p.1 #1 · What is the best picture quality combo for 35mm focal length and 35mm format given a $600 budget?
I recently fell in love with a Konica Hexar af. I told my friend, if she want a compact film camera to bring along for a bike ride, the Konica or the Ricoh gr is about as good as it gets. Then, I thought, for the $600 budget that I paid for the Hexar, what other camera combos I can recommend to my friend, as the best picture quality with a 35mm-ish focal length? One of my go-to set up is a Zeiss 35mm f2 zf that I believe can still be found below $400, this will leave enough room for either a FE or FM body (or even a FM2 body). This maybe even better quality than the Konica with much higher shutter speed, but just cannot operate one-hand (but it is not a requirement). Another option will be a Canon P with a 35mm f2 ltm.
I don't know the other brand well enough, and I think this is a fun thought exercise. Looking forward to hear your reponse.
p.1 #2 · What is the best picture quality combo for 35mm focal length and 35mm format given a $600 budget?
If you don't mind a bit wider (28mm), the Fuji Work Record is worth checking out. It has a fixed 28mm/f3.5 lens that is very sharp, the auto exposure and focus are spot-on, and I've gotten a ton of great photos with mine. Top shutter speed is only 1/250 and since it's really a point-and-shoot you don't have any manual control (and you need to use film that has DX codes). But I've used mine one-handed quite a bit while biking and it does a great job. I got mine in mint condition for about $90. It is also completely waterproof and quite rugged. Check out my album of photos with it here: https://www.lomography.com/homes/bernache/albums/2465864-fuji-work-record
I've shot that camera side-by-side with my Leica with Voigtländer 28 and 35mm lenses and in many cases preferred the photos I shot with the Fuji. It is a very ugly camera, though, which turns some people off but I don't care how my cameras look, I only care that they take good photos.
Huss (Desmolicious) turned me on to this (he turned me on to several other cameras that I own and love too!).
Another one he recommended (and which I now own) is the Ricoh FF-1, which is a zone-focus camera with an excellent 35mm/2.8 lens. Extremely small, truly pocketable. You could easily use that one-handed; it has a hyperfocal distance setting where pretty much everything should be in focus as long as there's enough light and your film is fast enough. Top film speed is ISO 400 and that's usually what I have in mine.
p.1 #4 · What is the best picture quality combo for 35mm focal length and 35mm format given a $600 budget?
As mentioned by my esteemed colleague, Fuji Work Record is a fantastic choice and has the same top shutter speed as a Hexar AF..
Samsung AF Slim is another great option. Super 35mm lens, super compact, but also super noisy!
If you look at these make sure it is the original AF Slim, not the Slim R version which is super crappy in comparison (different lens, worse everything).
If you want to spend $600, you can get six of them….
p.1 #6 · What is the best picture quality combo for 35mm focal length and 35mm format given a $600 budget?
I may add one to the list: Fuji Natura s. I just found one for under $600 on ebay. A fast 24mm f1.9 lens, and auto focus speed in the SLR level. I often have my pinkie in the picture, but it was fun.
p.1 #7 · What is the best picture quality combo for 35mm focal length and 35mm format given a $600 budget?
If the focus is image quality and not a particular experience (like manual focus, build quality, etc):
Nikon F65 and AF-D 35mm f/2 or AF-S 35mm 1.8G
Canon 3000N (or similar) and Tamron 35mm 1.8 VC
or either one with the Sigma 35mm 1.4 Art
These cheap early 2000s cameras don’t feel as nice in the hand but tbh if it’s about the result and not the experience, I‘d trust the F65 more than the F2..
And since they’re dirt cheap too, you can invest more of the budget into the lens.
p.1 #8 · What is the best picture quality combo for 35mm focal length and 35mm format given a $600 budget?
Oh, I didn’t realize it did not have to be a p&s camera - even though those are way more pocketable than a slr w 35mm lens combo.
The Nikon AF-D 35mm f2 lens is outstanding. And on a compact body like an N/F80 it is a wikkid combo. An F75 is even smaller.
I am sure there are equivalents from Canon, Minolta etc. The AF really makes it an easy to use take along camera. Like a big version of a p&s.
But I would still recommend a fixed focal length p&s - just more fun to carry with never being a hassle.
Size comparison of a zoom p&s next to my N80 w the smallest F mount lens out there - the 45 2.8 AI-P
p.1 #9 · What is the best picture quality combo for 35mm focal length and 35mm format given a $600 budget?
fjablo wrote:
If the focus is image quality and not a particular experience (like manual focus, build quality, etc):
Nikon F65 and AF-D 35mm f/2 or AF-S 35mm 1.8G
Canon 3000N (or similar) and Tamron 35mm 1.8 VC
or either one with the Sigma 35mm 1.4 Art
These cheap early 2000s cameras don’t feel as nice in the hand but tbh if it’s about the result and not the experience, I‘d trust the F65 more than the F2..
