Let's figure the perfect camera system for Fish

[Nesster]

Paul has been hankering to sell off his M42 stuff and go for maybe a Nikon kit.

I'd love to hear consensus wisdom on which old camera systems would fit his needs the best.

So, a summary of Paul's requirement:
- inexpensive gear, good availability
- heavy camera body, good vf with the possibility of fitting diopter etc
- lenses from wide angle to the short tele - 85mm or on the very outside, 105. For the wide angles, he's dreaming of f/2 or f/2.8 rather than f/3.5.
- no requirement for forward compatibility into DSLR

So given these criteria - which old camera makes in general shone with the wide angles, and made enough of them for them to be both inexpensive and easy to find?

Nikon? Canon FD? FL (is that a Canon mount )?, Konica?, Minolta SR?, Olympus OM?, Pentax K?, C/Y? or stick to M42, though the f/2 wides are rare and therefore a bit pricey?

(Ulterior motive: somewhere I picked up the idea that Nikon wide angles were a highlight, and maybe Canon teles? Thus my feeble Nikon kit.)

[trifox]

@ Canon FD - FL

Canon FL lens has Canon FD mount

is older version of FD mount series..

[Nesster]

yes, I just can't resist my little digs at Canon...

I'll put this more clearly, and eagerly hope for lots of opinions:

for a kit such as this, which old camera system has the best price/performance, or the best performance at still decent prices?

24/2.8, 28/2.8, 35/2, good 50, good macro, 85

[Joosep]

If I would be Paul...

1) M42 with choice and price (like Mir-20 for the megawide)
2) Minolta MD (really great lenses and cameras for low prices)

[Excalibur]

Canon FTB with M42 and Tamron adaptors for a tough mechanical camera or Canon T70 also with same adaptors for semi auto....or have both.

Lenses for above, bang for buck:-

24mm Sigma super wide II or Ensinor 24mm
28mm Canon or Vivitar 28mm close focus
35mm Canon or Tak 35mm
50mm Canon or Pentacon or Helios
Tamron SP 35-80mm
Vivitar 70-150 with matching 2Xs ext
or Kiron 80-200 f4 or Tamron 46a
If you must have a 135mm prime then Canon or Meyer 135mm are very good.

These lenses will give very good quality shots as I have them, the Vivitar 70-150 and 46a are good for macro if you don't want to buy a proper macro prime lens
e.g. for Vivitar zoom, supermarket scan@ about 4mp originally sharpened a bit in PS:-

[rbelyell]

if the most important criterion is cheap fast w/a, i dont know what system would be cheaper than m42. any proprietary system is going to offer less choice and, because of that lack of competition, more price. i cant think of any system that has a plethora of cheap f2.0 w/a lenses.

imho, as i made the same calculation for myself, is stick w m42, get a nice versatile bright vf camera like a nice heavy fujica st 801 for like $50, w split screen focusing, and then go for a mir 34/2.0 for about $125, a kiron or soligor 28/2.0 for about $200 (there is one selling for around this price BIN on ebay right now) and give up on the 21/2.0 moby dick of lenses and settle for a nice mir 20/3.5 for about $150.

cheaper than this i dont see in any proprietary system.

[woodrim]

Best advice I can think of is to talk him into an inexpensive starter DSLR, then he can keep the M42 lenses. I've seen nice results from Pentax ist. Just 6mp and I've got to believe a good used one can be had for cheap.

[Orio]

If inexpensive is the word, M42 is the way.

[eggboy]

Nice thing about Canon FD mount is it's easy to put old FD/FL AND M42 AND Nikon on them for stop down metering, plus most of the 'garden variety' FD/FL lenses are excellent and fairly cheap. Nice used FTBs go for about US$40 or so on eVilBay.

I think M42 mount to MD-mount Minoltas are pretty inexpensive on eVilBay. The old SRT series are fabulous...remember that W. Eugene Smith did the Minimata fishing village pix using Minolta SRT bodies...(not sure why I bring that up...)

I've just set up a family friend's kid for a black and white photo class with a Minolta SRT-101 and a 50/1.9 and 28/2.8 Minolta lenses for less than US$70

Of course, old Spotmatics are just sooo fine looking.

[walter g]

My Yashica Electro X has a ground glass veiwfinder, which means it can be removed and ground to any prescription.

Does the Spotmatic have one. That's the easy fix.

[fish4570]

Well, it is nice to be the subject of a nice thread!

This possible move to a different system is predicated solely on easy availability of inexpensive corrective eyepieces. As far as I have been able to determine, Nikon is the only maker that provides screw-in replacement eyepieces fo ALL of their 35mm film bodies from the F on up.

I started building a little nest of M42 gear because I had an M42 body that went kaput, but I still had three good M42 lenses. That brought me a Fujica ST605 with split prism finder, and an SP1000 with fresnel dot. With my readers on, I like the fresnel dot better, but I can focus on any part of the screen with my readers on. It would be so cool to do that without glasses! And it was only this summer that I discovered readers allow me to focus properly. There has been a major improvement in sharpness of my images. Oh yeah, I need readers with all my rangefinders, too, except the FED, which HAS diopter adjustment.

