SHOW US YOUR CAMERAS!!

[kansalliskala]

[calvin83]

This is the only film camera I have used in the past 10 years.

[Doc Sharptail]

[kansalliskala]

[stevemark]

[Doc Sharptail]

[kansalliskala]

[stevemark]

After showing the Mamiya ZM in an earlier posting, this time it's the Mamiya ZE-X.



The ZE-X is a pretty rare SLR, and the Mamiya Sekor EF 1.4/50mm is even rarer. Very few images are available of the ZE-X plus EF 1.4/50mm lens, and I haven't seen one with ZE-X & 1.4/50 & Mamiya winder yet!

The ZE-X is a most beautiful SLR from the early 1980s. Designed as the top camera for the Mamiya Z series, it offered not only an bayonet mount with electronic connectivity, but also A-, S-, M-, and P-mode. Unlike with other SLR, you wouldn't find a mode dial wheel, however. Instread of the "double control" found in most (all?) other multi-mode SLRs (i. e. mode dial PLUS A-positions on the shutter dial and aperture ring), its design was much more straightforward:

1) put aperture ring and Shutter dial to a specific value (e. g. f5.6 and 1/1000s), and you are in manual mode
2) put shutter dial in "Automatic", and the shutter speed is set automatically - you are in aperture priority mode
3) put aperture ring in "Automatic" position, and the aperture is set automatically, and you are in shutter priority mode
4) put both shutter dial as well as aperture ring in "Automatic" position, and both controls are set automatically (= program mode)

In addition, the camera by default was set to a "crossover mode", which means if your settings can't cope with the existing light, the camera would overrun your chosen (insufficient / wrong) settings and fix the problem. To get a really fully manual mode, this crossover mode could be overrun by the operator by switching a small "MODE" button on top of the camera

Unlike any other camera of its time, the ZE-X computer got information about the focus distance set on the lens, at least if a Sekor "EF" lens was coupled. This was used to set the appropriate aperture when using an electronic flash. The aperture set for flash photography was changing continuously from f16 at 1.1 m to f2.8 at 9 m. For even larger distances, the aperture would be opened to f1.4.

The ZE-X has a few more nice features such as

* an exposure override (+(/- 3 EV instead of the more common +/- 2EV)
* Exposure override also working for dedicated flash
* a AE-lock button (quite uncommon back then, but very useful)
* a dedicated switch for multiple exposures
" an electronic self-timer with positions for 2s, 6s and 10s
* a lever for closing the eyepiece / viewfinder
* A slow shutter speed warning (variable with focal length!)
* and even a dedicated electric contacts for a left hand shutter release (!)

To make it short - the Mamiya ZE-X was a very sophisticated SLR for its time. Sadly, its build quality was far from being excellent. Many ZE-X bodies these days have some problems, either concerning the electronics or the rather flimsy mechanical parts. Some obvious problems were adressed already during the rpoduction run (e. g. film rewind - the fork going into the film cartrige was changed from plastics to metal), but other flaws remain. Thus, these days the ZE-X usually will be more of an interesting "museum item" than a SLR used for real world photography ...

It's a bit sad that the Mamiya Z system never came to full fruition. Hints of its potential can be found in the ZE-X manual which shows "f1.2" indicators in the viewfinder. The camera was specifically prepared for lenses longer than 300mm, indicating lenses such as an 1.2/50mm or a tele longer than the existing Sekor E 4/300mm. In 1984, even a "Mamiya ZF" prototyp with AF was announced in the press ...

S

[stevemark]

Another one ... a black SR-T 101 with the famous MC Rokkor-PG 1:1.2 f=58mm plus the equally sought after Rokkors 1.8/35mm and 1.7/85mm. Josef Scheibel - an engineer working for Minolta wrote in his book about the SR-T "The SR-T combined with the 1.8/35mm and 1.7/85 is something like a dream equipment ...".




The MC-II 1.7/85mm shown here was my second ever Minolta MF lens (the first one was the MC-X 2.5/28mm), bought in 2007. However I had been quite familiar with the SR-T and its system for years by reading Josef Scheibels books: One of my high school teachers had given me a Scheibel book when I was 15 years old, and I was reading it over and over ...

