We know the M2 is king but what Tom's opinion on SLR's?

Dralowid said:
Oh, I do like it when someone else mentions an SL MOT but then, if Tom's got one and I've got one (still) then I reckon there are only another nine hundred and something to go...so they are hardly likely to be mentioned too often.

60mm Macro Elmarit? Fantastic.

Michael
Click to expand...

Not only is mine a SL-Mot - it is a black paint one (well there is some paint still left on it). I have kept it for the two Leica SLR lenses that I have kept. A 60f2.8 Macro Elmarit and the 180f3.4 Apo-Telyt. I did get rid of the motor though - 10 AA batteries and what looks like the starter for a small compact car made it too heavy to drag around.
 
All this talk about Nikon F is making me drool ... My first camera was an FM2n, and I bought an F2 photomic about 20 years ago. I also have a lovely F2A which has special meaning to me. So the FM and F2 series have my vote.

I have always been curious about the DE-1 plain prism, but they are quite pricey. In fact I can get a BGN plain F for the price of the DE-1 (also KEH BGN). Does it matter what vintage of an F to get as a user camera? I am not planning on attaching a drive or even a flash.
 
Tom... for me the Nikon F is a nice complement to the Leica Ms, if not the best. Not only for being extremely reliable but also quite practical. Once the prism is off use it as ground level camera with a superwide lens, great for sceneries.. or on the street like in the days we used the Rolleis; you set the view on the groundglass and then look only at the "victim" no need to look down again, wait for the right moment and press the shutter ;)... more practical than the Rolleiflex to carry around and load.. I have three of them.. all with standard prisms.

Bob
 
Besides my rangefinders, my first SLRs were Minolta and the SRT 102 is great. Then on to Nikon: FE, FE2, FM2 and then finally the Nikomat (Nikkormat) and the F2. I also love my Olympus OM3. For IQ that might be the best of the lot.

However, all that said, I just got a Canon F1 and an FD 50/1.4. I have never fallen so quickly in love with a camera.
 
Hate to differ with Mr. A, but the Best SLR ever made is the Leicaflex SL. It makes the Nikon F feel like a toy, and the viewfinder makes the F seem like a D100 viewfinder in comparision.

It's a shame the camera was dead on arrival given most pros had already bought into the F system by time Leica offered it, because it's a thing of rare beauty. Leica also didn't help it's postumous reputation be following it up with the R series of rebadged Minoltas.
 
mynikonf2 said:
I love the F-1, in fact it was my first "pro" camera & the EF too. My only regret in owning them is that I traded them and if I could find one as nice as this one I'd buy it! :D
Click to expand...
Mike, I have one for sale :D just kidding :eek:
 

Attachments

  • 721W09771b.jpg
    721W09771b.jpg
    190.1 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
Timestep said:
Nikon F2, Plain Prism.
The last "Adult Nikon"
Click to expand...

Nah... That was the F.

Although I'm a mere tyro next to Tom, I can furnish a quote from Marty Forscher (God rest his soul).

Me: What will I do when my Fs wear out?

Marty: How many ya got?

Me: Five.

Marty: How old are ya?

Me: Fifty [or whatever it was at the time].

Marty: Don't worry. They'll outlast you.

Strong men weep at the sight of a good F with plain prism: "I wish I still had one of those."

Cheers,

R.
 
Last edited:
My king of cameras is a Pentax MX, Black or Chrome . Perfect size, great build quality, large viewfinder. Having owned an M6 a .85 Chrome MP and owned and used Nikons and Canons this is the camera I come back to. Does everything a manual film camera is suppose to do and does it well.
 
I've owned the F. It was fine but I didn't like the loading system or the big monster of a metered head.

I did a partial trade for a very nice 35mm Summicron.

The Nikon F2 was for me a vastly improved F and I don't regret getting rid of the F. Indeed I prefer the thing to the F3 and the F4 for the laid back sort of photography I do.
 
I really want to handle an M2 some time. I haven't shot with an M before and have held some of the later versions but haven't had a chance to see how an M2 handled.

Ha, come to think of it, last time the Seattle RFF group got together, someone recommended a trip up to Canada some time to meet folks and suggested I'd probably have a chance to check out an M2 if we did that. :)
 
I always thought the F2as was the king. It's supposedly the last hand-built F and the as meter is the most sensitive/ accurate.

Bill
 
Tom A said:
Brian, I dont know what it is with Nikon's - they just multiply. I rarely "carry" them - mainly used for macro stuff. The F2's are great, but they lack the soul of the F. One advantage too with the F is that older lenses (non AI) are cheap and plentiful. But 11 F2's is a bit excessive - 8 F's is more normal - and there is a swapmeet coming up in April here in town and I tend to migrate to the dusty F's at these occasions - so 8 is not an impossibility!!!!
Click to expand...
Tom I agree with completely regarding the F (and the F vs. the F2). To me it's the definitive SLR. They are the ideal complement to a Leica. I prefer the eye level unmetered prism.
 
I once had a good F with an F36 motor (battery packs and all) - it was one impressive beast alright. I think the F bodies needed a small modification to accept it. I sold it to a collector in Germany, but I now wish I had it as a functional conversation piece - it really got ones attention and was fun to use!


Tom A said:
I agree with the F3HP - it is a good design and the fact that with the MD4 motor you run less chance of having the meter/AE dying on you as it draws power from the motor rather than from the batteries in the "head".
Only thing to watch for is the LCD screen in the viewfinder. This was fairly early LCD technology and they can fade or malfunction.
At the moment I dont have a F3, but I will probably pick one up at the next swap-meet (April 17). They work well with macro and bellows. The math for getting correct exposures with bellows in particular can be head-ache inducing. I usually just bracket like hell. Hmm, might be able to save up for a F3 on reduced film-cost!
The F3/MD4 is not as noisy as the F36 or MD-2 motors (and not as heavy either). Remember the "photo-ops" from the 60's. Politicians looking like gold-fish at feeding time. Mouth open and whatever they said drowned out by the clatter of F36's churning away!
Click to expand...
 
With my M2 and M3 I shoot two Nikkormat FTn's. Both early model, black paint with the all-metal lever.

They take pre-AI lenses (which can be had for a song since they often do not fit modern DLSRs) and have a meter read-out at the top so I can use them as meters without having to bring them to my eye.

Usually I bring a Leica for wides and normal lenses, and a Nikkormat for anything longer. Although recently I have picked up a 28/3.5 (which is a standard on my D3100, that can also take pre-AI lenses!)

It's resembling the classic sixties press set-up, I was told. I keep the Nikkormat in a gas mask bag, the Leica around the neck or in the coat pocket. Another pocket with film and I'm good to go!


EDIT:


Nikkormat FTN's by buzzardkid, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
Johan, that's a wonderful setup. The Nikkormat is one rock solid camera. I dearly wanted to own one of these when I was 17, but had to settle for an M42 Yashica SLR. (An actual F was unimaginably expensive back then to a kid - even one with a decent job).
 
If I did not already own too many 35mm cameras I would get myself a Nikkormat. It is a remarkable little camera. A perfect companion for the M2.

A friend owns a FTN with 35, 50 and a small telephoto. This is his only camera (!!!) and he uses it a lot.

Can you imagine only owning one camera.......One Camera!
 
Last edited:
Hi,

Well, there are times when I wonder why Leitz/Leica did something.

Why the M3 first when the M2 is so more useful? Imagine the M2 with self setting film counter and a 28mm wide angle with spec's on it to give you the correct view. And why did they put the socket for the flash where they did and why such an odd socket? The 3mm coaxial had come in well before the M series. But then the f/2, f/2.8, f/4 sequence was decided in 1900 and so on but they still went ahead with their sequence.

I often think it was a pity they became so profitable and popular so quickly. If they'd had to struggle a bit and watch the pennies things might have turned out differently.

Regards, David

PS No mention of the Pentax K1000, yet? Now that was a lovely camera and I sold mine (sigh).
 
I'm going to be heretical and offer up this:
5941233575_3c5101cdc6.jpg


I wouldn't go so far as to suggest that it is the King of SLRs, or even the king of Miranda SLRs... but it has one quality that ensures it is my most used SLR.

With its short back focus distance the Miranda could use adapters to mount most other SLR system's lenses. With this camera I can use my Exakta, M42, and native Miranda mount lenses. So it sees film more often than my other SLRs. The interchangeable viewfinders are so far as I'm concerned, a necessity with SLRs.

Nice as the Nikon F is... I can't use all of my lenses on one.
5991342253_7c51a1d625.jpg


I also have a Miranda G, which unfortunately has a dead shutter. But when it works it's a remarkably smooth camera. I'll have it fixed eventually.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom