out of all the cameras and all the lenses which would you...

I'm a Canon guy, but the Nikkormat FTN or later with the Nikkor 24mm f2.8 sounds good to me ( I've owned and used this combination).
 
I find Nikkormats rather heavy. The FM/FM2 are great choices. If you can find a clean one, a OM-1 is also great. OM-4Ti are also fairly affordable. Unfortunately I don't think Canons from that era really compare. Perhaps a Pentax LX, though I don't know how good the Pentax 24mm 2.8 is.
 
My first choice would be a Nikon, but my Canon F1n is nice. My Olympus cameras feel too delicate by comparison to the Nikon or Canon.

A dark horse: my Fujica ST801 is very nice.
 
Seems like you toy with the film camera idea every year or so. Do you envision color or B&W or both? Who will do the developing? Will you go for just negs then scan, or do you want prints? If sending out film for developing can you walk or drive there or will it be through the mail service? Really, you might as well go for a system with a good reputation as film and processing will quickly exceed the hardware cost if you shoot much at all.

Can't say it's best but I have an OM-4Ti (only because I got it cheap at a second hand store because it was 'jammed', these folks don't know these cameras need batteries to work) my widest lens is a 24mm f2.8 Zuiko and it is an acceptable lens, especially stopped down just a bit, to 5.6 or so. But any recognized camera brand from the 70's should do equally well, or better.
 
zuiko85 said:
Seems like you toy with the film camera idea every year or so. Do you envision color or B&W or both? Who will do the developing? Will you go for just negs then scan, or do you want prints? If sending out film for developing can you walk or drive there or will it be through the mail service? Really, you might as well go for a system with a good reputation as film and processing will quickly exceed the hardware cost if you shoot much at all.

Can't say it's best but I have an OM-4Ti (only because I got it cheap at a second hand store because it was 'jammed', these folks don't know these cameras need batteries to work) my widest lens is a 24mm f2.8 Zuiko and it is an acceptable lens, especially stopped down just a bit, to 5.6 or so. But any recognized camera brand from the 70's should do equally well, or better.
Click to expand...

i have the fuji 16...(24 in ff) and i thought a project involving a comparison of the 2 kits would be fun.
 
back alley said:
i had an x700, very nice rig...
i'm thinking something more basic and less electronic...

but still open to all suggestions.
Click to expand...
A SRT ticks all your boxes: meter, no electronics and very basic.

I own a SRT Super, (303) but a 101, 201 and even a 100 will be comparable. Another option would be the XE, that camera seems to be much lighter (without being a featherweight).

TBH, 24mm lenses were clearly showpiece lenses, so, all big brands have good 24mm lenses - I think the body will be much more important.
 
imo any of the big makers will have an attractive camera + 24mm lens, choose which one you personally like best.
I also bring into play Pentax, a MX + Pentax K 2.8/24.
The Pentax lens doesn't have the same fame as offerings from other big makers but imo is a very reliable and good performer.
The OM Zuiko 2.8/24 might have the edge, have better corners, but choose a late MC version, coating of the Pentax is great. My old 2.8/24 Nikkor-N.C Auto is very good too but has more distortion than the other two mentioned, and besides Canon both Minolta 2.8/24 and Yashica ML are tops too
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom