In your opinion, what are the best modern 35mm film SLRs ever built?

[eli griggs]

it took away my will to live

Look into the Golden Light that is a Canon F-1 and resurrect your love of photography!

 

[David R Williams]

In my mind, Nikon F6. Full stop. Can use pretty much any Nikon F-mount lens ever made (Canon 1v is limited to EOS lenses only, and cannot use any prior FD glass), and is a robust, reliable, highly functional workhorse. With an optional grip to turn it into a film-consuming monster. Apart from its dependancy upon battery power (and having an F2 as backup helps that), it's just a great film camera.

 

[MultiFormat Shooter]

In my mind, Nikon F6. Full stop. Can use pretty much any Nikon F-mount lens ever made (Canon 1v is limited to EOS lenses only, and cannot use any prior FD glass), and is a robust, reliable, highly functional workhorse. With an optional grip to turn it into a film-consuming monster. Apart from its dependency upon battery power (and having an F2 as backup helps that), it's just a great film camera.

I agree completely!

 

[Subversive Mk II]

What 35mm film SLR camera systems do you think are the best to get into right now?
Which system do you think has the 'best' lenses?

In the spirit of recommending what I own / owned... in calendar order:

Dead simple, basic and would take a tank out - Nikkormat FT2 (only thing is the mercury battery, but the later FT3 is normal SR44).
It's posher cousin, the F2 is a tank itself, and millions were sold, by no means all of them to pros, so there are tons of them around that had very little use. The whole gamut of F glass is there for the taking, but prices on a lot of it aren't as low as they should be - too much demand now.
I recently bought a Nikkormat FTn for old time's sake and have been just as impressed with it as I was with the FT2.
To bring it a bit more up to date, it's been joined by a Nikon F4 - which are cheap now. Superb cameras for peanuts.
Also acquired a Nikon FE, which is a pleasure to use.

Olympus OM-1, again, dead simple, basic and almost indestructible. OM glass is superb for the most part. There's that battery niggle again, but easily got around. Seriously, everybody should have an OM-1 at least once.

I have various K-mount Pentax and Ricoh bodies, but hesitate to recommend them as they are relatively recent used acquisitions and haven't been put through the mill by me, so can't really say how good they are in the long term. They all still work perfectly well, which must say something about them.

There is also a raft of late 90s / early 2000s auto-everything and manual shooters that are real peanuts for fairly decent kit. The vast majority of them never used much and have tons of life left in them. I'm thinking the EOS Canons and the Nikon family from that era.

 

[rcap]

---

Based on what I have used, my preference would be the Nikon FM3a. My second choice would be the F4 with the MB-20 grip. Mostly, because I enjoy using manual focus glass.

 

[IMoL]

Dead simple, basic and would take a tank out - Nikkormat FT2 (only thing is the mercury battery, but the later FT3 is normal SR44).

The FT2 also uses an SR44 battery - it was the FT and FTN that used the mercury 625 batteries.

 

[Subversive Mk II]

The FT2 also uses an SR44 battery - it was the FT and FTN that used the mercury 625 batteries.

You're right, was getting recollections wrong. In all the time I owned it I never changed the battery so it wasn't engraved in my memory.
The FTn I have now is a mercury battery, as you say, but it gets an SR44 just the same and meters adequately.

 

[Tony-S]

The FTn I have now is a mercury battery, as you say, but it gets an SR44 just the same and meters adequately.

I guess "adequately" is a subjective term, but running a 1.5V battery in place of a 1.3V battery won't give you very accurate results, and the voltage will drop over time, making it inconsistent through its lifetime.

 

[Subversive Mk II]

I guess "adequately" is a subjective term, but running a 1.5V battery in place of a 1.3V battery won't give you very accurate results, and the voltage will drop over time, making it inconsistent through its lifetime.

Silver instead of ordinary alkaline.
Diode in the adaptor, or simply setting the ASA to compensate.
Got any more niggles?

 

[Tony-S]

Silver instead of ordinary alkaline.
Diode in the adaptor, or simply setting the ASA to compensate.
Got any more niggles?

Really no need to be snippy.

