Old vs New

'Daniel' · Feb 24, 2006

I have for some time now has a rather negative view towards newer film SLRs. I think that it is probably unfounded and there are probably many advantages to them.

I really like te feel of the often compact, hardy and well built Film SLRs of the 70s and early eitghties with their metal bodies and rigid blocky design eg Canon A-1, Nikon FM2, K1000 etc.

However having had 3 of these types of cameras fail on me aqfter less than two rolls of film I have to ask myself if they are becoming an unwise option. These cameras are coming uto 30 years old and there are few consumer goods that work well after that length of time with alot of use.

I am a Canon person having a 350D and for some reason looked at EOS film bodies with scorn that doesn't really seem to have an logicial root. Should I abandon hopes of using FD SLRs and move onto more modern late 80s and 90s EOS bodies?

Discuss.

Rob · Feb 24, 2006

I've never had a problem with my 198? Nikon F3HP, or my 1969 Pentax Spotmatic, or my Nikons FM2n, FM3a and Nikkormat. If something well engineered is treated well, then it will be more durable than something which is not well engineered. The modern Nikons like the N55/F55 which I have had, I have quickly sold due to their flimsyness.

Just a random ramble.

Rob

LittleMan · Feb 24, 2006

I have a 1968 Canon TL/QL
It's a great camera and I love to use it(although the light meter in it no longer works) I only shoot B&W film through it.

(only to keep up with the old feel)

I also have a Canon EOS 1N. The 1 series bodies are really amazing and I would take them ANY day over the old bodies. The cheaper Canon SLR bodies are not as impressive IMO... and I would take an old Canon over a new cheap SLR body.

For digital, my uses are met with the Panasonic Lumix... I don't need anything super good... That way I can give it to my mom to take somewhere without having to worry about it. Yet, while the Lumix isn't a DSLR it still has a very nice looking photo(with contrast added in PS)

Those are my thoughts on the subject.

also. I still use the old Canon Body when I take some portraits.... It is the only camera I have a wideangle lens for, and the B&W photos that come out of it are very impressive. I use my 1N to meter the light for the TL/QL.

'Daniel' · Feb 24, 2006

I see. The problem is with all three cameras one of which ha been in the family from new had not had alot fo use all were in very good cosmetic condition and seemed to work fine at the start so how do you know if something has been well treated if it is second hand?

LittleMan · Feb 24, 2006

Daniel said:
I see. The problem is with all three cameras one of which ha been in the family from new had not had alot fo use all were in very good cosmetic condition and seemed to work fine at the start so how do you know if something has been well treated if it is second hand?

If the camera sounds good throughout ALL the shutterspeeds it should be OK. Also, if it wasn't treated good or over used it would have marks and scratches to show.

selmerdave · Feb 24, 2006

Daniel said:
However having had 3 of these types of cameras fail on me aqfter less than two rolls of film I have to ask myself if they are becoming an unwise option. These cameras are coming uto 30 years old and there are few consumer goods that work well after that length of time with alot of use.

I think you might find that with a simple repair job these cameras will last quite a while longer, and quite likely longer than a modern counterpart. If you're talking about the lifespan of a camera before it's first repair job that's like asking which car will last longest without ever changing the oil. With proper maintenance I'm sure they will perform well for a very long time.

Dave

'Daniel' · Feb 24, 2006

Do you think that most problems are easily fixed by the customer or would returning it to jessops be a better option? I already checked my A-1 at the bottom and it looked fine. I couldn't figure out how to get the top plate of so stopped.

darin3200 · Feb 24, 2006

First off, cool thread.

I have for some time now has a rather negative view towards newer film SLRs. I think that it is probably unfounded and there are probably many advantages to them.

I see what you're saying I sort of have the same views. For me its a couple of things.
1. Everyone has a new SLR regardless of if they know how to use it or not, having an old camera can give a feel of authenicity. An older camera is more unique. I've see everyone with a Rebel K1 or T2 or a canon digital, but the only other person with a Praktica B200 I know of is Santino.
2. New SLRs are mass produced and often are like toys, at least the cheaper ones
3. New SLRs come with more features and computers, it could be possible that you would rather have more control of the picture.

selmerdave · Feb 25, 2006

Daniel, I would definitely recommend a qualified tech, I think it is unlikely you would end up saving yourself money on your own (without repair experience). I don't know about Jessops, you might want to check around a bit to find out who people trust both for quality of work and price. I don't know about the UK but in the States there are places that do total overhauls for around $175.

Dave

markc · Feb 25, 2006

For SLRs I prefer newer. (For me, early 90's is very much "newer".) The Canon EOS-5 and Ae2 came out in '92, and it was the perfect SLR for me. For other styles of camera, like TLR and rangefinder, I like the older models a lot. They are just fun to use and have a sense of history for me. One of the favorites I've used is the Koni-Omega Rapid M from the late 60's.

'Daniel' · Feb 25, 2006

markc said:
For SLRs I prefer newer. (For me, early 90's is very much "newer".) The Canon EOS-5 and Ae2 came out in '92, and it was the perfect SLR for me. For other styles of camera, like TLR and rangefinder, I like the older models a lot. They are just fun to use and have a sense of history for me. One of the favorites I've used is the Koni-Omega Rapid M from the late 60's.

Yeah I've been looking at the EOS - 5 and Elan 7/ 30v. I don't like looking on eBay thoguh because then I want things but I dont't have the money! :lol:

:x

DocFrankenstein · Feb 25, 2006

The canon line rebels are crud... pretty much.

I guess you've had a stroke of bad luck, or can't pick cameras. Whatever camera you get, make sure the lenses fit EOS system. (nikon, minolta, contax, yashica, screwmount... and some others)

Good luck

santino · Feb 26, 2006

when it comes to the "modern" EOS series you can't do much wrong picking one of the 1 series or EOS 5 / Elan 7, even EOS 50 / Elan 2 isn't bad at all. older cameras can last for a very long time, BUT - after 15-20 thousand shots they need servicing - not much, just a bit cleaning of the shutter mechanism and lubing. leicas for example are undestroyable, even if the shutter gets damaged you just get yourself a rubbered cloth and make a new one (some skills are recommended but it isn't impossible). I personally prefer older cameras but the EOS 1 series is pretty good.

Torus34 · Feb 26, 2006

Well-designed and well-built cameras are little affected by age, excepting only such problems as thickening lubricants, etc. All of my equipment [35mm & 6x6cm] is at least 25 years old and functioning smoothly. It is all used in manual mode.

Your problems with used equipment are unusual, to say the least. A good used rig purchased from a reputable dealer should not develop immediate problems.

Most older rigs can be brought to 'like-new' performance by competent CLA. A good case in point are the old 35mm Russky rangefinders [Zorki, Fed, Kiev] CLA'd by Oleg.

'Daniel' · Feb 26, 2006

Yeah, I guess I must have just had soe ba dluck. I'm going to take it back to Jessops see what they can do. If nothing i'll either get my money back or take it some place else.