And since they’re dirt cheap too, you can invest more of the budget into the lens.
That’s the hard truth. I get the exact results I want using a plastic fantastic 35mm AF slr every time, for a fraction of the cost and effort of my way cooler F2! Or F3. Or Leica R9…
p.1 #10 · What is the best picture quality combo for 35mm focal length and 35mm format given a $600 budget?
fjablo wrote:
If the focus is image quality and not a particular experience (like manual focus, build quality, etc):
Nikon F65 and AF-D 35mm f/2 or AF-S 35mm 1.8G
Canon 3000N (or similar) and Tamron 35mm 1.8 VC
or either one with the Sigma 35mm 1.4 Art
These cheap early 2000s cameras don’t feel as nice in the hand but tbh if it’s about the result and not the experience, I‘d trust the F65 more than the F2..
And since they’re dirt cheap too, you can invest more of the budget into the lens.
I will second the Sigma 35mm 1.4 Art. It's one of the best 35mm lens regardless price. Although my favorite is the Tamron 35mm f1.4, but it doesn't work for the film body. I bought a Sigma to work with a F100. It's a combo that give some of the best result no matter the price.
p.1 #11 · What is the best picture quality combo for 35mm focal length and 35mm format given a $600 budget?
On the Nikon side, you really can't beat the N75/N80 and any autofocus 35. The 35 f/2D and 35 f/1.8G are great options, but I'm sure the third-party offerings from the digital era have plenty to offer as well. What stands out about the N75/N80 is the meter and the flash. It's just so reliable at delivering sharp, well-exposed photos in a variety of lighting situations.
Also the N80 in particular is uniquely comfortable to me for one-handed use, if that's going to be a factor during a bike ride.
p.1 #12 · What is the best picture quality combo for 35mm focal length and 35mm format given a $600 budget?
mikegao wrote:
I will second the Sigma 35mm 1.4 Art. It's one of the best 35mm lens regardless price. Although my favorite is the Tamron 35mm f1.4, but it doesn't work for the film body. I bought a Sigma to work with a F100. It's a combo that give some of the best result no matter the price.
I have the Sigma Art 35 and 50, but use the Nikon 35 f2 and 50 1.8G much more because the size difference is massive. The smaller lenses are just so much more enjoyable to use.
And frankly I cannot discern any quality difference on film - obviously the Sigmas ARE better but in my use it doesn't show.
p.1 #13 · What is the best picture quality combo for 35mm focal length and 35mm format given a $600 budget?
I have the Sigma Art 35 and 50, but use the Nikon 35 f2 and 50 1.8G much more because the size difference is massive. The smaller lenses are just so much more enjoyable to use.
And frankly I cannot discern any quality difference on film - obviously the Sigmas ARE better but in my use it doesn't show.
I totally agree with you that smaller lenses are much more enjoyable to use. After reading your post about the Sigma 50 vs other lens. I took my F100 and 35mm f2 AFD and my Hexar AF out for a shoot out. At the end, I like the result of my Hexar AF more, but mainly because I wasn't doing a scientific comparison, and the subject matter when use the Hexar is more to my liking. It's a smaller camera after all, so I can bring with me everywhere, and focus is just fast enough (comparing to F100, which is as fast as any DSLR), that I can capture the moment of my daughter's daily life better.
The F100 + Sigma 35mm f1.4 combo's big advantage is using ISO 400 film and shooting at indoor light at nearly 1/60" second. The results is consistent throughout the entire frame. Many of my less good lenses will fall apart in this situation. Either the entire frame is fuzzy, or dark, or glowy, or a combination of all of the above. The Sigma can deliver in such a setting. My Leica M-A with a Summilux 35mm f1.4 FLE II can do the same, but the price difference is mind-boggling.
p.1 #14 · What is the best picture quality combo for 35mm focal length and 35mm format given a $600 budget?
This is not a camera system that provides light weight options. It does offer the most amazing results on high resolution 35mm film. I don’t own, nor have I tried 35mm and wider primes on this body..
The Contax RTSiii provides sharper images than my Leica, or ZM camera bodies. The ceramic “vacuum” film plate really does hold the film flatter. The trade off is that it is a heavy metal brick.
A really sharp lens that, when added keeps to cost under $500 and provides some flexibility is the:
The 100mm Makro Planar is sharper and more contrasty, but not more versatile. This is the sharpest lens that I have used on any of my 35mm film bodies.
p.1 #15 · What is the best picture quality combo for 35mm focal length and 35mm format given a $600 budget?
bwcolor wrote:
This is not a camera system that provides light weight options. It does offer the most amazing results on high resolution 35mm film. I don’t own, nor have I tried 35mm and wider primes on this body..
