Rangefinder/SLR for beginner that "Just works"

[Forest_rain]

A let a friend of mine try my Contaflex II, and she really liked the images. I think she liked the manual camera but she thought that it was a little complicated with the film rewind, awkward loading of film with removing the bottom of the film case. Also the light meter works but is uncoupled so is a little bit of a hassle. Also, she got a few blank frames (I'm not sure what caused it, but it might be that she didn't cock the shutter fully, so the shutter didn't fire, but the film advanced. No lens cap so that's not possible).

Anyway, I gave her the Contaflex but she wanted me to suggest something newer with maybe a few more features. It doesn't need autofocus, but should be fairly cheap and more importantly - reliable. Maybe $80 most. I think she also liked the kind of retro look of it so maybe if it has that type of vibe it would be good, but manual advance/motor advance probably wouldn't matter.

Of the cameras I've bought over the past few months from eBay, maybe about half were broken/unusable or at least had some sort of problem that required me to take it apart and tinker with something.

I don't really want to frustrate a beginner with such problems so I was thinking of what camera to recommend to her. Any suggestions? Seems like Japanese brands were most reliable, but I don't know. I was thinking about recommending her a newer Olympus OM series camera, like an OM2000 with a simple, 50mm 1.8 or so lens. Hopefully that would be new enough to be working on arrival and last for some time. I was also thinking about a Nikon N2000 which would have plenty of lenses, and also a simple motor drive but still kind of retro-looking.

Also how would the older Contaflex II Tessar lens compare with modern lenses? It's a 45/2.8 I think. To me, the images looked great. I don't know if this lens would actually be better than a 50mm 1.7/1.8 lens on a newer camera, so I don't want her to be disappointed.

Here's some images that you can use to judge quality. It took out her photos and of people so they are a bit boring but to protect privacy. These frames were probably a bit overexposed so not perfect, but I kind of like the unique effect.

 

[ninadp]

For Rangefinders, I can only think of the Canon Canonet or the Yashica Electro 35. I think you'll have a better choice of SLRs if you increase your budget very slightly—a Nikon FE or FE2 for example with a cheap 50mm lens but that will likely be a sub-$200 purchase. But I'm sure there are plenty of cheaper choices with Olympus and Minolta.



Have you considered getting her a good point and shoot? They can have pretty good lenses, are very compact and often have auto-rewind. The trade-off is aperture size, some image quality and an inability to use exotic films without DX codes.

 

[Kai-san]

Oh dear! You will probably get more than a 100 different answers to this. But here goes: If you can get a Nikkormat for your money, look no further. The lenses can be had for relatively little money as well. A perfect beginners machine.

 

[Pál_K]

For the rangefinder experience and traditional controls, and also convenient to use, I agree that a Canonet 28 or QL17 GIII is a good choice. Loading one is trivial.

Other good choices are Minolta Hi-Matic 7 or Olympus 35 RC.

In good operating condition with new seals, it may be over $80.

 

[Pál_K]

If your friend would like an excellent inexpensive SLR, I also agree with the Nikkormat suggestion. Nikkormats are inexpensive, but very reliable and rugged. The Nikkormat FT2 takes modern batteries and can meter both pre-AI and AI lenses wide open. The newer FT3 also takes modern batteries, and doesn't need the aperture twist-twist ritual when mounting lenses. However, pre-AI lenses require stop-down metering.

The EL is like the FT2, but offers aperture priority as well. The EL2 is like the FT3, and offers aperture priority.

Nikkormats offer features like mirror lock-up, depth of field preview, and a self timer. All that plus ruggedness for very very little money.

Another SLR with lots of easy, useful features, I recommend the Canon Rebel G (aka EOS 500N, EOS Kiss). It's a fun camera to use and extremely light in weight.

For exposure, you can use it fully manual, shutter or aperture priority, or fully programmed. It has 3 AF points, which you can use all or even just one, or fully manual.

I've seen fully functioning cameras sell for under $20 (how I bought all 3 of mine). The 50/1.8 II EF lens is inexpensive, feels and sounds cheap, but is optically excellent.