 

[eli griggs]

IMO, when considering a piece of kit mechanical kit that runs on a mercury battery, I suggest photographers who want to shoot with the O.E. meter should pull up pics of the battery wiring in and behind the battery compartment, and see if the positive line has room for employing a voltage reducing Schottkey diode.

If so, it's a simple job to put one online and a low cost Harbor Freight soldering iron is for one if you need an iron.

Just be sure to use silver solder and the correct flux for non-plumbing projects like electronics.

Also, remember silver cells have the best performance and life and some cameras like the Canonet QL-17 G-III does not need the conversion, according to many members feedback on this topic.


Godspeed to All, take a photograph everyday, even if it of your own hand or foot.

Eli

 

[chuckroast]

IMO, when considering a piece of kit mechanical kit that runs on a mercury battery, I suggest photographers who want to shoot with the O.E. meter should pull up pics of the battery wiring in and behind the battery compartment, and see if the positive line has room for employing a voltage reducing Schottkey diode.

If so, it's a simple job to put one online and a low cost Harbor Freight soldering iron is for one if you need an iron.

Just be sure to use silver solder and the correct flux for non-plumbing projects like electronics.

Also, remember silver cells have the best performance and life and some cameras like the Canonet QL-17 G-III does not need the conversion, according to many members feedback on this topic.


Godspeed to All, take a photograph everyday, even if it of your own hand or foot.

Eli

It's actually not as critical as most people seem to think - at least for legacy analog meters. So long as you use a silver oxide battery (which fails suddenly, not gradually like an alkaline), you can compensate for the overvoltage by adjusting the ASA. A higher voltage will cause the meter to indicate more light than is really present, so you'll underexpose. The trick is to just set a lower ASA to force the meter to give you an increased exposure.

I have used the voltage dropping MR9 adapters and that also works great.

This is also an elegant solution:

 

[chuckroast]

I guess "adequately" is a subjective term, but running a 1.5V battery in place of a 1.3V battery won't give you very accurate results, and the voltage will drop over time, making it inconsistent through its lifetime.

This is substantially incorrect. The battery voltage drops gradually with alkaline batteries, but not so with silver oxide which fail more-or-less all at once. If you use silver oxide batteries, you will therefore get consistently high readings. This will cause you to underexpose. But ... you can compensate for it by lowering the ASA on the meter.

See my post #612 for alternatives.

 

[MattKing]

Sadly, while some meters will be usable when a battery is installed with a different voltage - usually by adjusting the ASA/DIN setting - other meters become non-linear, and therefore essentially unusable when an incorrect battery is installed.
It depends on the metering circuit used.
So it is worth checking against another reliable meter if you already have in hand the silver oxide battery and the meter, but without that check, you cannot count on a simple ASA/DIN adjustment doing the job.

 

[fophem]

3 of the greatest slr ever made: the pentax LX, you have access to pentax lenses but also tons of M42 lenses if you want to experiment.
Nikon FM3A the perfect manual focus camera, can be used without batteries and you have access to the great Nikkor lenses.
Nikon F6... I don't use it often but every time I have it my hand I wish all my cameras were as great...

 

[chuckroast]

Sadly, while some meters will be usable when a battery is installed with a different voltage - usually by adjusting the ASA/DIN setting - other meters become non-linear, and therefore essentially unusable when an incorrect battery is installed.
It depends on the metering circuit used.
So it is worth checking against another reliable meter if you already have in hand the silver oxide battery and the meter, but without that check, you cannot count on a simple ASA/DIN adjustment doing the job.

I have done a fair bit of battery adjustment/fiddling/experimentation with old Luna Pros. What I've seen there, at least, is that the nonlinearity is most pronounced at the end of the measuring ranges. However, said linearity issues were present with both older- and newer voltage sources. I suspect that this lack of linearity has less to do with the voltage source or measuring circuitry, and more to do with the nonlinearity inherent in the CdS cell itself.

If memory serves, most decent older powered analog meters work in some sort of diode bridge arrangement. Within reason (and 1.35->1.5v should be within reason), turning up the voltage isn't a lot different than recalibrating the meter - you're just moving where the needled deflects. If anything, adding voltage puts the diodes themselves in a more linear part of their transfer curve.

