wgerrard
Veteran
I'm thinking hard about selling a couple of little-used toys and dabbling in the manual focus SLR world. Here are my requirements, as posted on a Minolta forum:
1. Little automation beyond a meter in the camera, preferably match needle. I'd use AE, but it's not essential.
2. Nothing that uses batteries I can't buy today.
3. A viewfinder that gets along with my eyeglasses. (I don't use diopters because I don't take my glasses off.) Re: number one above, I sometimes have trouble seeing LEDs and diodes in a viewfinder, depending on their location.
4. A model that stands a good chance of not immediately needing service, and, conversely, a model for which CLA's, parts and repairs are still available.
Lens-wise, I'm looking for recommendations for something in the 28/35 range, a 50, and 80/105 or so. I don't use a flash and like to shoot around sunset.
Minoltas and Rokkors are appealing, because of price, if nothing else. Perusing Karen N.'s site, she's got me looking at Spotmatic SP II's. Both brands look to be a place where a dollar goes pretty far.
However, I wonder about the wisdom of acquiring hardware from the 1970's. Maybe something like a new Nikon FM10 is a safer bet. Anything else out there in the market?
What say you all?
1. Little automation beyond a meter in the camera, preferably match needle. I'd use AE, but it's not essential.
2. Nothing that uses batteries I can't buy today.
3. A viewfinder that gets along with my eyeglasses. (I don't use diopters because I don't take my glasses off.) Re: number one above, I sometimes have trouble seeing LEDs and diodes in a viewfinder, depending on their location.
4. A model that stands a good chance of not immediately needing service, and, conversely, a model for which CLA's, parts and repairs are still available.
Lens-wise, I'm looking for recommendations for something in the 28/35 range, a 50, and 80/105 or so. I don't use a flash and like to shoot around sunset.
Minoltas and Rokkors are appealing, because of price, if nothing else. Perusing Karen N.'s site, she's got me looking at Spotmatic SP II's. Both brands look to be a place where a dollar goes pretty far.
However, I wonder about the wisdom of acquiring hardware from the 1970's. Maybe something like a new Nikon FM10 is a safer bet. Anything else out there in the market?
What say you all?
Mike Ip
Vagabond Light Collector
I would second the Pentax. If you truly want a basic model, try and find a barely used K1000. They aren't hard to find at all, and very inexpensive.
ferider
Veteran
Olympus OM[124] with 28/2, 50/1.4, 85/2 or 28/2.8, 50/1.4 and 100/2.8,
depending on your budget.
If you like the Hexar AF and Leicas you will like the OMs.
Cheers,
Roland.
depending on your budget.
If you like the Hexar AF and Leicas you will like the OMs.
Cheers,
Roland.
colyn
ישו משיח
I'd go with a Minolta XE-7 or XD-11. The Rokkor glass for these Minoltas is second to none (Japanese glass)
gb hill
Veteran
I say Pentax. I have a Spotmatic with a locked up mirror from being in a closet for many years. I hope to get it fixed soon.
gb hill
Veteran
ferider said:
The Oly over a Minolta anyday. But the Pentaxes are sweet.
Graham Line
Well-known
Though I worked with screw-mount Pentaxes for a long time, to me the Minolta glass always seemed to give a smoother and sharper rendition. You can't go wrong with either, assuming they're in good shape, but I'd lean toward the Minolta lenses.
wgerrard
Veteran
colyn said:
I'm really tempted. The deciding factor will likely be service. Is anyone still working on these? Parts? I've seen people recommend the X-700 because so many are around for parts. Can I get an XE-7 or XD-11 fixed?
The last film SLR I owned was a K1000 that my parents bought for me umpteen years ago. I'd like that kind of simplicity again, and really do prefer match needle to LED readouts.
Bryce
Well-known
I'm a Pentax user from the start and know very little about Minolta's gear.
I can highly recommend K and M series cameras, at least the ones with full manual capability. The LX, MX, and KX models are the most sought out, the LX still being very expensive.
All are really well made, at a minimum comparable to the best Voigtlander models for build quality.
Lenses are excellent also, with only a few examples being "dogs". The 85/2 M series coming to mind.
Prices for Pentax lenses seem to be being propped up because they are directly compatible with new Pentax dslr's. So if you think you might like one of those as well, the system is an easy choice.
If not, Olympus, Canon FD, and maybe Minolta systems might make more sense since they are truly dead systems and prices for even the more desirable lenses are pretty low.
Outside of a Bessa L and 15mm lens and abortive attempts to use FED, I have yet to buy a 35mm rangefinder. The Pentax system offers nearly enough the same functionality and it is paid for... My actual RF gear is medium format.
So try it, you might like it!
I can highly recommend K and M series cameras, at least the ones with full manual capability. The LX, MX, and KX models are the most sought out, the LX still being very expensive.
All are really well made, at a minimum comparable to the best Voigtlander models for build quality.
Lenses are excellent also, with only a few examples being "dogs". The 85/2 M series coming to mind.
Prices for Pentax lenses seem to be being propped up because they are directly compatible with new Pentax dslr's. So if you think you might like one of those as well, the system is an easy choice.
If not, Olympus, Canon FD, and maybe Minolta systems might make more sense since they are truly dead systems and prices for even the more desirable lenses are pretty low.
Outside of a Bessa L and 15mm lens and abortive attempts to use FED, I have yet to buy a 35mm rangefinder. The Pentax system offers nearly enough the same functionality and it is paid for... My actual RF gear is medium format.
So try it, you might like it!
oftheherd
Veteran
In the early to mid-70s, both Minolta and Pentax were considered pro cameras. I don't know enough about Minota to recommend for or against. I have used Pentax and they were/are good cameras when found in good shape. There lenses are well known to be sharp. So would be a Fujica ST 801 but the LEDs might be a problem. Also, lenses are harder to get. I wouldn't be afraid to recommend an Olympus OM1. I think they are a little more expensive than the Minoltas, maybe not the Pentax as they, especially their lenses, tend to be sought after. The OM lenses are well known for sharpness as well.
Good luck.
Good luck.
Leighgion
Bovine Overseer
Nothing wrong with buying old photo kit so long as, as observed, you can still get them worked on.
This is one of the big benefits of buying old Nikons and Canons. There were so many of them sold and their brand reputation established that it's much easier to find people to work on them. Just some quick googling found me a one-man Nikon shop who has done work for me at a very reasonable price on my FE and FE2. Both cameras were in good shape, but needed a bit of touch up I wasn't going to attempt myself.
Between the choice of Minolta and Pentax, I'd be kind of inclined towards Pentax because my sense is that it would be easier to get work done on them vs Minoltas, but it's not a hypothesis I've put to the test.
If you're willing to consider Spotmatics and FM10s, I'd put old Nikons into consideration too. While you will pay more for the bodies and glass, the FE and FE2 would fit your requirements.
This is one of the big benefits of buying old Nikons and Canons. There were so many of them sold and their brand reputation established that it's much easier to find people to work on them. Just some quick googling found me a one-man Nikon shop who has done work for me at a very reasonable price on my FE and FE2. Both cameras were in good shape, but needed a bit of touch up I wasn't going to attempt myself.
Between the choice of Minolta and Pentax, I'd be kind of inclined towards Pentax because my sense is that it would be easier to get work done on them vs Minoltas, but it's not a hypothesis I've put to the test.
If you're willing to consider Spotmatics and FM10s, I'd put old Nikons into consideration too. While you will pay more for the bodies and glass, the FE and FE2 would fit your requirements.
colyn
ישו משיח
wgerrard said:
http://www22.brinkster.com/garryscamera/
He's fixed both my XE-7 and XD-11
wgerrard said:
The XE-7 uses the needle while the XD-11 is LED.
wgerrard
Veteran
Thanks, Colyn. Good info to know.
raid
Dad Photographer
If it is a one camera-one lens issue, then options are quite a few. If the wish is to build up to a full system one day, I would go with Nikon or Pentax since the lenses are useful with the digital SLR systems.
I got an MX with the 40mm/2.8 pancake lens recently. It would be a reliable and compact system.
I would recommend a Pentax SLR with the 50mm/1.4 SMC lens. It is a very sharp lens and it is fast.
Maybe an ME Super would be a good choice.
I got an MX with the 40mm/2.8 pancake lens recently. It would be a reliable and compact system.
I would recommend a Pentax SLR with the 50mm/1.4 SMC lens. It is a very sharp lens and it is fast.
Maybe an ME Super would be a good choice.
ChrisPlatt
Thread Killer
peterm1
Veteran
I would say Pentax for sure but unlike the first response I would recommend that you consider the Spotmatic series. Maybe a late F model with the hot shoe. They usually still work well without servicing. Assuming you can focus OK with the screen, (you may wish to test this first) the Spotmatic has the great advantage that the body and lenses are dirt cheap on eBay and very plentiful hence with huge choice as to quality and price. Best of all they are first rate in quality both being built like brick outhouses and the lenses having very good optical quality. I have recently acquired a 4/3 series digital SLR and have been using Takumar lenses with an adapter, with great satisfaction. If you wish to go beyond Takumar lenses there are even more M42 screw mount lenses available and many of these have superb optics as well. However if the Spotmatic does not suit and you are worried about focusing, the one suggestion I would make is to hunt around till you find a camera with split image focussing which has an effect very like the Leica rangefinder focussing and is positive to use. I cannot recall which bodies have this although I think some Nikon interchangeable screens do. This helps tremendously I find, as my eyes are quite poor too although I use a Spotmatic and can get by. If you adopt the Spotmatic suggestion the following lenses are first class.
- 28mm f3.5 (acknowledged as being sharp and contrasty.
- 50mm f1.8 or 50mm f1.4 (The former is dirt cheap and very plentiful. It is regarded as extremely sharp. The latter is also pretty well available but goes for more money. It too is extremely well regarded for its sharpness and bokeh.) There is also a 50mm f4 macro which is very good and quite cheap. It works well as a standard lens if the slowness does not bother you.
-105mm f2.8 (there is an 85mm f1.8 but it is a bit rare and pricey compared to all the others.) The 105 is extremely sharp and contrasty from my experience.
-135mm f3.5 This like most 135s of the era is good. The bigger faster 135mm f 2.5 is nice too. The later SMC version of that lens is said to be sharper.
-200mm f4. This lens wows me. I have seen MTF curves in an old magazine and it performs right up there with the best.
If you do choose Pentax but go down the later bayonet mount route, do some research on the internet as regards lenses as Pentax went through a purple patch there in its early K mount period where some of its lenses were regarded as having lower "consumer grade" quality and of not being of the same high standard as the screw mount ones.
I should add that recently I have been buying a few Canon FL mount lenses too and have found these to be of exceptional quality. A suitable body in good condition is cheap.
- 28mm f3.5 (acknowledged as being sharp and contrasty.
- 50mm f1.8 or 50mm f1.4 (The former is dirt cheap and very plentiful. It is regarded as extremely sharp. The latter is also pretty well available but goes for more money. It too is extremely well regarded for its sharpness and bokeh.) There is also a 50mm f4 macro which is very good and quite cheap. It works well as a standard lens if the slowness does not bother you.
-105mm f2.8 (there is an 85mm f1.8 but it is a bit rare and pricey compared to all the others.) The 105 is extremely sharp and contrasty from my experience.
-135mm f3.5 This like most 135s of the era is good. The bigger faster 135mm f 2.5 is nice too. The later SMC version of that lens is said to be sharper.
-200mm f4. This lens wows me. I have seen MTF curves in an old magazine and it performs right up there with the best.
If you do choose Pentax but go down the later bayonet mount route, do some research on the internet as regards lenses as Pentax went through a purple patch there in its early K mount period where some of its lenses were regarded as having lower "consumer grade" quality and of not being of the same high standard as the screw mount ones.
I should add that recently I have been buying a few Canon FL mount lenses too and have found these to be of exceptional quality. A suitable body in good condition is cheap.
Last edited:
Vics
Veteran
My wife and I did our first trip to Europe in '78 with a Pentax K1000 and pancake 40 and another K1000 with the wonderful 85/1.8. My daugheter still has that kit and I think it was perfect for that trip. We just kept switching cameras. I would, however, recommend instead the Nikon FM with the focal lengths of your choice. The 35/2 is excellent and the 85/1.8 that I have is a wonderful lens, but check the Nikon Compendium and get the right one, as some of them weren't so good. I've seen FMs for some very nice prices with the meter still working. I don't know if it uses a currently available battery. Lastly, the eyeglass problem is solved readily by the F3HP.
Mudman
Well-known
Pentax for the win. I shoot with both a Pentax Spotmatic F and a K10d. Love them both and they both are tanks.
Graham Line
Well-known
Honeywell in Denver, for something like $30, used to install a to split-image focusing screen in Spotmatic bodies. Both of my Spot F's were done that way, and it was a big help, but I don't think the split-image screen was very common.
PeterM didn't mention the 85/1.8 SMCT which is an absolutely phenomenal lens -- unfortunately good copies go for $300 and up.
The Spot F does have a bridge rectifier circuit that controls battery output voltage, so you can use silver oxide cells in place of the original PX625 mercury cell.
The Nikon FM someone mentioned uses 2 MS76 silver oxide cells that are easy to get. I think you can also use a 3v lithium battery as well.
PeterM didn't mention the 85/1.8 SMCT which is an absolutely phenomenal lens -- unfortunately good copies go for $300 and up.
The Spot F does have a bridge rectifier circuit that controls battery output voltage, so you can use silver oxide cells in place of the original PX625 mercury cell.
The Nikon FM someone mentioned uses 2 MS76 silver oxide cells that are easy to get. I think you can also use a 3v lithium battery as well.
Last edited:
ChrisN
Striving
Go for the Minolta or something else; anything but Pentax. The last thing I need is more people competing for the lenses I want to buy. 