Here is another issue: come October, vision insurance kicks in, which means new glasses for a low price. At night, I need glasses that correct a vertical misalignment of my eyes. In daylight this is not an issue for walking around, driving, whatever. But I need +2 readers for any reading or close work. When I see the eye doc, I will ask about this camera focus issue. Bifocals would be pointless for shooting because of eyeglass shifting.

So, I will continue to mull this issue - with y'all's kindly help - until after my try to the eye doctor.

[fish4570]

Aftrer I checked ebay prices on the Nikon F3hp, it is now in the running, too ...

[Excalibur]

***but I still had three good M42 lenses***

...and IIRC they are crippled for a Nikon or Olympus film camera, but on Canon and Minolta no problem.

[kansalliskala]

[Excalibur]

[mo]

Ok on a lighter note I just read the title of this post and suggest that something that could be used underwater would be an advantage Just for those who read this thread and think why are we discussing cameras for Fish!!
It's for MFL member fish...
I just had to comment...

[trev]

Although I am usually a Canon man I would recommend M42 as the way to go. Fuji st701 without split image actually SNAPS into focus - lovely. Im told that Fuji st801 is a better bet than their 901 camera although you cant dismiss Pentax M42 camera's.
Of course, I use my Canons both with their FD and FL lenses (by the way FL is not the same as FD) and with M42's with adapters and prefer FD lenses as I do not have to stop-down to meter but thats just a personal preference.
Suck it and see

[Nesster]

[Nesster]

[Big Dawg]

Pentax K-mount camera. All the M42's will work with an adapter and there are sooo many K-mount good quality lens out there for a pittance.
I should know...seems like I buy most of them myself!!LOL ME Super would be a good inexpensive one to get....but I agree the Spotmatic is cool!

[cooltouch]

Well, since a cheap price is a factor, I too will side with the folks who recommend Canon.

I bought an FTbn off eBay last year, and was looking through my records a few days ago, and ran across the sales receipt. I bought it because it was attached to a lens I wanted -- a Vivitar S1 24-48/3.8 zoom. Got both for under $20. I think they must have been mis-listed or something.

The FTb was a mess. I gave it a thorough cleaning and replaced the light seals. Its meter didn't work, but came back to life after I rocked the on-off switch back and forth several times.

Those are good old cameras -- just about bullet proof. I've always been fond of FTb's because of their solid feel, match-needle metering, and mirror lock up. I learned photography finally when I put down my auto-mode A-series Canons and began using an FTb.

As much as I like the FTb, I like the original F-1 even more. Clean examples are a lot cheaper than they were when I bought the two I used to own back in the 1980s. So's the motor drive. I had motors for both my F-1s and the biggest drawback I found to them was one packed around a lot of weight for not a lot of performance. Top speed on the old MD MF was only about 3.5 fps. Rather than installing one of those 10-battery monsters onto my current old F-1, I went with the Winder MF option instead. 2 fps, but that's fine -- I've always used the drive in S mode anyway so I don't have to take my eye away from the vf between exposures. And the Winder MF is soooo much lighter and more compact.

Having said all that, though, it seems pretty obvious that Paul is still leaning toward Nikon.

Yeah, Paul, the F3 is definitely a cool camera and there's lots of accessories for it. Prices are very attractive right now. The MD-4 option is so cheap now compared to what they used to sell for back in the day. And then there's the F2 -- one of my favorite Nikons and my favorite mechanical Nikon. Just about indestructible. Comparable F2s and F3s sell for close to the same price. In fact, most of the later F2s, like the F2a or F2as especially, will usually sell for more than an F3 in equivalent condition.

I prefer the F2 over the F for a few reasons. One is simply that it isn't as old, in most cases (there was some production overlap). Another is that I prefer the F2's ergonomics -- its rounded shoulders make it more comfortable to hold. And another is the back: the F2's is hinged. The F's comes off the camera completely and is more of a futz when it comes to being quick about reloading film. Also, with the F, the only finder worth considering for general use is the last one made -- the Photomic FTN finder. It indexes the easiest and uses Nikon's 60/40 metering pattern. Whereas the F2 has a variety of metered finders, the simplest of which (the DP-1) is equivalent to the F's FTN finder.

[integrale]

I have a Nikon F3 (non-HP) and I can recommend that as a very very high quality item. It feels (and quite possibly is) indestructible.

My main reason for choosing this was the ability to use the same lenses for film as well as digital, and I have a D700 for digital.

Should I start all-over, I would seriously consider Canon, as I understand that the Canon mounts accepts many lenses via an adaptor (unlike Nikon).

[Nesster]

... but to those with experience with both Canon and Nikon, who made the better wide angle lenses?

(Damn you all Canon FD folks, I thought I'd ruled at least that one off my list for good...)

[Excalibur]

[cooltouch]

I used to own a Canon 24mm f/2.8 and currently own a Nikon 24mm f/2.8 AIs.

I'd have to go out and shoot some slides with my 24mm Nikkor. I have slides taken with my 24mm Canon -- and with a Canon FL 19mm. I really liked both, and suspect that the FD 24mm will hold its own up against the 24mm Nikkor. And I also think the FL 19mm will do well against a 20mm Nikkor. But these are opinions and I can't offer comparisons, only examples.