Help choosing a one film camera/lens setup

[narsuitus]

Help choosing a one film camera/lens setup

The Nikon one film camera/lens setup I like include an F2, F4, N70, N2000, or EM body with one of the following Nikon lenses:
a. 35mm f/1.4 moderate wide-angle (select if emphasis is on low-light shooting)
b. 50mm f/1.4 auto focus normal (if emphasis is on low-light shooting)
c. 50mm f/1.8 Series E (if an expendable lens is needed)
d. 28-70mm f/2.8 Nikon auto focus zoom on Nikon F4 body (if auto focus is needed)


Nikon F4 & N70 by Narsuitus, on Flickr

 

[Beemermark]

I'm in favor of the Nikon FE2 or about any Nikon body for that matter. I'd go with the 50/1.4 Nikkor. Excellent lens and I'm not sure what the way more expensive Voightlander would get you.

 

[Kai-san]

If I were to have just one camera and one lens I would not choose any of the cameras that the OP has in mind. The FE2 has reached an age where electronics failure may occur, and to get a G1 fixed is a gamble. From these two camera systems my choice would be the Nikon FM3A with a 50mm f1.4 AI(s) or a Contax S2 with a Yashica ML 50mm f1.4 or 55mm f1.2. Both cameras will work even if the electronics should fail. The Yashica ML series are so close to the Zeiss line in performance and mechanical quality that I doubt you would notice the difference in daily use. But you will see a big difference in pricing.

 

[splitimageview]

FE2s are well-built and rarely fail, unless they are neglected or abused, which is the case for many cameras sourced via ebay. Electronics can fail within weeks of manufacturing; decades down the road, if they still work and are in excellent condition, they'll likely continue to work for many years.

The great thing about the film Nikons is they made so many of them, there is an almost limitless supply of well-cared for examples.

So many film cameras are so cheap nowadays, it doesn't really matter. Buy 2 or 3. 🙂

G1s are a bit more expensive than they were 2-3 years ago, perhaps because the demand has risen based on the price of the T2 and T3. Used to get perfect ones for $100 all day long...if either of these do break, cheaper to just buy another.

 

[splitimageview]

I'm in favor of the Nikon FE2 or about any Nikon body for that matter. I'd go with the 50/1.4 Nikkor. Excellent lens and I'm not sure what the way more expensive Voightlander would get you.

A bit more distortion, although hard to tell the difference, closer focus, and a wider view. 🙂

If looking at Nikkor, to save some funds, I'd get the 50/1.8 AIS Pancake, no distortion.

 

[Pál_K]

I have sold all of my gear and I am trying to simplify things when it comes to 35mm film photography.

I like a modern, contrasty look in my images, and my decision will be mostly based on the lens not the camera.

My budget allows me to buy either the Contax G1 + 45mm G Planar or a
Nikon FE2 + Ultron 40mm f2
...

Based on these criteria and these choices, my vote is for the FE2. The G1, in my mechanically-biased opinion, has a higher risk of failure and fewer options for repair and maintenance. I see the G1 as destined to be the world's most beautiful paperweight.

I've no experience with the Ultron 40/2 itself, but what I've seen from today's Voigtländer (Cosina) lenses has been impressive.

 

[besk]

My vote would be the all mechanical Yashica FX3 and a suitable Contax lens. 35mm, 45mm or 50mm. If I didn't have so many Nikon bodies I would get one myself.

 

[Rayt]

I like your Plan B. Contax lenses are on par with Leica R at a fraction of the price. I would go for the Contax RX with a 40mm Tessar.

 

[Austintatious]

I like Plan B as well. It's all about the glass ! Spend your cash on lenses.
My Yashica Fx-3 Super 2000 is now over 35 years in my use and still going strong.

 

[Bolo Kukus]

This from someone who has FOUR Contax G1s and uses them regularly. I recently returned to Australia from a too-brief (thanks, Australian bush fire crisis) sojourn in Southeast Asia with two G1s and three lenses. I've not yet processed my films, but I fully expect the results will be what I've long been used to with the G range - rock-sharp with luscious mid-tones.

Now for my (usual) contradictions...

Some excellent advice in these threads. If I had my druthers, I would NEVER again buy either the Contax G1 or G2 - fine cameras these are without doubt, but repairs are now virtually non-existent, and the cameras (certainly the G1) are often annoyingly quirky to shoot with. Indeed, if it wasn't for those wonderful Zeiss G lenses, I would have sold my arsenal of G1s long ago.

An as-new late model Nikon camera (I'm thinking of the F6 which several friends own, use and dearly love) will serve you well, can be repaired (but then knowing Nikon, for how long?) and will most likely outlast you.

If one lens suits you best, decide which is your favorite, and get one of that. Me, I would opt for a 28mm (2.8 D is ideal for my uses) and an 85mm 1.8 D. Yes, I know, that's two lenses, but I'm not a one-lens shooter.

The Ultron 40 is a fine lens and I know someone who uses it, so it gets my plus-vote...

 

[Chris101]

I find a film:camera:lens ratio of 1:1:1 to be aesthetically beautiful and theoretically doable, however I have difficulty achieving that, even with help.

One day, at the end of September 2011 I went to work and did some photography with my Olympus OM 1n and it's 50mm f/3.5 macro. While I was gone, burglars cleaned out my house, including all of my cameras. It was a lot of cameras and lenses, some that I will never find (in that condition at least) again. I was devastated. However I was scheduled to participate in a month long photography project that required me to produce a daily pictures, the very next day.

I had good insurance (American Family covered 100% of my losses except for a small deductible, which I covered by repairing a window by myself) so I put in my claim and went ahead with the project. The project (Octoberfest at the Nikon Cafe) assumes that all of one's pictures are from the same lens (or lenses) so I continued as if nothing had happened.

It all went splendidly for 10 days or so, but then my GAS, and fascination with anything mechanical, optical or electronic, took over. I bought a Kodak Stereo Camera from a local shop (Tempe Camera) and added it to my project. I still show those 3D images.

Shortly after the project ended I got my settlement check. I needed a computer of course (Macbook Pro.) A serious digital camera (D700, and replacement D2x - even though the D3 was available.) A wide angle zoom (17-35), a long portrait lens (105 DC), a short street lens (35/2), a macro (60/2.8.) Some additional lenses for my Olympus (21, 35, 85.) A film system camera (N80.) A street worthy slr (FG) and rangefinder (M4P) with some lenses (35 & 50.) A few people gave me cameras (thank you Ed, thank you Ray!), and I got a camera I lusted after for decades from the Great Christmas Giveaway here (thanks DNG.) I went experimental with the new Lytro, and eventually the high-end Lytro Illum (still using both!)

Recently I went on a buying jag, filling in my Nikon wants with a fisheye, ultra-wide and macro, another flash, a macro tripod and a "do everything lens". And a D850 , originally "to scan the film at high resolution", but now ... In the deep recesses of my mind, I keep hearing, "you really should make some pictures...". "Geez, I will, ok!!"

So, I went from 10 cameras and 16 lenses, down to 1 camera and one lens, and back to 8 cameras and 22 lenses, in a span of less than 10 years. Maybe it's genetic.

Littleearth, good luck in your quest. If you'd like a word of wisdom, avoid the first addition!

 

[Bolo Kukus]

Chris,

10-16 to 1-1 to 8-22... you and the rest of us... join the club.

Sometimes it takes such an unexpected event to shake up our old habits and ways of life/shooting and move us into a new situation entirely.

As one who has been slowly but steadily 'deacquisitioning' gear since 2012, from 60+ when I retired to a current low of less than 20, but still has a way to go to achieve my self-imposed camera nirvana state of being, may I say I greatly admire how you "rose from the ashes" of what must have been a devastating time, and turned it into a positive and, as you wrote, a far better situation.

It's always sad to lose things, but we have to move on, often as not to an improved way of looking and shooting. And grow into new ways of doing - and seeing - in the process.

As we say here in bushfire land, good one, mate.

 

[markjwyatt]

This from someone who has FOUR Contax G1s and uses them regularly. In fact I have just returned from a too-brief (thanks, Australian bush fire crisis) sojourn in Southeast Asia with two G1s and three lenses. I've not yet processed my films but I fully expect the results will be what I've long been used to with the G range.

Now for my (usual) contradictions...

Some excellent advice in these threads. If I had my druthers, I would NEVER again buy either the Contax G1 or G2 - fine cameras these are without doubt, but repairs are now almost non-existent, ...

An as-new late model Nikon camera (I'm thinking of the F6 which several friends own, use and dearly love) will serve you well, can be repaired (but then knowing Nikon, for how long?...

Personally, I would go all mechanical, and get a hold of some light meters (including on your iPhone). Lower cost/risk electronic based cameras are fine, but may not be dependable for 20-30 more years.

IF I had the budget, I would like a Zeiss Ikon Rangefinder, but the idea of a 30 year old electronic camera would make me question buying it.

 

[das]

I would consider getting an F3 or F4 or even an FA over a FE2. The Nikon professional cameras are much better and do not cost much more than an FE2. There is no better MF body than the F4 (well, maybe the F6 -- never held one).

 

[rob.nyc1]

FM3a and any 50mm Nikon lens (including E Series) ... effortless ergonomics + full manual control + aperture priority when you want it. Seriously incredible camera.