film SLR under $150 - any recommendations?

[littleearth]

The Pentax MX is one of my favs, but definitely not the cheapest, specially the black ones.

I woul also consider the Contax 139Q and the Minolta XD11, both very small, with bright viewfinders and they look great.

 

[nongfuspring]

I would pick the lens first, since you only want one get the one you want.

Good advice.

 

[David Hughes]

Hi,

Way under the budget maximum; try the Minolta X-300 and the f/1.4 50mm lens. And there's all the later Canon EOS film cameras, like the 300V, they don't seem to be able to give them away on ebay today when I looked at a couple.

Trouble is I'd vote for all the ones suggested so far; it all depends on what you want in the VF and the handling. Plus they range from the purely manual OM-1 to the all singing and all dancing automatics of the EOS 300V.

Regards, David

 

[Coopersounds]

minolta XD, Oly OM-1, Pentax MX or ME, all easily acheivable with a 50mm 1.4-2.0 within budget.
all have bright viewfinders, all have great lenses and are small.
I personally find the pentax and minolta easier to get <$100 with lenses.

 

[kxl]

You can get a clean Nikon F100 for under $150. Pair it with a $99 Nikon 50/1.8 AFD, and you've got a film SLR kit that is hard to beat. I know it's not what you asked for, and no, it's nowhere near as small and lightweight as the OM's and Pentax, but it is one hell of a combo. I'm just sayin'....

 

[CamB]

If the Pentax seems too expensive...

...consider a Ricoh XR7 (or the Sears equivalent if you don't mind Sears written on the camera). Super cheap, the 50mm F2 it comes with isn't bad although feels plasticky (sometimes you see a 50/1.4 - will be much better), and convenient exposure lock and compensation (and pretty easy to use in manual). I used one mostly with a Pentax SMC 50/1.7. It'd be <$50 with the Rikenon lens.

The KR10 is alright too if you prefer a match needle when doing manual exposure.

(edit) - for example on ebay right now there is a Sears equivalent (KS Auto) to the KR10 with the F1.4 lens and a 80-200 zoom for $45.

But it does sound to me like you want an OM.

 

[Wulfthari]

With some luck you can get a Pentax LX under $150, that's a very capable and small camera. Alternatively the MX and the Nikon FM are also good choices.

 

[B.Toews]

As others have mentioned, I'd go for an OM-1 or OM-2. The ME Super is nice as well, but I prefer my OM-1n's viewfinder coverage (97% vs 92% IIRC).

 

[Coopersounds]

almost forgot! Pentax P30 - small, light, cheap, and lovely lens options!!

 

[geetist]

canon ae-1, cheap lens system. disposable body no need to baby... or nikon FE2, versatile body but relatively pricy lens system.

Cheers.

-Jack

 

[tunalegs]

Small body Miranda SLR (that is anything that is not a Sensorex). From the F model to the last Sensomat. Until the OM came along these were basically the small SLR. Not particular light though. Interchangeable viewfinders, with the prism offering (practically) 1:1 viewing.
The G model has an oversized mirror and thus the brightest viewfinder - but they are also a little more fragile from being bit more complex than the other models.

 

[Laviolette]

Minolta XD11 or Pentax MX!

I don't have much experience with Pentax glass, but I love many of Rokkor lenses...especially the 50mm 1.4.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

What it means - bright EV in SLR? They are all bright enough. If it isn't dirt cheap ones. 🙂
But some of them will blurs image more heavily in out of central focusing area.
OMs, you could find them cheap and 50 1.8 which is amazing lens, with only limit of getting nuts in bokeh, sometimes.
Don't buy old OMs, they have this crappy 1.35v battery. More new ones are with ones which are sold on every corner cheap.
I have OM10, no issues, measures precise and fast to shot with aperture priority and M adapter is cheap to get. Very small camera and lens.

 

[peterm1]

I will give you some recommendations based on my personal experience. Why not go for one of the late film era cameras if you truly are willing to consider non metal cameras? I still own a Nikon F801s (Also known as F8008s in North American markets) and while it has a composite exterior I am pretty sure it has a metal chassis if this is relevant. It was and it is still a superb camera that can be used equally well with MF and AF lenses. In fact it works better with MF lenses as early AF was kinda clunky and slow by today's standards. Plus it has the advantage of matrix metering. The focus screen on the F 801s works fine for MF I find, especially as the camera gives focus confirmation in the viewfinder, but in any event it is swappable for a split screen one if you so wish. These screens are standard for Nikon cameras of the era and hence still reasonably available and cheap. And of course there is a super range of Nikon prime lenses many of which are available for a song. Incidentally the F801 is still available for a song itself - well under your $150. When I need to shoot film, mine is still my "go to" film camera due to its competence and ease of use. BTW one further advantage of this camera is that it uses standard AA batteries unlike many cameras of this era and earlier.

If that is out of the question, I can give good reports on the Nikkormat FTN which likewise is cheap to buy sturdy and in fact solid as a rock. It handles well and looks well and is very readily available to buy. Another option I used then and now (occasionally) are the early Pentax cameras in M42 screw mount. Both the Spotmatic and pre Spotmatic cameras such as the s1 and s1a and SV. The latter do not have inbuilt meters though but are well made good looking cheap and fun to use. Best of all, like the Nikon cameras Pentax made a superb line of lenses which are likewise cheap to buy at least for the more common ones. These are of course in M42 screw mount. Typically you will find one of these cameras with something like a 50mm f1.8 or f2 lens and sometimes the f1.4 version for a bit more cost. All of those lenses perform brilliantly and have nice bokeh. Both the Pentax Spotmatic and the Nikkormat use mercury batteries which are no longer available though, so you are obliged to use aircells or silver batteries, both of which have some disadvantages. The S1a camera etc of course , having no meter do not have batteries at all. But in general the issue of which batteries they use is a consideration with earlier cameras and something to look out for as some of those batteries are no longer available. As those batteries typically only power the meter and the camera is mechanical that does not mean you cannot use the camera though as long as you are willing to make other arrangements for metering.

 

[kuzano]

And the WINNER may be:

And the WINNER may be:

I'am getting more interested in shooting 35mm film now that I have a better hybrid workflow that can handle a larger volume. Specifically color negative as opposed to BW. What do you guys recommend I buy? Here are my requirements

1 - Has to be under $150 SLR (no RF suggestions please). The cheaper the better

2 - I only need a 50mm lens so any camera from any system is fair game (as long as it fits a decent 50mm lens). I only shoot with 28mm and 50mm FL's and the 28mm range is covered by my Ricoh GR

3 - Has to have a good BRIGHT viewfinder. This is a must. I need to be able to enjoy the experience

4 - Has to be small and most importantly light weight. The smaller the better. As a example I think the Nikon F3 and F2 cameras are too heavy.

That's it really. I'am not all that concerned with bomb proof build. I like mechanical metal cameras over fully electronic plastic ones but that's not set in stone.

I've been seriously eyeing the Olympus OM cameras (no experience with them) since they seem to satisfy all my requirements. Suggestions and comments welcome

The Fujica ST701, as meeting most of your requirements PLUS....

Weighs in at 580 grams, or very close to the lowest weight of all the camera's offered so far.

Lowest price as not considered a contender by most listing solutions here. Cheap and plentiful.

NO bigger on width and thickness than my OM 2S program

Most mechanical of all mentioned and simple match needle metering, No hunting for small numbers. Match marks and needle are HUGE in the viewfinder.

THREAD MOUNT.... the versatile M42 thread mount which was used since 1949 in the Contax S and opens up to all M42 and Pentax thread mounts, and more importantly Carl Zeiss lenses.

If I wanted light, simple, cheap, plentiful and a widest choice of lenses, I would get the Fujica ST701 or other Fujica thread mound bodies. Oh wait.... I have one.

And remember that the Fujinon lenses for this camera are also very good, cheap and plentiful.

The Fujica brand, The ST models in thread mount. All over eBay. THESE ARE $30 TO $50 CAMERAS WITH LENSES (FUJINON AND OTHER) in high numbers on eBay.

 

[lynnb]

Since you can get bodies from Olympus, Canon, Pentax, Nikon and Fujica (and maybe others) that meet your price/weight considerations, I second the opinion that you should choose the 50mm lens you'd most like to shoot with and then buy the body.

I have the OM with 50/1.8 and 50/1.4, very nice, light and good handling. I've handled the Pentaxes and they are also very nice. I have a Nikkormat but it's much more solid - and heavier. Built like a tank. No complaints with the Nikkor 50/1.4.

I also bought a Nikon F80 at a charity store for $15. I added a Nikkor 50/1.8 AF-D (a very cheap, but excellent 50mm) and that's a very good-handling combination: the camera has a built-in grip, and it's lightweight, being largely composite material. The body is a bit bigger than the others, but the handling, metering and AF more than compensate IMHO.

I must say that Fujica mentioned by Kuzano sounds interesting, too. M42 gives you a lot of choice.

 

[ravilamir]

Don't buy old OMs, they have this crappy 1.35v battery. More new ones are with ones which are sold on every corner cheap.
I have OM10, no issues, measures precise and fast to shot with aperture priority and M adapter is cheap to get. Very small camera and lens.

The OM-1 can use a 675ZA hearing aid battery. They don't last long, but are cheap and you should find them in your chemist. They can also be converted to use a SR44 1,55V battery.
The OM-10 is really a beauty. In part it is a fusion of the -1 with the -2. With the Manual Adapter in place, it doesn't need to be turned on to work in Manual mode. I normally use it as I use the -2 in Auto mode and switched off. I don't need in daylight to see the shutter speed indication on the viewfinder. I take a reading initially, set the aperture and switch it off. Very economical on batteries. BTW, the manual for the -2 alerts that common alkaline LR44 batteries aren't to be used, only SR44 silver ones. I have yet to see a problem with LR44 batteries.

 

[Dirk]

As has been pointed out before, your choices are numerous. Here's what I like, keeping your requirements in mind:

1) Pentax ME Super. Small with a bright, large viewfinder and aperture priority. The Pentax-M and Pentax-A 50mm 1.7 lenses are great and cheap.

2) Nikon FE with 50mm f/2 or f/1.8 lens. As above. You can even install a K3 focusing screen for even brighter viewfinder.

3) Canon AE-1 Program. Handles very well, especially with the optional handgrip. The FDn 50mm 1.4 lens is killer.

Enjoy!

 

[crsantin]

Nikon FE with a 50mm 1.8 series E lens will get you what you want for $150 or less. As someone mentioned earlier, an F100 is a hell of a camera and not too big with a 50 1.8 but perhaps a bit too large based on your requirements.

 

[ssmc]

Another vote for the Minolta X-700/570. The VF is huge and bright - AFAIK it has the second-highest magnification of any 35mm SLR at 0.90x (the OM-1 and OM-40 being the highest at 0.92x). This makes a noticeable difference in discriminating focus on small details. The Minolta 50/1.4 is excellent; the 45/2 pancake is surprisingly good and makes the overall package seem much smaller and lighter. I have not tried the 50/1.7 but it gets good reviews and can be had much cheaper than the 1.4.