Considering an SLR

[Pioneer]

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".

Not al early SLRs had dim focusing screensl. I have yet to find any SLR, or DSLR viewfinder that is brighter than the one in my 1959 Zeiss Ikon Contarex, though the mult-coated viewfinder in the LX does come very, very close. Of course the Contarex is not exactly compact since it even makes a Nikon look small. 🙂

 

[Tejasican]

I'd agree with an OM compact , quiet, and bright. I have an F3HP, it is neither compact nor quiet. Likewise my Leicaflex SL. But my R4 (you'd want R6 for full mechanical) with the R series brightscreen is compact, quiet, and bright - and getting Summicrons is no problem.

 

[locheeboy]

Fujica ST901+any Fujinon lens, along with Minolta, the most under-rated cameras/lenses - better than Summicron.

 

[Pioneer]

Fujica ST901+any Fujinon lens, along with Minolta, the most under-rated cameras/lenses - better than Summicron.

Contrary to Mr. Rockwell's opinion, and that of many Leicaphiles, there are actually quite a few lenses that are better than the Summicron.

 

[Tejasican]

Contrary to Mr. Rockwell's opinion, and that of many Leicaphiles, there are actually quite a few lenses that are better than the Summicron.

That would be an interesting pursuit for another thread.....

 

[Pioneer]

That would be an interesting pursuit for another thread.....

Absolutely right.

Right now you can go to KEH and pick up a nice, black, MX with a very good 35 and 50 for less than $400, even with shipping. Of course that does not include a strap or case.

 

[bonatto]

Thanks for all the input. I'll have to mull these over and research a bit, but now I have a good starting point!

 

[mfogiel]

Suggestions:
Best (serious) mechanical slr's: Nikon F2 (loud),
Leicaflex SL2 ( heavy and inserviceable),
Pentax LX,
Canon F1 ( a brick).
Best lenses: 35 and 50mm:
Nikon: Zeiss Makro Planar 50/2 and Distagon 35/2
Leicaflex: Summicron 50/2 (1st) and 35/2 (any)
Pentax LX - Pentax K 55/1.8 or Pentax M 50/1.4, Pentax 35/2
Canon - meh...
Other bodies are not too serious for various reasons.

 

[bonatto]

Suggestions:
Best (serious) mechanical slr's: Nikon F2 (loud),
Leicaflex SL2 ( heavy and inserviceable),
Pentax LX,
Canon F1 ( a brick).
Best lenses: 35 and 50mm:
Nikon: Zeiss Makro Planar 50/2 and Distagon 35/2
Leicaflex: Summicron 50/2 (1st) and 35/2 (any)
Pentax LX - Pentax K 55/1.8 or Pentax M 50/1.4, Pentax 35/2
Canon - meh...
Other bodies are not too serious for various reasons.

I had looked at a contax s2 someone else mentioned (since deleted), and albeit looking like a serious contender, the lack of available glass really drags it down, plus it's essentially a closed system.

A Nikon system makes more sense, especially if I eventually have to go back to a D system.

In regards to the lenses you mentioned, I presume you mean the modern ZF glass. Would I be correct in assuming this works with both an FM2 and pro digital bodies? I had a 50 planar 1.4 which was a lovely lens, but sold it off with my old system.

 

[FrankS]

Isn't the Pentax LX a bit iffy reliability wise? I remember reading this more than once.

 

[DNG]

Disclaimer: I own a Nikon FE, and have my eyes on an FE2.

I would suggest the Nikon FM2, compared to Leica M... just ad VF atop it...
Overall size is about the same, except in height of course.
Takes modern Bats,
1/4000 top speed
1/250 Flash sync
Nikon Ai and Ais 35mm f/2 lenses are considered tops
(although the f/2.8 may have center sharpness results wide open)
Nikon Ai, Ais 50mm f/1.4 are also great lenses..

Altough I own a Nikon 24mm f/2.8 Ais, and Nikon 50mm f/1.8 Ais Long Nose.

The FM2 is a smaller and lighter than the older Nikkormat FT3,
The FM2 is based on the Nikon FM.

These are not to scale to each other...
BUT, you can see that the FM2 is that big a camera...


Nikon FM2 (1983) by xlth, on Flickr

 

[Range-rover]

I also say yes to the Olympus OM1n and other of the series, their small, light,
and have great finders and the aperture ring is in the right place, just like
a Leica M camera. Which was pointed out to me a short time ago.

