Preferring the amateur body to the pro level one?

[De_Corday]

I have several F3s and my fiancé has an FE. I love carrying the FE, I love shooting the F3. It's the features that make me love it--the full 100% VF, the easily removable prism (instant waist level), the meter pattern. But, funny enough, part of my love for the F3 is that it's smaller and lighter than an F2 🙂

If all I had was an FE, I'd shoot it all day long and be none the wiser (case in point, I love my Leica CL). But the F3 has spoiled me.

 

[CK Dexter Haven]

So- anyone actually prefer the amateur body to the pro level?
Dug up my FE2- and damn, forgot how nice it is
Love the meter display, love the "push lever in to lock shutter button", love the shutter (1/250 sync/1/4000 max?- perfect for when I have ISO400 film inside during broad daylight hours), love how much easier it is to handle than the F3HP

Same thing with my Maxxum 7- all the features I want, none of the bulk

That's interesting. You've just praised all the qualities i dislike in my FE2. Don't like that the lever needs to be out to meter/shoot. I can't see the numbers or needle on the meter display. And I just ordered an F3. Not to replace the FE2, though.

I had an F6 for a short while. But I went back to an F100. The 6 is 'better' but the rear display was a bit useless and I didn't like feeling that I needed to baby the camera to maintain its value.

 

[Pherdinand]

i definitely prefer the amateur body against the pro. if you mean girls.

 

[OurManInTangier]

Despite having sold ALL of my film gear at least twice over the last few years I have ended up with an Olympus OM2, Leica M6, Hexar AF and a FM2. Ok, partly due to not wanting to give up film completely but also for their simplicity and size. Again, part of the reason I have an X100T and two Fuji XPro bodies.

My work gear is rugged, dependable and versatile allowing me to do what I need to but I never use that stuff for my hobby, I often feel ungainly, obvious and over the top when lugging work stuff around (the feeling disappears whilst working) so unlike Dave's guy in the park I'll take the simple, small and light stuff every time please.

 

[_lou_]

i definitely prefer the amateur body against the pro. if you mean girls.

Excellent one, good humour !

 

[Paul Jenkin]

I currently own an OM2n, FM2n, F2SB, F5 and F6. Down the years, I have owned an F100, F3HP, FM3A and F70.

Last weekend, I went to a local country fair. Assuming that it would be a relatively sedate day's wandering around, I took the OM2n and a few small prime lenses (from 24mm-100mm).

When I got there, there were falconry displays, jousting, horseback acrobatics, etc. As much as I like the small, manual-focus cameras for travel and street shooting, I would have definitely taken my F6 + 28-70mm f2.8 and 70-200mm f2.8 (irrespective of the additional weight) had I known I'd have benefitted from autofocus.

Therefore, my preference is almost always determined by what I need for what I want to shoot. To quote Sean Connery from Untouchables, last weekend, "I took a knife to a gunfight".

 

[Wulfthari]

I used a Fujica ST901 as my crime scene camera for many years. There was nothing better that I could afford, and anyway, nothing worth more money would have done what I needed. The Fujinon lenses were in a class of their own imho. I still like the 901 for my photo taking.

In my opinion, the 901 was the top of their line, the later bayonet mount cameras not withstanding. Non of the "pro" cameras available at the time I bought it would have done any better, probably not as well.

I think there may be merit to the comment above about the support given by other camera makers, particularly Nikon and Canon. They were well known for that. It provided much free advertisement.

Strange, I've a 705, 801 and 901 and to be honest the latter is the least favourite of the bunch because it's only semiauto, I enjoy the 705 much more.

Having said that they are all very good cameras, on pair with the Spotmatic, better than the FTb and Nikkormat, but I wouldn't underestimate the bayonet series: while my AX5 is not as sturdy as the old Fujica is a capable camera that works fine in auto, program and manual mode, plus it can use the faboulus 50 mm f1.2:

 

[nobbylon]

I just had a trip to Thailand and whilst there actually said to my friend while walking in a busy area 'it feels so liberating leaving my cameras at home'.
I took my Canon S100 and hardly even used that! I did most of my pics with my phone.
If I'd had a photo agenda then my choice would be different but carrying heavy gear and keeping half an eye on it in a lot of situations is tiresome.

 

[FrankS]

On my motorcycle trip last summer, i planned to photograph extensively and I did take a lot of photos, but it was the trip itself with its physical rigours that asserted itself as my primary focus. My best photos were made with my iphone.

 

[cary]

When I was a student at Brooks Institute I purchased a Nikon FM to complement my FTN. The FM did almost everything the FTN could with a lot less weight and bulk. i ended up using the FM all the time.

 

[BillBingham2]

For me it's feel, can't really put a Pro vs. Amateur, I loved several of each over the years. Never really fell for the F3 but I was very happy with my Bessa L, Nikon F feels so much better than the FMs ever did.

It's a combination of balance, body and lens size, can't pin it down to one specific style.

I have to say I am somewhat shocked that the FM/FE/FG cameras have lasted as long as they have. I expected them to belly up 10 years ago. Well made plastic seems to last a bit longer than I thought it did. Makes me wondering about my worries about how long the current versions of cameras will last.

That said there is something nice about seeing 100% of the frame in an SLR. But being able to pull out my iPhone 5 from my pocket really has slowed my need to jump into another digital camera.....

B2 (;->

 

[GaryLH]

Having said what I did about pro bodies feeling better, I do more often grab a Nikon FG than an F2 because it's smaller and lighter, and has built in light meter and exposure automation.

Same..

If I am out and about for more than a couple of hours, it's something like the Nikon FG for me as well.

I still own a FE2, FM2 and F3HP.. Between these three, in terms of how well it feels and handles, for me it is the F3HP.

Gary

 

[John Bragg]

Nikon F100 has become my go anywhere camera. My F5 is better built and has the legendary tank like qualities, but where weight is a consideration, the F100 and 3 small primes (28/50/85) makes a great travelling kit !

 

[Wulfthari]

I have to say I am somewhat shocked that the FM/FE/FG cameras have lasted as long as they have. I expected them to belly up 10 years ago. Well made plastic seems to last a bit longer than I thought it did. Makes me wondering about my worries about how long the current versions of cameras will last.

I can't speak for the FE and FG, but the FM is not plastic camera at all, or better there's more or less the same quantity of plastic you can find in a F2 of the same era.

Same thing for the FTb that is evidently the junior sibling of the F1, the Pentax K series are some of the sturdiest cameras ever made, all these SLR from the 70s do have pro durability but they aren't system cameras, however if you don't need the "pro" feature (interchangeble screens, finders etc...) that can be successfully used for pro work.

 

[Dguebey]

I sold my F6. Then grabbed an Fe2 (kept 90mm Macro and 80-200, very rarely used).
The F6 is gorgeous, but with a Leica M7 as main camera, I had to study the manual each time I used the Nikon.

 

[GarageBoy]

The EM/FG/FG-20 may be plastic heavy, but it'll take a beating
Besides, the plastics are just protecting the innards and absorbs shock when it gets hit
As long as the shutter and wind mechanism are good, they'll be fine forever
I have no doubts of the FM/FM2 lasting damn near forever

 

[J enea]

I used to get into the whole pro camera thing. but after a while I learned that all they really are, to me, is a light box. the modern pro cameras do a few more things the amateur cameras dont, but a lot of those things are or were not important to me. when my dad died a few years ago, I got from him a lot of cameras, including like new nikons F4 and F5. I was thrilled but soon found out the weight did not offset the features they added over my f100. and my fuji 120 rangefinders actually weighed less than the f4 and f5 but had a much larger film area. so for me the big advantage they offered, again for me, was all in the metering. f5 with the color meter and the f4 gives matrix with manual focus lenses, which is slightly better than my FA.

so for me the big differences are the weight in the pro cameras vs the slightly better metering. when i want to travel light and need AF lenses, I pull out the F100 or the F80 over the much larger pro cameras. I have trouble telling which slides came from which camera. with manual focus cameras, there is no real difference again to me except for small things. results seem very similar from the FG, FA, FE2 and F3. I just gravitate to the F3 as it feels so dense and ya gotta love the film winder. so smooth.

funny how this discussion seems to only be relevant to 35mm cameras. is it me or does almost everyone categorize Medium Format bodies as pro?

 

[oftheherd]

Strange, I've a 705, 801 and 901 and to be honest the latter is the least favourite of the bunch because it's only semiauto, I enjoy the 705 much more.

Great photos. Are they with the AX5? I once had a 'X3 for a while, but I just couldn't bond with it.

I was curious about what you meant by semiauto. It doesn't have autofocus of course, because that wasn't really in use when it was made. But its AP exposure was great (SBC and accurate); you could usually get more than the 20 seconds they advertised, when needed. For some crime scene photography that was useful with a tripod. No other camera had such built into the body, and so good in low light. It also worked with non-Fujinon lenses by putting it in stop-down mode.

I also have an 801, actually 2, but almost never use them, preferring the 901. I never needed the other 'pro' attributes such as interchangeable screens or motor drives , or whatever. Just the 901, some film, a brace of lenses, and occasionally a flash. Bliss.

EDIT: It just occurred to me you may have meant no Program or Shutter Priority modes. Was that what you were referring to? In an SLR, I think the only camera with SV was some Canon SLR. Nobody at the time had Program that I recall, although it wasn't too long after it that multimode exposures became available. That's my recollection, so if somebody remembers more accurately let me know.

 

[GarageBoy]

funny how this discussion seems to only be relevant to 35mm cameras. is it me or does almost everyone categorize Medium Format bodies as pro?

Well- short of the Mamiya 645E- there wasn't really a tiered system of cameras- and the 645E was scary cheap feeling- the first year it was out, the demo body at the PhotoPlus Expo wasn't working because of a damaged wind mechanism

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

Pentax ME Super is exhibit #1 for this notion, IMHO