Considering an SLR

bonatto

looking out
Local time
2:04 PM
Joined
Mar 11, 2010
Messages
641
I'm considering giving a go at an SLR for a bit, coming from an M6 kit with 35 and 50.

I'm looking for something reasonably compact, using modern batteries for the meter, mechanical, with a bright viewfinder that can take a diopter lens or adjusting.

Would need a 35 and a 50, both with comparable quality to modern summicrons.

Meter should be spot or center weighted.

Any ideas for an economical kit?
 
I'm considering giving a go at an SLR for a bit, coming from an M6 kit with 35 and 50.

I'm looking for something reasonably compact, using modern batteries for the meter, mechanical, with a bright viewfinder that can take a diopter lens or adjusting.

Would need a 35 and a 50, both with comparable quality to modern summicrons.

Meter should be spot or center weighted.

Any ideas for an economical kit?

That sounds just like a Pentax MX or LX.
 
of these pentaxes or nikons, how quiet are they? I know certainly not as quiet as an M body, but I had a k1000 that was a bit loud
 
Mk. 1 eyeball...

And of course there have been quite reliable hand-held exposure meters since the 1880s. Even electric ones since the 1930s.

Cheers,

R.
I have to admit that I did try going to in-camera metering via a Nikon FM, but found it difficult to go back after using a hand meter for 20 years. Mostly I missed incident readings.
 
I have to admit that I did try going to in-camera metering via a Nikon FM, but found it difficult to go back after using a hand meter for 20 years. Mostly I missed incident readings.

I've had the similar experience, though backwards. I did shoot with an M2 and a hand meter for a little while, but had trouble getting used to it. The battery on mine managed to get depleted quite quickly as well so...
 
Minolta SRT-202 has acute/matte screen, and takes cheap diopters. Metering is Minolta CLC center-weighted. Got mine in the classifieds here for $40, put a CRIS adapter in it for battery, and it works great. Later on, got it completely rebuilt by Chris Stelz for $75. Now absolutely as good as brand new. Built like a tank, and the MC/MD Rokkor lenses are absolutely killer. They have now replaced my Leitz Summicrons. No wonder Leitz collaborated with Minolta. Nowadays they are extremely plentiful and cheap 😱
 
I know they are not compact (nor light). I know they do not take modern batteries (a .59 cent hearing aid battery lasts a few months). But, my new found drug is Leicaflex. The SLR version of your mentioned M6. Summicron equivalency? No problem!
 
A couple of things to consider.....

Early SLRs had dim focussing screens, late SLRs had brighter but smaller focussing screens and once AF hit the market they were next to useless for actually focussing (manually that is). There's a sort of historical high spot for nicely built useable SLRs that roughly corresponds with "late 70s".

35mm and 50mm are the ideal focal lengths to use with a rangefinder camera, why go for the extra complication of an SLR unless you want to explore focal lengths out of the ordinary which is where they really excel?

I second Pioneer's suggestion of Pentax MX - enormous lens choice at all budgets.
 
When I went that route I ended up with a well cared for yet brassed Nikon FM. Smooth, solid, small, good meter that takes commonly available LR44 batteries. It will take Ai as well as non Ai Nikkor lenses. It was cheap too, because it is overshadowed by the FM2 with its high tech shutter (which very few of us actually need). The finder is good too, much better than later, cheap AF SLRs.Oh, and you can connect a good motor too.

What can I say? It has become my favorite camera. But I am a heretic anyway as I prefer SLRs to RFs...

A recent shot below. Lens was the Nikkor 180mm f2.8 AF ED. Film was expired Kodak VR 200.


The Jacks, Impact festival Helmond by Ronald_H, on Flickr
 
Since when did a Nikon become compact, especially when compared with the MX or LX Pentax, or one of the Oly OM models?

I have certainly not tried them all so I could certainly be wrong but I have yet to find any SLR from the mechanical era with a shutter as quiet as my M6. The mirror going up and down will always add to the perceived shutter noise. However, I use two Pentax LX cameras fairly regularly and they are certainly not as quiet as the M6 but it is not bad at all. Though I no longer own an MX the shutters are not any louder than the LX. If a Pentax has a really loud shutter it probably needs to have new mirror bumpers installed.

I will say this, a nicely cared for Pentax LX, or MX, is a pleasure to work with. Though obviously different it really feels no larger or heavier in use than my M6.

Of course I am pretty obviously biased on this topic so feel free to keep that in mind as you look for your SLR. Most of the metal, mechanical marvels from that time period are pretty nice cameras. What really matter is how it feels in your hands. If you can you are always better off going out and handling a few yourself to see how they feel.
 
Beside my m7 I like to use, when in a srl mood my Nikon FM2. Small, light weight everything ok apart that for sure it is not silent. When you fire the sound is "dry2 , but I like it!
robert
 
Choose an Olympus OM. Priced right. Mechanical models available with excellent meters.
The lenses will have familiar ergonomics to your RF lenses with relatively small size and aperture ring on the front rim.
I use an OM2 which offers AE as well as manual exposure. The OM2 is Battery dependent.
The OM1 is mechanical with battery only for metering.

I also like the Pentax MX and use one occasionally with an excellent 50mm f1.7 lens.
Nikons to me are too big and clunky. Unless you are going to war or need a spare hammer there is no reason to carry a brick like Nikon IMO just to use a 50mm and 35mm.
 
Back
Top Bottom