Photography Cafe
June 24, 2018, 5:10 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
  Home   Forum   Gallery Help Arcade Cafe Book Nook Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2]  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: What was/is the best SLR  (Read 16823 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
ColRay
Viewfinder
*
Album
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Country: Australia
Posts: 93



Awards
« Reply #20 on: February 7, 2014, 6:38 PM »

Just noticed this old thread.

Okay SLRs and what was the  best.

I have a few in the collection and all of them still get used every now and then.

I'm a member of a small group of film users that twice a month has a Sunday photo walk, using old film cameras is a great way of spending a few hours.

My choice of SLRs :

Zeiss Ikon  1953 ..okay but not that good
Zenit S 1958.... Russian CR#P
Zenit 3M 1966...Ditto
Beseler Topcon  1964  .. Nice camera but not the best
Recoh KR5 1975 .. Ditto
Zenit 12XP  1987.. Works well  use it a lot
Canon ESO 5000 1987  .. Modern plastic rubish
Strat 1963 Russia got this one right 9/10
Minolta x700.. Good basic camera
 My top two
Minolta 600si ..Fantastic camera
Mamiya M645 1000s ..Use it all the time.. want extra lenes
Logged
Stephen
Viewfinder
*
Album
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Country: England
Allow Photo Edit?: Yes
Posts: 94



Awards
« Reply #21 on: February 8, 2014, 3:10 PM »

No easy answer to this, but probably the one that does the job for you...

That about sums it up for me, because I see a camera as a tool to do a job. What's best for one job isn't necessarily the best for all.

On the basis of fond memories and usefulness, and given that this is on SLRs not other camera types, I'd pick two.

In 35mm, my OM1n, bought new in 1974 and still going (one owner, careful driver, as they say). Small, light, does the job and easily carried if size and weight matters.

Overall, the RB67. Better image quality than 35mm, better viewing with a waist level finder rather than having to use it up to my eye, and, like the OM1, doesn't need batteries to operate.

Other SLRs we have include Exakta VX IIB, OM2n, OM4, Minolta 9xi, Minolta 7xi. Non-SLR types are another small list.

The OM1 was bought after comparing it with the Nikon F2 for which I still have a sneaking regard because you could swap the pentaprism (the fixed pentaprism is the worst feature of the OM series for me); I did like the sound of the Canon F1, Pentax LX and Minolta XM (I think the last designation is correct).
Logged

Stephen
Pipeman
Top Gun
*
Album
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Country: England
Allow Photo Edit?: Yes
Posts: 5,624



WWW Awards
« Reply #22 on: May 2, 2014, 9:14 AM »

The AE-1 for me Kev, with a Cobra power winder under it for sports shots! Thumb Up

The FTb before it was a good one too, and I still have my Zenit E - doesn't everyone have one? Smiley
Logged

A bit like Victor Meldrew.
KevB
Global Moderator
*****
Album
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 3,012


Awards
« Reply #23 on: May 2, 2014, 3:50 PM »

Canon AE-1 got to agree with you there pipeman, terrific film camera, and IMO advanced for its time, as for the zenith had the EM, both great cameras (even if the zenith was really very heavy LOL)
Logged
scoundrel1728
Global Moderator
*****
Album
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Country: United States
Posts: 4,876



Awards
« Reply #24 on: May 3, 2014, 11:39 AM »

I have never actually owned a film SLR.  By the time I could afford an AE-1, my interest in photography had already gone dormant and stayed that way for the next twenty years or so.
Logged

The power of coercion stops at the ability and the willingness of the coerced to take the penalty for disobedience. The power of love has no such limit.
Pages: 1 [2]  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!