Preferring the amateur body to the pro level one?

[GarageBoy]

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

 

[giellaleafapmu]

It reminds me of something I saw in the web. A property in the South with a warning saying: "Never mind the dog, the guy with the gun is what it matters" (or something similar). Here it is similar: "Never mind the body the pro is the guy behind it".

GLF

 

[FrankS]

For me, the tactile difference is too significant. Handling both an FE2 and an F3, the F3 just feels better, and I can live with the relative limitations as a consequence. It's the same as a Bessa RF camera compared to a Leica M, for me.

 

[kxl]

Like the answer to most 'which do you prefer' questions, my response to this one is--it depends:

1) on what I own

2) on what I have in my bag when the need arises

3) on what the situation demands

Sometimes I want/need the heft/bulk/water-sealed build of a pro body that increases the chances of getting the right shot for a client.

Sometimes a lightweight body helps me concentrate less on the gear and more on the composition.

Like I said, it depends.... But, as has often been said: "the best camera is the one that you have with you."

 

[Godfrey]

I too had FE2, FM2n, and F3/T all together for a long time. Liked them all. I probably put twice as many rolls of film through the FM2 as the other two, simply because it was smaller/lighter/easier to carry more of the time.

G

 

[daveleo]

Go with whatever works for you.
I ran into a guy with (my guess) a $4000 full-frame SLR setup last weekend, wandering in the same park as me with my X100. He showed me what he shot that day (on his LCD).
IMO . . . he wasted about $3500. But it's his money and if he feels good about it, so be it.

 

[Daniel Teoli Jr.]

OP...pro or not...does not matter. It is all in your head. I've put pix from every kind of cam under the sun into museums.

https://danielteolijr.wordpress.com/2015/05/13/what-is-the-best-camera-in-the-world/

 

[charjohncarter]

I can't stand large camera even though I have a few. I nice small SLR is all I need just as long as it doesn't have too much screen. Give me an aperture ring and a shutter speed dial.

 

[Wulfthari]

I too had FE2, FM2n, and F3/T all together for a long time. Liked them all. I probably put twice as many rolls of film through the FM2 as the other two, simply because it was smaller/lighter/easier to carry more of the time.

G

That's also an aspect: cameras like the Canon F-1 and the Nikon F2 are fantastic but if I'm visiting a large town like London and I plan to walk for five hours no way I can use such an heavy gear, a lighter body like a FM but also a Pentax Spotmatic can do the work.

System cameras are great you can configure them to do different things, but for hand held photography you can also use something nimbler.

 

[Pioneer]

I am not sure that pros are always so thrilled with some company's "pro spec" camera bodies either. I think the attraction for some pros is not so much the body itself as the pro benefits that accompany the body in some situations.

The only "pro-spec" body I have ever used consistently is the Pentax LX. That one is actually worth the money in my opinion.

 

[FrankS]

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.

 

[dave lackey]

Shoot, I wish I didn't care. I tried unsuccessfully to get down to just one camera everyday. Turns out that the FE2/FM3a (and the M3/M6) are the most fun and most successful film cameras I have ever had. I suppose it is because I started out with the Minolta and Nikon compacts back in the late 70s.

But the bigger dudes from Nikon are in the bags too. Is there an AA equivalent for cameras? Cameras Anonymous?😱

 

[mdarnton]

I'm with Frank. My Leica M4s get very little time because the Nikon FG does everything I need, more ergonomically. In fact it's the nicest small camera I've ever had.

 

[dave lackey]

There is just something about the FE2 that just begs me to use it and it is so easy and quick!😀 slapped a little leather half case on it and it feels luxurious.

Addicting little things...

 

[Robert Lai]

I had the FG also at one point. Once the shutter started to taper, I soon found out that nobody wants to service that Copal Square shutter.

The pro level cameras like the F, F2, F3 are always serviceable.

 

[ColSebastianMoran]

I had F2s. When the compact Nikons came out, I shifted immediately. I doubt I shot more than a couple of rolls in the F2s after acquiring smaller cameras (FM, FE-2). The size difference was such an advantage, and the amateur bodies did everything I wanted them to do.

 

[Ronald M]

Have a Nikon D3. It is pretty heavy and I will not go far with it.

Digital leicas are smallish, but not light. Carry less lenses to make it work. Superb quality.

For a long carry or dodgy neighborhood, D7000 Nikon, APSc, pretty light and small. 18/105 VR lens is good.

Film is for when I go back to roots. M6 leica or Zone 6 4x5. the Zone 6 is real work to move, to shoot, to process, but results are spectacular. I still compound my own developer,D76.

 

[FrankS]

Is it weird then, that if there were a fire, I'd grab the F2 before the FG?

(actually I'd grab some other cameras first, but between these 2 Nikons, the F2 would be saved, and not just for its monetary value.)

The FG, despite being more useful than my F2 with plain prism, is practically disposable.

(The one camera I would certainly grab, is my Rolleiflex tlr, of course only if my family were safe first, and it was safe to do so.)

 

[oftheherd]

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.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Yes.
Used Canon film Rebel for years. Purchased EOS 3 to try. Sold fast, still keeping Rebel.
It is nice with 50L on it. 🙂