Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!

SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Cameras you wished you'd purchased new?
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon Oct 11, 2021 9:34 am    Post subject: Cameras you wished you'd purchased new? Reply with quote

Easy:

Contax RTS III
Nikon F4s

I own neither but if I could buy them new today, I'd run out and buy both.
These are the two cameras I have truly ridiculous regrets never owning.

The Nikon F4s was the first professional Nikon I ever held with a 80-200 f2.8 (single ring) lens attached. It was brought in by a Nikon rep to where I worked. Remember that day like it was yesterday. I took it outside, fired some frames, it's the day that made me commit to the Nikon system.
At that point in time the F4 was getting old and I didn't need to buy a system "right now" so I opted to wait for the F4 replacement. Nikon took longer than expected to release the successor (F5) so I ended up with the Nikon F90x as my first Nikon camera. This was effectively the Nikon pro camera for a period during that F4 to F5 gap. The F4 was still available but for pro use, the tech just became too old so the F90x was number one in the Nikon line. I later also did get the F5 upon release.

The Contax RTS III and Contax system is what I intended to buy into prior to the rep bringing in the F4. I was brought into the photography world using Leica gear. (Not owned by myself)
That's what I used but I was never a fan. I looked at the Contax system and also got to hold and have a play with the RTS III. Remember that day like it was yesterday too!

Back then I was building a career. I looked at system cost and at that time there was still plenty of debate if autofocus would rule the world over manual focus or not. I could see the future becoming autofocus and the Contax system cost would be extreme. The day the Nikon rep brought in the F4 and I had the opportunity to have a good hold and play, made me decide Nikon would be the more sensible long term option. As excited as I was that day, I still recall that I was equally shattered my Contax RTS III dreams were over.

I loved both those cameras and I am absolutely devastated I never actually owned either. I would even buy a used one today if I could find one that is truly mint and in perfect working order. No success so far so I guess this is one MAJOR regret I will carry with me till the end of time. lol


PostPosted: Tue Oct 12, 2021 2:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I wouldn't let regrets overwhelm me. I'd look for clean used examples and buy them. They're out there. I bought a very clean Nikon F4s, just to have one because of its historical importance. Its AF truly sucks compared to modern cameras, but that's kinda beside the point.

My first camera system was Canon FD. I bought an AE-1, followed by an A-1. Not too long after I bought the A-1, I realized I was moving in the wrong direction. So, to reverse this trend, I went back to the basics. My first new old Canon was an FT-b, the camera that really taught me photography. I followed up maybe a year later when I bought an old beater F-1. Man, I loved that camera. Bought another just to have a spare. So, those two -- the FTb and the original F-1 are cameras I wished I could have bought new. The reason why I bought an original F-1 and not the new model was because the old one has mirror lock-up, whereas the new one does not. MLU is also why I bought my first FTb. It wasn't until many years later that I bought my first New F-1. A helluva camera, I like it a lot. But I still think that Canon blew it by not including MLU.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 19, 2021 6:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

A Pentax LX. I started with a new ME Super and wore it out. That was replaced with a second hand MX. I used that until it was stolen. A few years later I discovered Ebay and internet fora and fell down the slippery slope of GAS. One of my purchases was an LX. I've used it a great deal since, but it makes me wish I could have afforded one earlier.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 19, 2021 8:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

cooltouch wrote:

My first camera system was Canon FD. I bought an AE-1, followed by an A-1. Not too long after I bought the A-1, I realized I was moving in the wrong direction. So, to reverse this trend, I went back to the basics.


I did virtually the same, went from AE1-P to A1, and back again. I still have the AE1-P I bought used back in the 70's to replace the A1.

I stuck with Canon and went AF with a EOS600, still on my shelf, but in doing so I missed out on the only camera I lusted after and have never owned - the Canon T90.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 19, 2021 9:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

My cameras are usually brought used when they are at least 5 years old.
I don't think I'd ever have wanted to pay the extra for having them new, but some I might have liked to get a little earlier than I did.
More significant around one third of the cameras I did actually buy new, I subsequently felt I shouldn't have bothered with at all.
All of these where less than £25 so the expense wasn't to drastic, but combining the cost of them all would now probably allow a used Go-pro type camera to be purchased that might actually do what I was planning on trying.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 19, 2021 9:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I remember Reids with Dallmeyer lenses being sold at government surplus stores for about £50 in 1971. I wish I'd bought one.


PostPosted: Wed Oct 20, 2021 8:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lloydy wrote:

I stuck with Canon and went AF with a EOS600, still on my shelf, but in doing so I missed out on the only camera I lusted after and have never owned - the Canon T90.


I did similarly. My first AF was a first generation Rebel that I wore out. Replaced it with an Elan IIe, which I've owned for probably 15 years or so. Finally, about 5 years ago, I bought my first and only T90. It's a helluva camera. Mine doesn't get much use, since, if I'm shooting film with an FD Canon, I'm still reaching for an F-1 or FTb first, usually the F-1.

But you gotta love the T-90 for what it represents. It was the first camera with that new (for the late 80s) "slippery" look that all manufacturers have since adopted as an essential element of their styling.


PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2021 6:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why to regret ...? Just get a nice used sample of each one, and enjoy them ...!

Starting around 2005 I purchased nearly all the professional SLRs I had been interested in ... they now are simply too cheap to resist Wink

Canon: Canon R, Canon F-1 and New F-1, T90, EOS 1, and a few more
Mamiya: 645 1000s and 645 Pro TL
Minolta: SR-1, SR-2, SR-3, SR-7, SR-T, XE, XM, XD, 9000, 9xi, Dynax 9, ...
Nikon: F, F2, F3, F4, F5, ...
Pentax: LX, MX, ME, ...
Yashica Zeiss: Contax RTS, RTS II (but no RTS III yet!)
Leica: Leicaflex, Lecaflex SL, R3, R4, R5, ...

All the cameras mentioned above probably did cost me < CHF (EUR/USD) 3000.-- (with exception of the Minolta 9000 / 9xi / Dynax 9 which I bought new).

S


PostPosted: Sun Oct 24, 2021 4:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Out of all the cameras that have passed through my hands, I *think* only two were bought brand new:

A Nikon FE, and a Bronica Sq-A.

I got the FE after after two negative experiences in a row with the parent cameras.
Both the Nikkormat EL, and Nikon EL-W suffered from the same bad shutter resistor.
I have no regrets over the FE. It proved to be a fairly robust and capable performer.
It's electronics have proven to be fairly long lived, in at least a few examples.
The FE I have today is not the same one I sold off for living expenses.
It is, by it's serial number, one of the last FE's to come off the line.
It's printed circuitry is a bit physically stronger than the later FE-2.
The swinging needle display is well ingrained to my eye.
I'm at home with a single glance through the viewfinder.

The Bronica, I'm still a bit ambivalent on.
Bought as a work camera, it performed quite admirably.
The Seikosha shutters in the 2 lenses I had with it were utterly dependable.
It was a fair amount of kit to boot as well, with a couple of extra 120 backs, a speed-grip and two lenses.
I was by that time running around with two camera bags, and could have actually used three.
I think if I would have bought a Nikon F-2 in it's stead, I'd still be carrying it today.
That's the only camera that I can think of, that I really should have bought new.
What a love affair. I have today a chrome F-2 body in mint condition, and a black one in heavily used condition.
If I ever win a lottery, the black F-2 will go to Sover Wong for a rebuild.
Everything on the camera works, and works well. By the noise it makes, it could use a cleaning, lubrication, and adjustment.
Shutter speeds still appear to be right on the nose, despite all the clatter.

I am considering another DSLR at present. It too, will not be bought new- just a matter of plain economics...
2nd hand, in good condition, has generally served me well over the years.

-D.S.


PostPosted: Wed Dec 08, 2021 9:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Doc Sharptail wrote:
Out of all the cameras that have passed through my hands, I *think* only two were bought brand new:

A Nikon FE, and a Bronica Sq-A.
...
I think if I would have bought a Nikon F-2 in it's stead, I'd still be carrying it today.
That's the only camera that I can think of, that I really should have bought new.
What a love affair. I have today a chrome F-2 body in mint condition, and a black one in heavily used condition.
If I ever win a lottery, the black F-2 will go to Sover Wong for a rebuild.
Everything on the camera works, and works well. By the noise it makes, it could use a cleaning, lubrication, and adjustment.
Shutter speeds still appear to be right on the nose, despite all the clatter.


I bought my first Nikon F2 when I was about 25. It was a heavily used one, chrome, with an equally heavily used Ai 1.4/35mm. After some time I sold it because the combo didn't outperform my then standard SLR, the Minolta 9000. The F2 felt too heavy, too clumsy, and too slow, compared to the 9000.

Last year my local photo dealer got a nice looking black F2 with motor, a Ai 2/35mm and the rare Ai ED Nikkor 4.5/300mm (NOT the IF-ED!!). I bought the set, and as I'm interested not only in the gear itself, but also its history, I asked about the original owner. To make it short: I was told the (famous) name, but under the strict condition NOT to tell anyone. I am adamant ko keep my promise, but obvioulsy I'm allowed to say that the set did neither belong to Michael Schumacher nor to Oliver Kahn Wink

It's a marvelous piece of history, and I really appreciate it!!


Doc Sharptail wrote:

I am considering another DSLR at present. It too, will not be bought new- just a matter of plain economics...
2nd hand, in good condition, has generally served me well over the years.

-D.S.

Very reasonable. The last fullframe I bought "new" was the A7II, and a couple of A900s. These days the A900 (and to some extent also the D3) are ridiculously cheap. My last A900 was CHF/USD 190.-- ... in a like new condition.

S


PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2021 9:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

stevemark wrote:



Doc Sharptail wrote:

I am considering another DSLR at present. It too, will not be bought new- just a matter of plain economics...
2nd hand, in good condition, has generally served me well over the years.

-D.S.

Very reasonable. The last fullframe I bought "new" was the A7II, and a couple of A900s. These days the A900 (and to some extent also the D3) are ridiculously cheap. My last A900 was CHF/USD 190.-- ... in a like new condition.

S


Ended up with the D-810 discussed else-where on this forum.
Quite a camera.

Heavy, clumsy, and slow are strange words for me to associate with the Nikon F-2.
I suppose it has everything to do with user preference and emotions Mr. Green
I still haven't come across a camera that has been this natural in my hands, and I'm not so sure that is entirely user preference.
Not even the FE, or any Nikon DSLR has this "feel" to me...

-D.S.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 11, 2022 11:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Doc Sharptail wrote:

Heavy, clumsy, and slow are strange words for me to associate with the Nikon F-2.
I suppose it has everything to do with user preference and emotions Mr. Green


Don't take it too seriously, please Wink I was about 25 yo back then, and had been using the Minolta 9000 since I was 18 ...

The 9000 is a surprisingly small camera, and its integrated (built-in) grip was remarkably "progressive". Here are the two cameras side-by-side:


The Nikon F2 is shown here with the MD3 (only 2.5 fps!!), the Minolta 9000 with the MD-90 (5 fps) and the highly sophisticated Program Back PB-90 (intervals, groups of intervals, extreme long exposures, spot multi metering, large LCD display which looks like a DSLR ... you name it). The F2 just has manual metering - nothing else!! Not even spot metering ... let alone AF.

I had gotten used to all these features on my 9000, especially AF, spot metering, and aperture priority AE, and reliable long time metering / exposures.

Reliably getting perfectly exposed slides was easy with the 9000, even in very difficult situations (e. g. quickly changing / flashing light at rock concerts). No way using the F2 ... !!


The AF of the 9000 feels very slow these days, but back then it was much faster and much more reliable than my MF skills, especially with lenses such as the MinAF 2.8/200mm APO G (which was remarkably reflex-free - important for concert photography). There's simply no way I can get so many "in-focus" images with my F2 & 2.8/180 ED, even though the latter is a great lens as well. Thus my "heavy, clumsy and slow" ...

Nikons F4 was different, of course!! Not clumsy, fro sure - but heavy as well ...


Doc Sharptail wrote:

I still haven't come across a camera that has been this natural in my hands, and I'm not so sure that is entirely user preference.
Not even the FE, or any Nikon DSLR has this "feel" to me...
-D.S.


I basically know only two 35mm (D)SLRs that really feel natural, especially when shooting in portrait mode:

1) Minolta Dynax 9 (Alpha 9 or Maxxum 9 elsewhere)
2) Sony A900 (which basically is a Minolta Dynax 9D)

Especially the Sony A900 and its vertical grip are much better (much more ergonomic) than the even the newest Noikon DSLRs, let alone the mirrorless models, be it Sony or Nikon. Such a shame ...!!

S


PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2022 4:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

For me, the comparison is pomegranates to bananas.
(this b/b has strange auto-correct)
There were one or two local news-paper staffers here that went with Minolta glass, usually paired with something like the XD-11, if memory serves me correctly.

The 9000 actually came at a time when I was well away from photography already.
I'm a bit unable to comment on it as I know nothing about it.

My personal mind-set was well grounded in the mid to late 70's cameras, where battery dependence was still something to be feared.
Funny how times change.

My descriptive abilities are somewhat lacking when it comes to using the F-2.
For me, the ergonomics were completely natural~ right thumb and fore-finger found the shutter speed dial right where it's needed to be. ( I take a size "L" glove, but my hands are no where near "big")
I rarely have to take my eye away from the viewfinder on the F-2.
It took very little getting used to the camera- just about all of it was intuitive for me.
I still have no desire to drive the F2.
The downscaled F3 and it's huge MD-4 motor drive cured me of any desire for drive.
The F3 was supposedly an award winning design.
It actually holds little interest for me, other than having one in the collection.
It was supposed to be an ergonomic improvement over the F2, but I didn't find it so.
I still fumble a bit using it. The rounded corners and lowered shutter speed dial take a bit of getting used to.
I still have to look to find it.

For me, the emotional attachment to the camera plays a huge part in my preference.
That is not necessarily a bad thing, especially when concentration takes us so much of the task at hand...

From time to time, browsing this forum, I get twinges looking at images made with the better Minolta primes.
Twinges are all they are, and there's no need to act on them... Wink Mr. Green

The ergonomics curve for the D-810 compared to the F2 is actually a fairly steep one.
Man, do I have a lot to learn. The rear control wheel comes fairly naturally.
The rest of it is complete re-training. Razz

-D.S.


PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2022 8:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Probably a Spotmatic SPii as it's my favourite basic camera (and I own 3 of them Laugh 1 )

Canon T90s are great too, but to be honest, I'm happy with the used ones I have and haven't used film for 4 years.


PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2022 3:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Doc Sharptail wrote:

My personal mind-set was well grounded in the mid to late 70's cameras, where battery dependence was still something to be feared.
Funny how times change.

Don't get me wrong - Being 16 yo, I was looking forward to get a "real" SLR to replace my Mamiya ZE/ZM gear, and I was about to buy a New F-1. That is, until the 9000 came out ... Wink


Doc Sharptail wrote:

For me, the ergonomics were completely natural
...
I rarely have to take my eye away from the viewfinder on the F-2.
It took very little getting used to the camera- just about all of it was intuitive for me.

Yep, that certainly is true. These old manual SLRs are pretty easy to understand.


Doc Sharptail wrote:

For me, the emotional attachment to the camera plays a huge part in my preference.
That is not necessarily a bad thing, especially when concentration takes us so much of the task at hand...

Absolutely. And don't get me wrong - these days I consider the F2 to be one of the most desirable 35mm cameras, along with the New F-1 and the M6. For practical work back in the late 1980s however I clearly did prefer the 9000.

Doc Sharptail wrote:

From time to time, browsing this forum, I get twinges looking at images made with the better Minolta primes.
Twinges are all they are, and there's no need to act on them... Wink Mr. Green

That doesn't say much about the quality of the Minolta glass.

Most professionals simply had to use Nikon (or Canon or Leica, to a lower extent) back then, just because of reputation. If you were using something like Minolta you were considered "not professional". So obvioulsy most of the interesting ("good") images were taken with Nikon (Canon / Leitz) glass, even thogh Minolta often was better.

I know a quite successful Swiss photographer (successful enough to develop his own innovative large format camera for about CHF 1'000'000.-- back in the 1980s) who was using Nikon gear "on the road" (reportage), but Minolta gear for all critical stuff requiring best image quality (when he was working on his own). He clearly told me that his average client wouldn't accept anything but Nikon gear ... Minolta simply was considered "unprofesional" Wink

S


PostPosted: Mon Jan 17, 2022 11:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I remember looking at X-Pan II 3-4 years ago… I thought that it was too expensive ($1000 with 45mm)... -.-


PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pentax 645 - Loved the camera but was outside of my budget when it came out

BESSAFlex TM - Missed the chance to buy that one.


Last edited by titrisol70 on Mon May 09, 2022 12:10 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sun Jan 23, 2022 6:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

titrisol70 wrote:
Pentax 645 - Loved the camera but was outside of my budget when it came out

Yes, a very nice camera - and even more so the 645D and 645Z which some of my friends are using!

S


PostPosted: Sun May 08, 2022 5:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If I'm allowed to slightly adjust the thread title - from "... wish you had purchased new" to a more general "... wish you had purchased", the I could add a nice story about a gold plated Leica M5.

Back in 2004 I stumbled upon a perfectly gold-plated Leica M5, complete with an equally perfect gold-plated Noctilux 1:1/50mm. The item was for sale at an antiques shop - not what I usually would frequent! Anyway, that strange gleaming camera (the M5 in itself is very uncommon here in Switzerland, let alone agolden one with a golden Nictilux) caught my attention, and in I went, asking about the price. The seller was eager to tell me that the gilding was "not original Leitz" and that therefore the camera was difficult to sell. He asked for CHF 1500.-- for the M5 and the Noctilux, which I found rather OK. While we were discussing, another man came in - obvioulsy a acquaintance of the shop's owner -, immediately snubbing at the strange Leica. He certainly was a Leitz Coinaisseur - unllike me - and as such he NEVER would even consider getting such a crazy bastard. After a while he became a bit more humble and interested; not in the camera of course but in the young man who would dare to buy such a monstrosity. He quite directly asked "what can you do with it ...??", meaning it would spoil any serious Leica collection. I simply would have taken the M5 / Noctilux for available light concert photogtraphy, and I told him so. This answer - taking real photos with a golden M5!! - was completely unexpected, and immediately he became quite respectful towards me.

Long story short - I was a bit flabbergasted by the strange discussion, left the shop without buying, forgot about the camera, and a few days later it was gone ... so I put the money saved in a brand new Minolta AF 2.8/70-200 APO G SSM, and made quite a lot of money taking pictures with it Wink

S