jmooney
Guy with a camera
Hi all,
So I've got funky hands due to Psoriatic Arthritis (autoimmune arthritis, not the stuff old folks get) so my immune system is destroying my joints for sport. My hands go from pretty OK to "please tie my shoes dear" because I cant' use them that well. What say ye on which SLRs (35mm or 120) that work well for folks with misbehaving/arthritic hands? I know this seems slightly generalized but I don't think I'm the only one whose hands don't work right. I don't care about brand or AF or MF just looking for any advice on what others might think works best.
Thanks in advance to the awesome folks here at RFF,
Jim
So I've got funky hands due to Psoriatic Arthritis (autoimmune arthritis, not the stuff old folks get) so my immune system is destroying my joints for sport. My hands go from pretty OK to "please tie my shoes dear" because I cant' use them that well. What say ye on which SLRs (35mm or 120) that work well for folks with misbehaving/arthritic hands? I know this seems slightly generalized but I don't think I'm the only one whose hands don't work right. I don't care about brand or AF or MF just looking for any advice on what others might think works best.
Thanks in advance to the awesome folks here at RFF,
Jim
Vics
Veteran
I've been shooting a Minolta Maxxum 700si (4th generation) and a Maxxum 7000 (1st generation) because of my cerebellar ataxia (please button my shirt) lately, and they both work well and cost nothing. The lenses are a bit more, 'cause they work on Sony alpha DSLRs and SLTs.
farlymac
PF McFarland
I've got a Maxxum 4 with 28-80 lens that would be good for you, Jim. Very light weight, and you'd only need the other longer zoom to complete the kit. Due to it's looks, I don't think it garners a premium like the other Minolta AF lenses do.
PF
PF
Off the top of my head I reckon something like an entry level Canon EOS would suit you well (Rebel in your market?). Quite light = kinder to your hands; motor drive = same; plastic zoom lens = same.
Of course there will be trade offs in image quality and durability but at present prices they can be as cheap or cheaper than a disposable 35mm camera anyway.
I'm sure Nikon and other brands offer equivalents but Canon are the only make I have any familiarity with. You haven't mentioned how important image quality is to you, or the genres of photography you tend to practice, so it is hard to offer more suggestions without knowing these things, but if ease of handling, weight and size are key something along the lines of what I have mentioned might be as good a place as any to start.
Medium format seems to me rather harder. There are a number of reasonably light MF cameras that are worthy of consideration but no SLRs I can think of that are as light as Eg. their rangefinder or TLR alternatives. Closest I can think of might be a Hasselblad with 80mm lens and waist level finder. How you'd go using this is another matter of course. There might be some 645s that are a better fit for you but 645 has never really been my thing, sorry.
Cheers
Brett
Of course there will be trade offs in image quality and durability but at present prices they can be as cheap or cheaper than a disposable 35mm camera anyway.
I'm sure Nikon and other brands offer equivalents but Canon are the only make I have any familiarity with. You haven't mentioned how important image quality is to you, or the genres of photography you tend to practice, so it is hard to offer more suggestions without knowing these things, but if ease of handling, weight and size are key something along the lines of what I have mentioned might be as good a place as any to start.
Medium format seems to me rather harder. There are a number of reasonably light MF cameras that are worthy of consideration but no SLRs I can think of that are as light as Eg. their rangefinder or TLR alternatives. Closest I can think of might be a Hasselblad with 80mm lens and waist level finder. How you'd go using this is another matter of course. There might be some 645s that are a better fit for you but 645 has never really been my thing, sorry.
Cheers
Brett
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I'd be looking for an OM-2 with a motordrive if my hands were that bad. The drive improves the ergos of the OM body considerably and not having to advance the film would be a bonus in your case. Plus you have a camera with the best AE metering of it's era IMO.
B-9
Devin Bro
The Nikon N80/F80 comes to mind. Also the N90/F90. Both are undeservingly cheap.
Ranchu
Veteran
Canon T2, the silver film one, not the T2i or whatever. I have a couple Ti's which I think would be ideal, but the AF won't do one shot focus and reframe, which the T2 will. The 28-90 4-5.6 mark II zoom isn't bad either.
http://www.ebay.com/sch/Film-Photography-/69323/i.html?_from=R40&_sac=1&_nkw=canon+t2
I don't have arthritis, but these are very light, and the controls are mainly poke or rub. You can also get a EOS to M42 adapter and put on a Super Takumar 35mm f3.5 and scale focus with auto metering, which is what I do. It works on my Ti's anyway.
http://www.ebay.com/sch/Film-Photography-/69323/i.html?_from=R40&_sac=1&_nkw=canon+t2
I don't have arthritis, but these are very light, and the controls are mainly poke or rub. You can also get a EOS to M42 adapter and put on a Super Takumar 35mm f3.5 and scale focus with auto metering, which is what I do. It works on my Ti's anyway.
x-ray
Veteran
Nikon 8008 or 8008s. I believe there was a very compact and light 35-70 for it.
kxl
Social Documentary
I think weight might only be one factor. Another would be ergonomics, i.e., hand and finger placement on the body's controls. If you have big hands, a small lightweight body may cause issues as well. Impossible to say which body works for you without knowing your hand size. Also, I would think that auto film advance would be important. IMHO, an AF body might be a better choice.
If it's not too heavy for you and if the size and ergonomics work for you, IMHO a Nikon F100 is the best buy right now wrt price/performance.
If it's not too heavy for you and if the size and ergonomics work for you, IMHO a Nikon F100 is the best buy right now wrt price/performance.
sc_rufctr
Leica nuts
I'd suggest a digital SLR or good digital point and shoot. Something like a Fuji X series?
IMO, Unfortunate loading film will always be an issue. I have a friend who was a film user with a similar condition.
She found the only real long term answer was to go digital.
I wish you the best with your condition.
IMO, Unfortunate loading film will always be an issue. I have a friend who was a film user with a similar condition.
She found the only real long term answer was to go digital.
I wish you the best with your condition.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
That's a good suggestion. I bought an N90 a long time ago for around seventy dollars and it's an incredibly able camera for the price. The AF is good and the metering is typically matrix Nikon ... near faultless.
It's also very good ergonomically and not all that heavy.
If you were interested I'd give it to you for the cost of the postage.
p.giannakis
Pan Giannakis
I would say go for the Nikon F4. All dials and buttons are oversized so that they provide easy access while wearing gloves. The number of buttons are kept to minimum and are of good size. The camera is of considerate weight though although some people (me included) like it as it provides more stability while taking pics.The camera is not excessively expensive considering what you get for your money.
Google around to see some pictures on the net. On my blog i have a personal review of using this camera.
Google around to see some pictures on the net. On my blog i have a personal review of using this camera.
CMur12
Veteran
Hi Jim -
I'm wondering if a medium format SLR or TLR with a waist-level finder, supported on a neck strap or a tripod, would be easier than supporting a camera in your hands at eye-level.
I normally shoot my TLRs on a tripod and I just sling it over my shoulder to carry it about. (I don't know if this would be a problem for you.) When I set it up, I am not holding the camera in my hands, at all. My hands are free to just work the controls. If your hands start to ache, you can just stop where you are, then continue where you left off without having to set up the composition all over again as you would handheld at eye level.
- Murray
I'm wondering if a medium format SLR or TLR with a waist-level finder, supported on a neck strap or a tripod, would be easier than supporting a camera in your hands at eye-level.
I normally shoot my TLRs on a tripod and I just sling it over my shoulder to carry it about. (I don't know if this would be a problem for you.) When I set it up, I am not holding the camera in my hands, at all. My hands are free to just work the controls. If your hands start to ache, you can just stop where you are, then continue where you left off without having to set up the composition all over again as you would handheld at eye level.
- Murray
David Murphy
Veteran
If you are shooting film I would suggest a larger camera body. The compact SLR's like the OM-1 and the Pentax MX, as nice as they are, take some precise finger-hand coordination to manipulate their controls since they are (out of necessity) squeezed close together, especially in the OM series.
There many large SLR bodies, and some prefer them - often users with large hands. Notable among them are the Nikon F and F2, early Nikkormats, all earlier era FD Canon bodies, the Minolta SRT bodies, Yashica M42 series, the screw mount Pentax models, a number of Japanese screw mount bodies like the old M42 Vivitars, Chinons, and several others. I don't have that much experience, but I seem to recall also that many of the earlier Leicaflex models were rather large bodies with easy to use controls (all superb cameras and lenses too).
So it is early 35mm SLR bodies that are easy (IMO) to set the controls on. They are heavier, bigger cameras, so as most camera makers moved towards the compact 35 SLR these larger bodies mostly disappeared (the OM-1 was the game changer in that regard and basically forced other camera makers to make their cameras targeted to the advanced amateur market smaller and lighter).
There many large SLR bodies, and some prefer them - often users with large hands. Notable among them are the Nikon F and F2, early Nikkormats, all earlier era FD Canon bodies, the Minolta SRT bodies, Yashica M42 series, the screw mount Pentax models, a number of Japanese screw mount bodies like the old M42 Vivitars, Chinons, and several others. I don't have that much experience, but I seem to recall also that many of the earlier Leicaflex models were rather large bodies with easy to use controls (all superb cameras and lenses too).
So it is early 35mm SLR bodies that are easy (IMO) to set the controls on. They are heavier, bigger cameras, so as most camera makers moved towards the compact 35 SLR these larger bodies mostly disappeared (the OM-1 was the game changer in that regard and basically forced other camera makers to make their cameras targeted to the advanced amateur market smaller and lighter).
David Murphy
Veteran
Also, almost any medium format camera is easier to handle control wise than a 35mm camera. The can get big and heavy of course. The TLR's are my favorite since they are comparatively compact and light - the Rolleiflex and their many excellent imitators such as Yashica, Minolta, etc, etc.
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
Do you fear that you may not be able to handle a camera, or is that a realistic medical prognosis? Personally I still get on perfectly well with every reasonably smooth camera, in spite of three decades of PSA.
Things that can be hard on bad days is pressing one button for more than a few seconds at a time, knob winding, or handling intentionally difficult knobs like the F2 or F1n prism releases. But every motorized or lever wind camera that does nor require me to press some knob permanently or very hard does do so far. I even get along with ancient cameras like the Contax IIa/Leica IIIc, provided that I find some way to work around being unable to rewind them on bad days (like handing that off to the wife or kids)...
V-12
Well-known
I imagine loading an unloading a 120 camera would be difficult with arthritis as unwrapping the film and feeding it onto the takeup spool can be difficult just with cold fingers. If on the other hand you had a tame film loader assistant a Mamiya 7 or similar may make a good camera with the flexibility of interchangeable lenses and big controls.
But I would suggest an auto everything SLR, one that winds the film on for you, and then winds it back at the end of a roll. I think ideally you'd want one that you could fit a soft release to, to raise the exposure button and make it easy to feel. But what camera that would be I don't know, cable release threads became unfashionable at the same time as all the auto gadgets and cable sockets appeared.
V
But I would suggest an auto everything SLR, one that winds the film on for you, and then winds it back at the end of a roll. I think ideally you'd want one that you could fit a soft release to, to raise the exposure button and make it easy to feel. But what camera that would be I don't know, cable release threads became unfashionable at the same time as all the auto gadgets and cable sockets appeared.
V
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
As long as you don't have to rush it, it is not all that bad. But do sit down at a table for loading, or you will have to juggle two parts in each hand!
Paul Jenkin
Well-known
For me, a Nikon F5. It's the sort of camera which, once set up the way you like it, you can use wearing mittens. It's heavy alright but it's well balanced and I've always loved using mine. If the budget won't stretch, a Nikon F100 with the battery grip is a similar size, weight and dimension and is also a great camera.
nobbylon
Veteran
Many suggestions here involve dials and knobs which will be impossible on your 'shoelace' days so I'd recommend as above, an , F5 if funds allow and if not an F100. Set them up on a good day and all you have to do is press the release on bad days. I hope you find ways to manage your condition,
Regards John
Regards John