The SR-T was expensive back then, and so were the lenses shown here. Most of the MC-II lenses still work perfectly after 50 years; occasionally an aperture is stuck, or there's some haze on an inner lens surface - nothing serious

All lenses shown here were re-designed later on to become their "MC-X" analogues, with rubber waffles on the focusing grip, but otherwise largely identical optical constructions.

S

[titrisol70]

I have too many, but this one has been with me the longest.
Bought new by my dad in 1973 while visiting Japan

Asahi Pentax Spotmatic - SP

[stevemark]

Another one, just re-discovered when I was looking for some other stuff. I got it from a local auction platform, and sadly the previous owner was seriously ill when I picked it up. I very much hope she is better now ...!



The camera - even though marked "Porst" - is a Fujica STX-1. It's a fully mechanical SLR with a limited set of shutter speeds from 1/2s to 1/700s, somehow similar to the ubiquitous Konica TC (which goes from 1/1000s to 1/15s). The Fuji however has a horizontal cloth shutter, while the Konica has a vertical metal shutter. Both cameras are pretty small, and both feel really reliable. Unlike most entry-level SLRs of its time, the Fuji STX-1 even has a depth-of-field preview! Otherwise it's pretty down-to-earth: A mechanical self-timer, an on/off switch, a hot shoe for flashes, and the ISO dial. That's about all you'll find on the Fuji!

S

[Doc Sharptail]

What is the sliding plate next to the rewind knob?

-D.S.

[stevemark]

[Doc Sharptail]

Thanks.
I thought it might be the battery door, or a fancy rewind release button

-D.S.

[sheepeck]

First two photos show cameras which were my favourite. I sold them to make a budget for the camera shown on the third photo.
#1


#2


#3

[ZuikosHexanonsandVivitars]

[ZuikosHexanonsandVivitars]

#1

[skida]

I have had this one a while but it is a lot of fun (especially since I replaced the seals)
#1

[Farside]

My most recent acquisition, for old time's sake.
My first decent camera that I'd bought with my own money was a Nikkormat FT-2. I quite fancied the look of this FTn and wasn't disappointed. The seller has re-sealed it and given it a good workout with film.
I'll be able to make use of the small box of Nikon-fit lenses I've acquired over the years, just a motley set of Vivitars and one or two Nikkors. The one I'll be most interested in using is the Rikenon 55 / 1.4 that came with a Ricoh Singlex F mount. I also have several SP Tamrons and a couple of N-Ai adaptors that will work fine with this.



However, I have to resist the urge of 'Completism', where I then go out and buy more Nikkor lenses or other Nikon cameras to expand the set.
I'll try to remain happy with what I've got, for a while.
Oh, and I immediately bought a Nikon FE, but called a halt at that.
Hoping that arrives tomorrow.

[pdccameras]

Minolta XK with 50mm f/1.4. One member of the of "BIG 3" professional SLR club - Nikon F2, Canon F1, Minolta XK. I suppose Pentax LX and Topcon Super DM could be in there as well!

[pdccameras]

Here's a Diax IIa and four lenses. The Schneider lenses are excellent and the Isco's are no slouches either. A very agreeable little camera. So what do you do if you want to design an interchangeable lens rf and you DON'T want to bother building a multi-frame viewfinder or settle for accessory viewfinders? Why you add a second viewfinder window of course!

[Doc Sharptail]

[stevemark]

[Doc Sharptail]

I really didn't think much of the F-3, especially after getting one.
Definitely not the "feel" of the F-2.
The F-3 had quite a bit in the way of foibles as well.
I really didn't care for the LQD viewfinder display, or it's extremely poor backlighting system.
I have yet to encounter one that actually lights up...
The other stuff is better known like the low flash sync speed, and the design of the M/D system.

One of my better friends had the XK for a very brief period.
It had to go back for circuitry problems, and he elected to go with a different system.
I handled that XK for a very limited time, and was impressed with what I saw, but not enough to go looking for one.

-D.S.