The Contax RTSiii provides sharper images than my Leica, or ZM camera bodies. The ceramic “vacuum” film plate really does hold the film flatter. The trade off is that it is a heavy metal brick.
A really sharp lens that, when added keeps to cost under $500 and provides some flexibility is the:
The 100mm Makro Planar is sharper and more contrasty, but not more versatile. This is the sharpest lens that I have used on any of my 35mm film bodies. ...Show more →
Speaking of film flatness, I do think my scanning setup is not able to hold my negative completely flat. All of my negative scan are not sharp edge-to-edge even though I know the lens are good and I shoot it at f8. I also suspect some of my film bodies are not able to hold the negative flat. It's hard to trouble shoot since I can't hold one of the variable constant. The camera body that I wish I can be sure to hold negative flat is my Nikon S2. Even shooting with the Millenium edition 50mm f1.4 lens, the edge is always a tiny bit blurry. Unfortunenately, I wasn't able to find an adapter to adapt that lens to my Leica M11, so I can only use it on my S2 and Z8. I am contemplating either getting another Nikon S4 or try out some ebay adapter that convert Contax to M.
p.1 #16 · What is the best picture quality combo for 35mm focal length and 35mm format given a $600 budget?
mikegao wrote:
Speaking of film flatness, I do think my scanning setup is not able to hold my negative completely flat. All of my negative scan are not sharp edge-to-edge even though I know the lens are good and I shoot it at f8. I also suspect some of my film bodies are not able to hold the negative flat. It's hard to trouble shoot since I can't hold one of the variable constant. The camera body that I wish I can be sure to hold negative flat is my Nikon S2. Even shooting with the Millenium edition 50mm f1.4 lens, the edge is always a tiny bit blurry. Unfortunenately, I wasn't able to find an adapter to adapt that lens to my Leica M11, so I can only use it on my S2 and Z8. I am contemplating either getting another Nikon S4 or try out some ebay adapter that convert Contax to M. ...Show more →
I had the Nikon S2 - actually my favorite Nikon RF as the vf was perfect w 50s! - but with the original 50 1.4. That lens was not sharp to the corners, only in the center area. If the millenium edition was an improved version but using the same formula, I would not be surprised it was not sharp at the edges.
What lens are you using to scan? I use the 60G and stop down to f10, Z7 w ES-2 film holder.
p.1 #17 · What is the best picture quality combo for 35mm focal length and 35mm format given a $600 budget?
My highest resolution negatives are from my RTSiii/Zeiss 100mm makro combination. In fact, I’m completely at a loss to understand how a Neopan 1600 negative can provide this level of performance, but I have a number of scans (9000ED) with this combination where the level of detail is jaw dropping. So, I’m convinced that it has everything to do with film flatness and the high level of performance of this particular lens. I have this image on my wall as a 24”x36” print and it is well defined at 18” viewing distance. Will provide link vs posting image here..
I’m at the early stages of copying via digital cameras. I started with a really solid copy stand and made sure that the camera plane and stand base are parallel. Using Kaiser & Negative Supply copy stands and Negative supply film holder and illumination. Everything is on a heavy table on a cement slab. After years of setting up two channel stereo systems, I found that rock solid stable and isolated components were essential. I believe that the same is true when copying film. Also, using a remote shutter control and electronic shutter to minimize vibration. Likely what all of you are also doing.
p.1 #18 · What is the best picture quality combo for 35mm focal length and 35mm format given a $600 budget?
bwcolor wrote:
My highest resolution negatives are from my RTSiii/Zeiss 100mm makro combination. In fact, I’m completely at a loss to understand how a Neopan 1600 negative can provide this level of performance, but I have a number of scans (9000ED) with this combination where the level of detail is jaw dropping. So, I’m convinced that it has everything to do with film flatness and the high level of performance of this particular lens. I have this image on my wall as a 24”x36” print and it is well defined at 18” viewing distance. Will provide link vs posting image here..
I’m at the early stages of copying via digital cameras. I started with a really solid copy stand and made sure that the camera plane and stand base are parallel. Using Kaiser & Negative Supply copy stands and Negative supply film holder and illumination. Everything is on a heavy table on a cement slab. After years of setting up two channel stereo systems, I found that rock solid stable and isolated components were essential. I believe that the same is true when copying film. Also, using a remote shutter control and electronic shutter to minimize vibration. Likely what all of you are also doing....Show more →
I just hand hold my Z7 w 60g and ES-2 over a lightpad for 35mm film scanning. Zero issues w critical sharpness. I use a copy stand for mf film.