Having said this, I've resorted to either manually recalibrating my meters for newer voltage source (Luna Pros) or using MR9s with diodes in them for my cameras. It's just one less thing to have to keep track of. I have not yet retrofit an older meter with a Stable625 regulator, although I do have an older Nikon Photomic FtN that's begging to get redone this way. My bench test of those regulators shows them to be right on the money.

As an aside, if the meter behaves approximately linearly, my quick calculations (not checked or verified) suggest that meter will be off by under 0.2 f stops. I calculated this as log, base2 of new to old voltage:

log 2 (1.5/1.35) = 0.152 f stop deviation of underexposure with the higher voltage battery


Obviously this assumes perfectly linear behavior over the indicated voltage range and may not be the case in practice. However, it does suggest that the variability isn't as draconian as everyone believes.

The greater error here, by far, is the use of alkaline batteries. Alkalines gradually lose their voltage and will cause slow errosion of exposure readings over time - silently an without any real warning. That why, if I were to use a modern 1.5V source without any other fiddling, I'd juse one of the MR9 style adapters without the diode (much cheaper) so I could use silver oxide batteries. Silver oxide maintains voltage right to the and then dies pretty much all at once.

 

[M-88]

Do I see Nikomat suggested as modern/newish?

Was the thread moved 50 years back in time?

 

[Tony-S]

Do I see Nikomat suggested as modern/newish?

Was the thread moved 50 years back in time?

Right? If it took a mercury battery, it can't be called "modern."

 

[manfrominternet]

Well, after 2 years of us all keeping this thread alive, I finally bit the bullet and bought myself a very lovely Pentax LX (later model) that looks like it has been barely used. The clear piece of protective tape on the bottom of said Pentax LX was never removed is still completely intact. I bought the camera due to its impressive metering range (-6.5 EV to 20 EV) and the highly-rated Pentax lenses it can use. While I still haven't taken the LX out in the field, everything on it appears to be working properly. Without film in the camera, however, I noticed that the Integrated Direct Metering (IDM) appears to be working fine for shutter speeds at or above 1/60th of a second, however at shutter speeds slower than this, it takes a little while longer for the mirror & shutter to fall back into position. I assume that, because the camera meters off the film at speeds slower that 1/60th of a second, when there's no film in the camera, the light meter is just reading and metering off the pitch black pressure plate (instead of film) causing the auto-exposure mode to keep the shutter open for longer. (Let me know if I'm wrong with my logic.)

Anyway, if you guys can offer any suggestion for any high-quality lenses I should get for this camera, I'd really appreciate it. The SMC Pentax-M 50mm f/1.7 that you see in the photo below is sort of busted so I won't be using it. That said, now that I'm effectively starting from scratch, I'm looking for either a classic 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, and 85mm/100mm prime lens setup (or the Limited series of 31mm, 43mm, or 77mm Pentax lenses) or even just a really sharp zoom lens or two. They don't even necessarily have to be Pentax brand lenses. Any suggestions would be very much appreciated! Many thanks!

 

[Pioneer]

Well, after 2 years of us all keeping this thread alive, I finally bit the bullet and bought myself a very lovely Pentax LX (later model) that looks like it has been barely used. The clear piece of protective tape on the bottom of said Pentax LX was never removed is still completely intact. I bought the camera due to its impressive metering range (-6.5 EV to 20 EV) and the highly-rated Pentax lenses it can use. While I still haven't taken the LX out in the field, everything on it appears to be working properly. Without film in the camera, however, I noticed that the Integrated Direct Metering (IDM) appears to be working fine for shutter speeds at or above 1/60th of a second, however at shutter speeds slower than this, it takes a little while longer for the mirror & shutter to fall back into position. I assume that, because the camera meters off the film at speeds slower that 1/60th of a second, when there's no film in the camera, the light meter is just reading and metering off the pitch black pressure plate (instead of film) causing the auto-exposure mode to keep the shutter open for longer. (Let me know if I'm wrong with my logic.)

Anyway, if you guys can offer any suggestion for any high-quality lenses I should get for this camera, I'd really appreciate it. The SMC Pentax-M 50mm f/1.7 that you see in the photo below is sort of busted so I won't be using it. That said, now that I'm effectively starting from scratch, I'm looking for either a classic 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, and 85mm/100mm prime lens setup (or the Limited series of 31mm, 43mm, or 77mm Pentax lenses) or even just a really sharp zoom lens or two. They don't even necessarily have to be Pentax brand lenses. Any suggestions would be very much appreciated! Many thanks!
View attachment 370446

Nice catch. I have been using mine more or less continually for the past year with an occasional interruption from my Rolleiflex. My poor rangefinders are beginning to think they have been abandoned to the wolves. I have been using a very nice Voigtlander Ultron 40mm f2 lens along with my SMC Pentax-A 50mm f1.2 and I have not been disappointed. My 31mm Limited has also gotten its' chance lately. Though it is an autofocus lens it works quite well with the LX. But there are tons of options available including some very nice Takumars from the early M42 period. Like most Pentax cameras the LX has amazing lens compatibility and handles stop down metering with no problems.

Have fun!

 

[naaldvoerder]

The Contax RTS III.

 

[flowerpunk]

Nikon fm2 and Minolta x700. I use the 700 the most. But if I had my first K1000 I would probably shoot with it.
I feel my early days with the K1000 some of the best shot I’ve ever taken. But it might be my age now affecting my stuff now.

I had full auto Minolta 9 something that I sold. Didn’t shoot much with it.

 

[ant!]

Nikon fm2 and Minolta x700. I use the 700 the most. But if I had my first K1000 I would probably shoot with it.
I feel my early days with the K1000 some of the best shot I’ve ever taken. But it might be my age now affecting my stuff now.

I had full auto Minolta 9 something that I sold. Didn’t shoot much with it.

I prefer the X500/X570 over the X700, but wouldn't call them modern. In the best modern category I'd count the Minolta 7 and 9.

If one prefers manual of AF, or a 70s/80s camera or even a mechanical one isn't really the question, I understand "best modern" is the best from the latest film camera generation late 90s/early 2000s, with all the whistles one might never need.

 

[Paul Howell]

When I was ready to trade in my F2 I did consider the LX, had all the same features as the F3P, weather sealed, built in flash shoe with a large numbers of viewfinders and focusing screens. I decided on the F3P as my employer paid 1/2 the cost and I had Nikon lens. If I had been a freelancer I might have gone with the LX.

 

[chuckroast]

When I was ready to trade in my F2 I did consider the LX, had all the same features as the F3P, weather sealed, built in flash shoe with a large numbers of viewfinders and focusing screens. I decided on the F3P as my employer paid 1/2 the cost and I had Nikon lens. If I had been a freelancer I might have gone with the LX.

I have owned and used Nikon in some form for five decades. I currently have a Nikkormat FT from the 1950s, a chrome unmetered F from the 1960s, an 70s era Apollo FTn, an F2 made later, and an F3HP made later still that I got essentially new in box (and paid way too much for

For pure utility and elegance of simplicity, I don't think anyone ever made a better 35mm SLR than the original F/F2 in their variations (the F2 was really just a better F). I know they are not "modern" in the sense of this thread but these cameras are just bulletproof workhorses that still hold their own 50+ years after original build. I have literally dropped an F from my lap onto a concrete sidewalk as I stood up, forgetting to put the strap on after I reloaded, and the camera just kept working flawlessly.

I'd love to love the F3 more than I do. It's a wonderful "next turn of the crank" from the F/F2 era. The shutter, in particular, is an accurate and highly reliable piece of machinery. But my love for the F3 is tempered with my hate for its meter. That LCD with a backlight button has no place on a pro camera. It's just consumer grade eye candy that's hard to see and harder to use. What's maddening about this is that LEDs were well available during the F3 design cycle. The way Leica handled this in the M6 is waaaaaaay better.

So when I reach for a 35mm SLR, it's almost always and an F or the F2. (The Nikkormat is my cheap "car camera" that works remarkably well 70ish years after being built.) I do use my "modern" F3 from time to time more out of nostalgia than anything, but then the clumsy metering in low light shows up and I got back to one of the other bodies.