[cooltouch]

From 1989 til the mid-90s, I made a decent living buying and selling used photo gear. During that time, I bought and sold numerous Canon original F-1s, several F2s and F3s, but only one Canon New F-1 and only one Minolta XK. The New F-1 sold quickly, before I had a chance to play around with it at all. But the XK hung around for a while. There was little interest in it at the shows I went to and most people had never heard of it. But I was rather taken by it, appreciating its advanced features compared to those of the original Canon F-1 and Nikon F2. Also, I had a close friend who owned an XK Motor, which he highly prized. I had the chance to play around with it a bit. I was impressed by the highly ergonomic shape of the drive's grip, which was very comfortable in my hands, but I was frankly stunned and somewhat dismayed that Minolta produced the camera with an integral motor drive. I still think that if Minolta would have designed an add-on drive for its XK instead, the camera system would have been much more successful.

Prior to taking up the role of camera dealer, I had for several years shot Canon, and my favorite Canon of them all was the F-1n, the second generation of the original F-1. But when I started out in the biz, I had also recently changed systems to Nikon. And shortly after, I had put together two nice Nikon systems -- one based on an F2AS and another based on an F3. I enjoyed the F2 for its similarity to the Canon F-1 in the sense that both were mechanical cameras, although the ergonomics were quite different. But to be honest, I preferred the F-1's match-needle metering rather than the F2's LEDs. Unlike many other folks, I enjoyed the F3 because of its ergonomics. They are subtle, but the result is a sleek, comfortable, relatively compact and lightweight camera that will accomplish most any task requiring the use of film. I especially appreciated the fact that Nikon chose to tighten up its standard 60-40 meter weighting pattern to 80-20 in the F3. I've always felt that Nikon did this for slide shooters who wanted to use its Aperture Priority mode. I still recall the first time I decided to give my F3 a go, shooting Kodachrome with the camera set to "A," knowing how critical accurate exposure is with slides. I expected to get back a fair number of slides that had been mis-exposed, but instead I got back boxes of slides where each one was exposed correctly, and I attribute the tight metering pattern for this success.

Years later, I finally bought my first Canon New F-1 -- to keep, this time -- and I immediately came to appreciate its viewfinder display. It seemed that the F3's was almost an afterthought and so obfuscating that I pretty much ignored it, whereas the Canon's readouts were bright and clear and functioned very well. Canon's laser-matte focusing screens were also world's better than those Nikon used. There is quite a contrast in these two cameras. The F-1 is a brute, a camera you can easily drive nails with if you ever needed to, whereas the Nikon is just more refined, more sexy -- except for its lame viewfinder readout. I often compare the two to vehicles: the Canon F-1 would be an AWD Ford F-250, whereas the Nikon F3 would be closer to a Porsche 911 -- albeit with half of its instrumentation either obscured or missing.

A few comments about the motor drives Canon and Nikon developed. The motor drive for the original F-1 was huge, heavy, and slow. Its continuous rate was a leisurely 3.5 fps. By contrast, the Nikon F2's MD2-MB1 was an engineering marvel with all sorts of switches and wheels and levers and gizmos. Plus, it was quite a bit faster, running at around 5 fps. When Canon released the New F-1, it seems they pretty much took a page out of Nikon's playbook and designed a drive that was a close match to the Nikon MD2-MB1 in looks and performance. But when Nikon released the F3, they started with a fresh sheet of paper with its drive, the MD4. Matching the sleekness and relatively light weight of the camera, Nikon had eliminated all the fancy gadgetry and instead developed a drive that just simply worked and worked beautifully.

These days I have a pretty significant collection of "vintage" cameras. It includes a couple of Canon F-1n's (one with motor, one with winder), a New F-1 (with motor), a couple of F2's (both with motors) and an F3 (with motor). Sadly no XK. They're even harder to find these days than they were 30 years ago. But I do own a Pentax LX, and I very much like it. I find the perspectives of time and variety can be wonderful things. These days, I can appreciate each camera for what it is and its own special place in history. I'm no longer plagued with opinions about which is better than which. They're all excellent, outstanding cameras -- workhorses each one, and examples of the very best that Japanese photo engineering had during their heyday. I would not willingly part with any today.

Oh, and here are a few obligatory "show your cameras" images: