Eight from the early 80's !

stevemark · Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 4087 Location: Switzerland

In the early 1980's, when the Cold War was on its height, president Reagan was shot and Pope John Paul II too, I started to take images with my fathers Mamyia SLR. It was a cheap, yet useful set with three lenses - the ubiquituous Sekor 50mm f1.7, a rather common 3.5/28mm wideangle and the standard tele of the time, a 3.5/135mm. In addition I had access to my mothers Leica III, equipped with the 3.5/5 cm Elmar.

Quite soon I began developing my own b/w films, using the Minolta and Pentax cameras available at high school. Our local photographer - a rather short, but bulky man in his 50s - of course had lots of interesing prospects for professional gear; in his shop-window however there was mainly boring point-and-shoot stuff. A too small village it was for selling pricey cameras! His large and worn-out medium format camera (probably a RB 67) didn't interest me: Such a monster wasn't suitable for taking images of my schoolmates (and especially girls) ...

Quite soon - I was around 15 y then - it became clear that one of two cameras might be right for me: Either the Leica M6, or the Canon New F-1. It was obvious that the Leica and especially her lenses were too expensive, and thus my mind became more and more focused on the New F-1. Until a year later, when the Minolta AF SLRs were introduced, it was immediately obvious to me that the F-1 would be a "dead end"...! I switched, bought the 9000 and was extremely happy - not only about the camera itself, but even more about the lenses I got in the following years: The 2.8/20mm and the 2.8/100mm Macro in 1987, and in 1988 (as soon it was available) the famous Minolta AF 2.8/200mm APO G together with the 2x APO converter, plus a really fast Minolta AF 1.4/85mm. It was paradise, at least as far photography was concerned! Toghether with the 1.4/50 and the 4/70-210 that came with the original 9000, that was all I needed then.

Long story - short meaning:
Which cameras were you dreaming of? Which cameras did you get eventually? Why did you buy into your specific system? And which of these magnificient early 1980 SLRs do you still own these days ...?

I'm really looking forward to hear your stories and see some of your camera / lens terasures from that time ...!!

Below, I've set up a few of the best 35mm SLR cameras from the 1980-1985 time frame:

Some of the classic "early 1980s" SLRs, seen from behind ... do you know them ..?

The same bunch again ... I have put some of the lenses i like most on these cameras.

The Contax RTS II is equipped with a Zeiss Distagon 2.8/25mm, a true classic developed originally for the Contarex SLR in the 1960s. It was the worlds first really good retrofocus superwide. Back then - around 1985 - most Zeiss CY lenses were as expensive as Leica M lenses, and therefore I never seriously considered getting the RTS II. In addition, the largest tele lens available then was the 4/300mm, pretty unspectaular compared to Canons 2.8/400mm L and 5.6/800mm L!

Behind the Contax there's the Pentax LX, a beautiful professional SLR with an exchageable viewfinder and an exceptionally well made AE system, especially for long exposures. The LX has a hybrid mechanical/electronic shutter which in AE mode goes from 2 min to 1/2000 s. The lens mounted is a Pentax-F 4.5/300mm IF-ED, perfectly suited for manual focusing an much better than the Nikkor AiS 4.5/300mm IF-ED!

Ok, "Nikon" now: It's a Nikon F3 plus motor drive MD-4, equipped with the astonishing Nikkor AiS 1.8/105mm. This lens is one my favourite portrait lenses: I prefer the slightly longer focal length over the classical 85mm lenses, and f1.8 often results in pretty amazing portraits. It has a relatively low contrast, but lots of detail ... perfect! Stopped down it has an incredible resolution and not too much contrast. So why did I consider to buy a New F-1, but not a F3? Main reason was a) the missing hybrid shutter, b) the missing spot metering, and c) frankly the mediocre images shown in the Nikon F3 prospect!! And Nikon didn't have a 2.8/400 mm lens, back then ...

Next is the Canon New F-1 I so badly wanted when I was fifteen ... here shown with the Canon new FD f1.2 85mm L lens. I bought the 1.2/85 L only a few weeks ago, so my experience with the lens is still quite limited ... The New F-1 still feels simply right to me: large, heavy, and extremely well made. While the Nikon F3 shutter has just one mechanical speed (1/90s), the Canon has a hybrid shutter, too: All the speeds from 1/60s up to 1/2000s are working even when the battery has failed. The grip of the Canon Motor Drive F is much more ergonomic than Nikons MD-4 (and second only to Minoltas MD-1 in this respect), and it has an additional (third) shutter release for portrait format. Nothing like that can be found on the Nikon MD-4 ...

Now the Leica R4 ... here an early model together with the motor winder and grip. The R4 is said to be a sibling of the Minolta XD, but in reality the R4 feels much more sturdy than the XD7. In addition to the Minolta, the R4 has spot metering (which was extremely useful when shooting slides), and a real 4 fps motor drive. The grip however is "plastic fantastic", using a clumsy mechanical transmission for releasing the shutter, and certainly not worth of a Leica. Shown on the camera is the Leitz Canada Elmarit 2.8/135mm, first introduced as one of four original lenses for the Leicaflex. Later the 2.8/135mm was re-calculated; here's the newer version. When it comes to corner resolution, the Leica isn't as brilliant as e. g. the CY Sonnar 2.8/135mm, but handling is extremely enjoyable. Probably the lens is very well suited for portraits, but I haven't really used it that much since I got it only a few weeks ago, too.

Next, in front, the Minolta X-500 with the Minolta MD 1.2/50mm superfast normal lens. You may be surprised that I chose not to show the X-700, but the "inferior" X-500 model. In fact, I consider the X-500 to be more useful since it has a better metering system for manual exposure, and a better TTL flash system than the X-700. And I really don't need the "P" mode of the X-700 ... The f1.2 normal lens, while not as famous as the earlier Rokkor 1.2/58mm, can easily compete with Canons 1.2/50mm "L" lens. In fact, Minolta had prototypes for an aspherical 1.2/50mm as well, but chose to stick with the spherical verision.

We have only two cameras left - the first of those is Konica's Autoreflex T4. It's a nice and well built no-frill camera with a fully mechanical shutter (the only fully mechanical shutter here!!). This advantage at the same is also its big disadvantage - there is an AE mode, but only in shutter-priority. While the T4 was Konicas top model at the time, it now is the cheapest of the cameras shonw here. Still not really cheap is the Hexanon 1.8/85mm portrait lens, a beautiful little beast with remarkably changing properties when stopping down. Wellsuited for slightly soft and low-contrast portaits at f1.8, it becomes extremely sharp at f8. The overall image characteristics are well balanced.

Finally the smallest of the cameras shown here, the magnificient Olympus OM-2 Spot/Program. As it name says, this "enhanced" OM-2 is (as the Leica R4) capable of spot-metering, and it has a progam mode. Handling is a bit different than with other SLR of its time; the exposure time must be set on a ring at the bayonet, and instead of the usual knob for exposures times on top of the body, there's a large "over-/underexposure" knob. Quite useful actually! The Zuiko Auto-W 3.5/21mm lens shown here is extremely small as well, at least for a 21mm superwide. Surprisingly, it has only seven lenses, and the Olympus lens designers would be really genius if they would have been able to make this an excellent performer as well - it isn't, and back then and these days probably only Leica could manufacture really small outstanding lenses ...

OK, enough for now ... now i really look forward to hear other stories Wink

S

Oldhand · Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2020 1:57 am Post subject:

I bought my first SLR in 1975.
It is my Canon FTb exactly as here with the 1.8/50 lens, and it has done a lot of miles since and still performs beautifully.
I loved it for its simplicity and ease of use, as well as its excellent meter. I shot a lot of slide film in those days and the twelve and a half percent of the finder that did the metering allowed excellent control of the highlights.
I didn't buy a second SLR until the 1980's and it was the Canon EF.
This was my first experience of auto exposure and it worked very well. I used it for negatives, colour and b&w, and it was my primary wedding camera... shot plenty of those in the 80's.
It has a wonderful range of shutter speeds all the way down to 30 seconds. Still works a treat.
I have included my lenses from that time as well: 2.8/28, 1.8/85 and 2.5/135
The Vivitar S1 24 to 48 by Kiron/Kino is a late addition. I had a Tamron SP 24 to 48 in those days.

I always wanted an F1 but could not afford it while our children were growing up.
It came along in the mid 2000's and the T90 (another most wanted camera) followed around 2015.
Interestingly, the Canon T90 was still selling for over US$500 in the mid 2000's

The camera straps are what was wide and comfortable and available. You can see that there are a couple of Pentax straps in there. The camera/strap combinations have attracted more comment than the fact that I still shoot film Smile

I added to my Canon FD glass in the time before mirrorless digital exploded, and prices were ludicrously cheap. Not so any more unfortunately.
I probably have more Canon FD lenses than any other species Smile

Tom

#1

jamaeolus · Expire: 2015-08-20

Ahhh the 1980's big hair pop music with a great dance beat. I was still in college and was just(and still am! just) an amateur photographer. I had been using my moms FTb but then I bought a friends OM1 with the 50mm 1.8. I still have it, it still works just fine. It has taken thousands and thousands of photos. I purchased when the (always tight) money allowed the 70-150 zoom and the macro filters. Eventually I found I liked to take B & W film but wanted to be ready for color when the occasion arose so I bought an inexpensive second body at a junk shop. then the 135mm and the 35mm 2.8. I bought a really nice pelican case for them. They all went on my honeymoon to the Cook islands in the early 1990's. I didn't expand much for quite a while. then a friend showed my some shots he had taken with the dimunitive Kyocera S3X. I bought one, film camera gear went into storage. I upgraded ever other vacation to better and better point and shoots mostly Pentax. Then in the early 2010s my wife wanted a telescope. I figured I would get a suitable camera for astrophotography. Bought a Canon 60D. Looking for inexpensive lenses got me started with the manual adaptations and brought me to this site. So to save a couple of hundred dollars on new Canon gear I now have an office chock full of maybe a thousand vintage manual focus and adaptable AF lenses. probably way more $ than a brand new Canon top of the line camera and a plethora of top AF new glass. Still NO REGRETS.

caspert79 · Joined: 31 Oct 2010 Posts: 3225 Location: The Netherlands

Canon new FD f1.2 85mm L, wow!

vivaldibow · Expire: 2021-03-09

Nice collection! But it seems I am not qualified to add my story as I was still young in earlier 80's. Smile

But in mid 80's our family got a pretty decent point shoot, rumor said it was a copy of a German camera. If my memory served me well, all I can remember the mechanical quality was really good and I liked the crisp sound of the shutter.

Fast forward to 2003, I had some to really put myself into collecting Vivitar/Soligor/Spiratone lenses. The first SLR I got is a Nikon FE2. I managed to collect the MD-12 motor, eye cup of the viewfinder, the Nikon strap, even the little plastic black triangular things that wraps around the strap ring. I remember I even sold a Nikon 50mm f/1.8 to fund the Vivitar Series 1, 70-210 Tokina.

One thing I remember at a weekend I went out to shoot, it happend to be some middle school kids riding horses. A boy asked me if I work for newspaper. I said no and he seemed quite disappointed. I really should have said yes...

D1N0 · Joined: 07 Aug 2012 Posts: 2537

I had a Praktica BC-1 in the eighties. Al I could afford from my pocket money.

womble · Joined: 28 Sep 2009 Posts: 987 Location: Hertfordshire

I became interested in archaeology as a schoolchild in 1975. I quickly realised that archaeologists needed photographs, especially slides, partly as a record and partly to be able to give talks.

Move on to 1980, and I started volunteering at the excavations at Wroxeter in Shropshire, I was 15. There, the photographer Sidney Renow, was a star. I learnt all about getting the scales, labels and north arrows in the right places, and using a tripod, exposure and so on. He used Minolta gear. I started saving my pocket money and working in a local news agent on the weekends. At the time, the Pentax ME Super was the camera making the news, and one of the magazines I used to buy had it as the best seller for many, many months. By 1982 I had saved enough (I hoped). My tuba teacher was going to the USA, where prices were cheaper, and so I gave him my cash and a few weeks later he returned with a slightly used ME Super (he took his holiday photos with it!) and a M50/2. My first roll of film was Kodachrome 64. I still have all the slides. I quickly got a 28/2.8 (I don't remember where or when, must have been before I went to Italy in 1984), and my girlfriend of the time gave me a 50/1.7 when her ME-F died of salt damage after a wave broke over the sea wall and soaked her (and the camera) in 1984. In 1986 I managed to get a 135mm, I don't remember if it was the 2.5 or 3.5 version. That was all I needed for many years.

Sadly, the ME Super died of being on archaeological sites too much (lots of dirt and dust). In 1993 I needed a replacement for a trip into the Carpathian mountains of Romania to visit Iron Age sites. I went to a big photo store in Southampton. I had to wait an age to be served and was not impressed by the shop assistant trying to fit a brand X lens to a brand Y camera. When I was looking at the camera I was thinking of buying the lightmeter didn't work. I asked why. No battery, said the shop assistant, but didn't make any move to go and get one. I walked out. I went to second, smaller camera shop. I told them what I needed, ideally, depending on cost (I was still a student). They found a lovely Pentax MX, then dug through their second-hand bits-and-bobs box and found some extension tubes and a cable release, then dug around in the back and found a suitably sized used camera bag. What stars! Not a big purchase in their terms, but everything came in at budget and I was a happy camper. I used that store for several years!

Fast forward to about 2000 and the family were on our way to the south of France for a wedding. As I went to get the Metro tickets, I left the family with the luggage. They were so busy watching me buy tickets that didn't see someone walk past our pile of luggage and deftly pick-up and walk off with my camera bag. Now my collection was down to my original M50/2 and a bust ME Super.

A few years later and I was fed-up borrowing dodgy film cameras from work, and I needed three "sets" for a project, and I discovered ebay. Oh dear. I quickly replaced the MX (since CLAed and seeing regular use) and got a couple of ME Supers (occasional users), and my pride-and-joy, an LX (sees regular use). The latter half of the 2000s were the golden years of ebay and getting into buying film gear. The film renaissance was ten years off, ebay was ordinary people selling stuff they didn't want, and most people were ditching film gear. For 35mm SLRs I stuck to Pentax, and now have cameras from the original "AP" to a few of the autofocus models, but mainly I have K and M series camera. I think I have all the Ms (although not all the variants) of which the MX, ME Super and ME-F see regular use and the ME, MV, MV-1 and MG are just shelf queens (I have very few of those). Most of my glass is early "K" series stuff, or M series. I have a few Fs, and two of the three magical FA Limiteds, and then I jump to modern glass for my digital SLR.

A bit of a ramble, but the bottom line is that a great deal of my stuff dates from about 1975 to about 1985, and most of it is Pentax. I have oddities (Horizont swing lens camera, some 1950s folders, some Soviet rangefinders, a couple of TLRs, my 5x4 Horseman LE) but I made the decision not to get into the other four of the big five (Nikon, Canon, Olympus, Minolta) simply because one can have too much stuff (no room, no room!) and because I can use all my Pentax lenses right back to the early M42 Takumars on my Pentax SLR with the minimum of fuss.

Kris.

kypfer · Joined: 27 Sep 2017 Posts: 523 Location: Jersey C.I.

My first slr was a Zenit 3m in '69, bought on extended credit with some of the money from my first pay packet in a "proper" job. The cost of the camera with it's Industar-50 lens was equivalent of a full week's wages!
After a couple of "ordinary" 42-screw-mount cameras I came across the Fujica AZ-1, with it's open-aperture metering and 43-75mm zoom lens. Apparently the first camera to be offered with a zoom "kit" lens.
Then moved to the Fujica AX-5. Bayonet mount, but backward compatible with my screw-mount lenses, which could be used in open-aperture shutter-priority and program modes when fitted with the appropriate adaptor. Possibly the only camera to offer this functionality with any 42-screw auto-aperture lens!
When the AX-5 finally went the way of all good things, around 2003, the only practical option, to retain at least some backward compatibility with my now extensive armoury of 42-screw lenses, was a Pentax.
So my current system was born, first with a *ist film camera, then a *ist DS dslr and on to my current KP ... and I've still got and use some of the lenses I bought back in the '70's Wink

stevemark · Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 4087 Location: Switzerland

e6filmuser · Joined: 12 Nov 2010 Posts: 860 Location: Reading UK

stevemark · Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 4087 Location: Switzerland