 

[newst]

If I were asked this question by somebody I knew I would recommend a Konica FT-X SLR. It isn't anything spectacular, actually a plastic (but sturdy) Cosina body with the AR mount and the Konica name on it.

It is a simple camera without a program mode. The shutter is mechanical. However, as with all Konica SLR's you have the option to manually set your aperture, or have the camera set it for you. It also takes standard AA batteries for the light meter.

It can be found readily, in good condition, at very reasonable prices.

Best of all it uses Konica's Hexanon range of lenses, many of which are amazing, and few of which can be considered expensive. If you shop online carefully you can find many Hexanon lenses still being sold as new/old stock.

I have one. It was what triggered an ever increasing interest in film photography in me. I don't use it much anymore as I have more capable, more complicated and more expensive bodies now, both SLR and rangefinder. It was, however, a good simple, solid performing camera to start out on.

 

[Forest_rain]

I offered her a point and shoot as well as autofocus SLR initially but she seemed like she enjoyed the ability to calculate and control the exposure herself to learn about it. She's pretty knowledgeable and seemed to have read a book about it at some point, she just has not actually used a film camera except for this once.

She asked to try out a few of my other cameras next to see how they handle, work, etc., so I will probably have a better idea of what she wants after that.

I will basically present her with a few options, but she rejected a point and shoot out of hand 😉 So any suggestions here will be useful as information to her that I can basically suggest a few things, I won't decide for her and just explain to her how a few cameras work, and she will determine.

As to reliability I cannot attest, only that a few older cameras I have have sticky slower shutter speeds or various other problems, so I'd probably recommend something from the '80s or '90s at least.

Have you considered getting her a good point and shoot? They can have pretty good lenses, are very compact and often have auto-rewind. The trade-off is aperture size, some image quality and an inability to use exotic films without DX codes.

 

[kshapero]

Hands down, the Nikon FE with Nikkor E series 50/1.8 lens.

 

[xavyr]

Mmmm...Nikon EL2

 

[Phil_F_NM]

I'd go one further and say a Nikon FM with any 50mm they made. Will be cheaper than an FE and more likely to work.
The biggest issue is your price point. With the recent resurgence of interest in "retro" film cameras, many of these bodies are going for a lot of money, more than they are worth. I see them all the time, selling for over $100 and up, sight unseen, not tested, no warranty. If you want a camera that is working and will give reliably exposed images, you're not getting in under $150 if it has a light meter. Without a light meter, you can expect a camera to work well at about $75-100, but it could be a gamble. I wouldn't ever want to sell a friend a leaf shutter SLR, nor would I recommend one. They can work and can make some great images, but as far as reliability, they just don't have it.
A Pentax K1000, or Konica Autoreflex T3 would probably be the most reliable and highest quality cameras you could get for the least amount of money.
Phil Forrest

 

[Horatio]

How about a Pentax K1000? I found a nice one with three lenses for $45.

 

[Forest_rain]

Seems like a lot of votes for newer Konicas and Nikons, it seems like Konica might be the winner if she's trying to save money. But I have a feeling she will go with the Nikon.

My Minolta 600si (which I might give her) does not look very sexy, but it works. AFAIK it has a vertical focal plane shutter, I don't know if this qualifies as a "leaf shutter" but I've heard that before (high speed sync up to 1/4000th)

Why are these Konica Autoreflexes so cheap? Just a lesser known brand? I'm not familiar so I hope it would work.

There is a "bargain" quality Nikon FM on KEH for $91, with 6 month warranty. Olympus OM10 for $60 (very reasonable).

I think I will suggest she buy on KEH if she doesn't like my dorky electronic Minolta.