Range

 

[DNG]

I owned a few OMs... the body size is great, the VF outstanding,
The lenses are fabulous... I just thought the F/stop tabs where in the wrong place for "Me"... I prefer 360* f/stop rings, although similar in place to the Leica Focus tabs... the OM F/stop tabs are rather small.

I suggest you handle an OM1 with a lens, and act like you are adjusting the f/stop and shutter speeds (At the camera mount behind the lens (Aka Nikkormat style)..If, it works for you... then, the OM1 should be on your short list.

It is great SLR with great lenses across the board.
I had an OM1n MD, OM2n, OM4. for several years.
Just my only pet peeve about the F/stop tab size and placement.

 

[Penny Lane]

Pentax MX = OM1 size - battery/meter hassle. Also, the controls are where you expect them on an SLR. Even if I do prefer the OM1 for its control layout, I know of some people who for whatever reason simply can't get used to it so it's not an advantage per sé. That the lens mount is still supported is a real advantage though. Bonus: the MX displays all exposure info in the viewfinder.

I've done up an MX for a friend once and found it a lovely little thing. I just don't need even more systems, so I decided it wasn't for me.

The Fujica ST-series is also a quite small, straight-forward and well regarded SLR, and with the M42 mount there's an almost endless choice of lenses from a wide variety of manufacturers.

Derk

 

[Frontman]

Having shot everything (And still shooting it), I might recommend the Canon FD system, mainly because you require a good 35mm lens. I have used 35mm lenses by Olympus, Nikon, Pentax, etc. but the 35mm Canon FD concave lens is in a class by itself. Nikon's 35mm lenses, the 35/1.4/2/2.8 are rather mediocre (though I usually shoot Nikon gear), and my experience with 35mm Olympus lenses has been hit-and-miss. Only one of the three OM 35/2 lenses I bought was a keeper. I like the Pentax MX, but it is not as a reliable camera as the Nikon, Canon, or Olympus cameras, many of the old MX cameras are beginning to suffer from sticking mirrors due to the drying of internal lubricants, I did three such repairs last year on MX cameras.

I would probably get an old F1 or FTB, with a 50mm f1.4 SSC, and a later 35mm f2 SSC concave lens.

 

[lukitas]

Nikon FG?
the smallest and lightest of the metal nikons.

 

[oftheherd]

Fujica ST901+any Fujinon lens, along with Minolta, the most under-rated cameras/lenses - better than Summicron.

The Fujica ST901 is rather quiet as SLRs go. It is compact but solid, and does offer mechanical speeds from 1/60 (X sync) to 1/1000, even without battery. I don't recall for sure, but I think the meter was center weighted, but edges not ignored. The viewfinder is relatively bright, and provides leds to give the nearest approximate shutter speed (the shutter will give the correct fractional speed as suggested by the meter). Speeds from 20 seconds to 1/1000. Meter very accurate even at near darkness to very bright due to using silicon a blue cell.

If you find good lenses, they are hard to beat. I think they are better, as well as the cameras, than the latter bayonet mount camera line. And I really don't think they take a back seat to any other lens line. The problem is cameras still turn up fairly regularly on ebay, the lenses are almost always expensive. A few years ago, they finally achieved a reputation equal to their quality.

Due to the lens issue, you might do better to consider cameras from the Olympus or Pentax line.

 

[colyn]

Nikon FG?
the smallest and lightest of the metal nikons.

I just sold a FG with 50mm f/1.8. Nice little camera and small..

 

[redisburning]

I'll second Frontman; 35mm is a trouble focal length on SLRs. the Canon Concave and the f2.0 distagon are really the only special ones IMO.

Nikon makes a poor compliment to Leica IMO. they may actually be reliable but the feeling of the lenses is beyond cheap to me. sort of like the Neavue Rich; you can't argue with the net worth but the pedigree just isn't there.

of course I own an F3 and a 50MP so take my opinion FWIW. If the lens worked on my Olympus cameras Id pitch the F3 into the lake which is where you would have found my SRT-101 had I not sold it.

ps, in SLR land comparable to a summicron translates into large size. Id ammend your expectations for either size/price or quality. you won't be disappointed by an OM 50/2 or 50MP optically but they are big, especially the latter which makes two 50 Summicron-Ms duct-taped together look small.

 

[paulfish4570]

everybody seems to have missed the OP's diopter parameter. nikons take interchangeable diopter eyepieces, easily available. not so for olympus and pentax. minolta? others? don't know.