinder is smaller than other film Nikons I've used but without it being tiny as found on the D3xxx and D5xxx DSLRs. Perfectly useable.

A physical switch to swop from auto and manual focus is nice, the button you have to hold down to cancel the af assist lamp in low light less so. Having a depth of field preview button is great on a modern(ish) consumer cam.

Taking it to a festival at the weekend, looking forward to seeing how it turns out

 

[HHPhoto]

Are these 2000's plastic fantastic mid-level SLRs the new film bargains?

Yes, they are, definitely.
Cameras like Nikon F75, F80 or Canon EOS 300V, 300X, 30, 33, 30V, 33V deliver very good quality, much more features than older mechanical film SLRs, and are available for extremely low prices.
Perfect for film photographers who are interested in making good photography, and not so much in hipster-camera-fashion 😉.

Cheers, Jan

 

[jsrockit]

Perfect for film photographers who are interested in making good photography, and not so much in hipster-camera-fashion 😉.

Exactly... here in Santiago, Chile I see many film cameras that have no hipster value in use. Digital too... many people still using D80, D300 to make wonderful photos. It is refreshing really.

 

[Prest_400]

Yesterday I was out dipping into water and sometimes I like the point of view from it, so I tend to have a "not very valuable" camera handy for that purpose... Usually it has been a Nikon AF SLR, F80 (which died of salt spray exposure) and an F90. A thrift find mju I also fulfilled EDC purposes, but doesn't have the sparkle and sharpness of an SLR.
Though yesterday only had the Pentax MX (adopted from a fellow RFFer). Only one hand for shooting, the other one for balance and holding onto the ladder of the pier. I missed automation in focus and film winding.
It's always fun to see some reactions when taking the camera into the water (over it of course, no nikonos here).


As of what John says. The other day in the photo club a member took a Pentax K100 (2010 SLR?), and we discussed its low value, but I always argued for its usefulness and how purpose fulfilling it may be.