I'd go one further and say a Nikon FM with any 50mm they made. Will be cheaper than an FE and more likely to work.
The biggest issue is your price point. With the recent resurgence of interest in "retro" film cameras, many of these bodies are going for a lot of money, more than they are worth. I see them all the time, selling for over $100 and up, sight unseen, not tested, no warranty. If you want a camera that is working and will give reliably exposed images, you're not getting in under $150 if it has a light meter. Without a light meter, you can expect a camera to work well at about $75-100, but it could be a gamble. I wouldn't ever want to sell a friend a leaf shutter SLR, nor would I recommend one. They can work and can make some great images, but as far as reliability, they just don't have it.
A Pentax K1000, or Konica Autoreflex T3 would probably be the most reliable and highest quality cameras you could get for the least amount of money.
Phil Forrest

 

[Ste_S]

For $80 and manual focus, perhaps the Nikon FG? You’ll pick those up a lot cheaper than a FE or FM.
There’s a few Minolta bodies that are cheap, XG-1, X300 etc. Some of the Canon T series, Pentax P30 etc etc

A dealer should have something like the above with a warranty for $80

 

[peterm1]

My favorite film camera these days though to be honest I seldom now shoot film is my old Nikon f801s which I have had for 25 years or more. Thought it was designed as an AF camera it works perfectly well as a manual focus camera with an MF lens. Set it to manual exposure or aperture priority mode, turn the AF off and you are good to go. It uses 4 AA batteries (not esoteric and usually non available batteries needed) which reside in the hand grip and when loading film it pretty much loads it itself even reading the film speed from barcode on the film canister. Its about as easy as it gets. A manual focus unchipped lens will not work in matrix mode but works perfectly well in centre weighted average mode. Best of all these are far from expensive and built like a brick outhouse without being over heavy or over large. if your friend wants the AF option then a good one could be the cheap and readily available 50mm f1.8 AF which of course can also be shot in MF mode.

 

[Phil_F_NM]

There are people who like Konica and there are people who don't. Ford vs. Chevy is all. Back when they were a viable company, on the edge of design, Konica lenses were the standard that all other Japanese lenses were held to in order to receive the JCII emblem.

When I got my first Konica Autoreflex T3 (chrome) I was amazed at the build quality. The lenses are first rate. Frankly, I think Leica made a misjudgment when they partnered with Minolta for their R series bodies and lenses, and they should have gone with Konica. The Hexanon lenses are absolutely second to none, with some of them, like the 50mm f/1.7 being regarded as one of the very finest normals ever made by any manufacturer, at any time. The T3 body is at least as well built as a Nikon F. The only weakness would be the meter linkage but Nikon didn't come out with a TTL autoexposure camera more than a decade after Konica. Even if the Konica T3 meters don't work perfectly, they are amazing manual shooters. When they do work, they give great exposures and they are a nice shutter priority system.

Konica was never within the "pro" realm because they didn't offer systems of gadgets and doodads, like interchangeable prisms and motor drives. They concentrated on optics. The Autoreflex series, both A and T all have interchangeable screens but those are impossible to find, so it's best to just clean the one in the camera and go. Konica also didn't adapt away from the Mercury 1.35v battery in any of their manual SLRs, so those batteries eventually became problematic to find and then banned altogether. The meters can be adjusted by a tech to give a proper reading at the 1.5v of silver oxide.

The Hexanon lenses between 28mm and 200mm are plentiful, inexpensive and stellar. The Hexar line for their SLRs wasn't as good but are still decent. Wider than 28mm, lenses are both hard to find and expensive. Their zooms can be pretty good as well.

The last of the Autoreflex models, the T4 is really a fantastic camera. They offered a motor drive with this line and it got smaller, with all the functions of the T3 in the smaller body of the Autoreflex TC. The TC is a good camera as well, but it lacks shutter speeds below 1/8 second and doesn't have DOF preview. They are practically free these days with a 50/1.7 hanging on the front.

Konica bodies and lenses just don't have the cachet of Nikon or Canon but they work just as well. After all, a camera is just a box with a lens on the front and film in the back. The mirrorless and motion picture crowds haven't taken to adapting Konica lenses as much as the bigger manufacturers as well as Pentax, because of the lore of the thorium Takumars.

I'll get off my soapbox now. PM me if you want any more Konica specific information.

Phil Forrest

 

[Deleted member 65559]

Forest, I think a Pentax K1000, or Olympus OM-1 would do the trick, but the upside of the Nikon, if she bonds with it, and wants to move up......there are so many different fine bodies available.
Perhaps the biggest determining factor is the budget... i.e. what's available in working order in your price bracket...& near you.... with a budget of $80....there's not much for shipping.

 

[CMur12]

For $80 and manual focus, perhaps the Nikon FG? You’ll pick those up a lot cheaper than a FE or FM.
There’s a few Minolta bodies that are cheap, XG-1, X300 etc. Some of the Canon T series, Pentax P30 etc etc

A dealer should have something like the above with a warranty for $80

I could certainly support the recommendation of a Minolta. A mechanical/manual SR-T series would be the most retro and certainly competent.

An X300/370 would be a good electronic camera for a low price. It offers metered manual and aperture-priority automatic with AEL (auto-exposure lock). It also has a very bright finder.

I wouldn't recommend an XG-1 as it has no metering in manual mode and it is even older.

All of the major manufacturers offered competent SLRs and optics that should suit the needs of the OP's friend. I would be more inclined to buy from someone like John Titterington, who is a camera technician and who offers fully refurbished cameras in good cosmetic condition on his auction website. This way, you know that the light seals are good, the shutter speeds accurate (important on older mechanical cameras, especially), the meter works as it should, and so forth. In short, you have and old camera functioning nearly as new.

https://www.ebay.com/sch/titterington/m.html?_nkw=&_armrs=1&_ipg=&_from=

The cameras he offers vary, but they are mostly Minolta SR-Ts, X-700s, and X-570s; Canon AE-1/Programs; Pentax K1000s; and Olympus OM-1s. (My only connection with John Titterington is as a very satisfied customer.)

- Murray

 

[zuiko85]

How about a Pentax K1000? I found a nice one with three lenses for $45.

Great deal for you, but definitely not typical.
On a practical side I’d also suggest a Nikkormat, tough as nails if a bit loud and heavy. Another good deal can be a Minolta SRT series. Many were good, even a lowly SRT200. And the MC/MD mount lenses, either Rokkors or third party are often reasonable in price.

 

[nickthetasmaniac]

It doesn't need autofocus, but should be fairly cheap and more importantly - reliable. Maybe $80 most. I think she also liked the kind of retro look of it so maybe if it has that type of vibe it would be good, but manual advance/motor advance probably wouldn't matter.

A lot of the cameras mentioned so far (FE2, FM, K1000, OM1 etc.) are well out of that budget, unless you're getting very lucky at garage sales.

The best I can think of is probably a Minolta SRT101 with Rokkor 50/f1.7. Not spectacular, but good quality, very common and very reliable. The SRT series doesn't seem to have been impacted by the price spike that a lot of it's contemporaries have seen in the last few years. Likewise, Rokkor lenses are abundant and cheap (unless you're looking at the exotic stuff).

 

[splitimageview]

The previous generation manual focus SLRs are moving up in price, so look to the more recent AF models, like the Canon mentioned above, or the Nikon F80/N80.

These often come with 28-70 zooms that are quite good, for $30-50ish. Some will have databacks that can print exposure data between frames.

This is insanely cheap for modern, matrix-metered, AF, 1/4000, built in flash, motor, and it's small and light weight.

Add a 50/1.8 AF, but often they go for more than the bodies. 🙂 $50ish if you're patient.

Only gotcha is to find one without the sticky back syndrome, or just use the alcohol cleaning method to take care of that.

Same thing applies to the N8008 (same as the F801 mentioned above), N90, N90s. Those are bigger and heavier but also will meter with manual lenses which the N80/F80 doesn't.

They are all solidly built internally, don't let the plastic-clad appearance fool you. It's not going to look like a traditional metal bodied SLR from 1975, but it will easily outperform such cameras. These cameras were the basis of several digital SLRs; people often mistake them as DSLRs.