Amifssa olive grove, Greece. Kodak ProImage 100, Canon EOS 300 with the 40/2.8 STM. I think. Or maybe it was the 600 with the Ultron 40/2. Yes I had both and yes you could say I like 40mm.
brick33308 wrote:
are there any dirt cheap film cams on which I can use my M lenses?
I don't think "dirt cheap" and "M" go together, although by sheer dumb luck I got my Leica M2-R (a rare model no less) for essentially $250 (or if you look at it another way, I got it for $1,000 along with three Leica lenses for free). But that's because I got it from an old friend who gave me an incredible deal.
Probably the Voigtlander Bessas are your best bet for cheap M although they're ugly and prone to problems; the Minolta CLE is cheaper than most Leicas but its price has gone way up in recent years. Not sure what other options are out there apart from the less-desirable Leica models, but they tend to be less desirable for good reasons.
Kentmere is perfect for that shot. Just the right about of grain and grit. Right amount of shadow detail but still got those dark tones. I think you nailed it.
bjhurley wrote:
I don't think "dirt cheap" and "M" go together, although by sheer dumb luck I got my Leica M2-R (a rare model no less) for essentially $250 (or if you look at it another way, I got it for $1,000 along with three Leica lenses for free). But that's because I got it from an old friend who gave me an incredible deal.
Probably the Voigtlander Bessas are your best bet for cheap M although they're ugly and prone to problems; the Minolta CLE is cheaper than most Leicas but its price has gone way up in recent years. Not sure what other options are out there apart from the less-desirable Leica models, but they tend to be less desirable for good reasons.
Leitz/Minolta CL is your best bet. $400-500 if you shop around. Mechanical and serviceable. Saw a beater for for $300 last week. That's as good as it gets unless you go screw mount in which case you have a bunch of sub-$200 Canons.
CLE, Hexar RF, Bessa are all around $1k now which is about what you can get an M3 for and I've seen/purchased M4 and M2s for close to that amount too.
ottokbre wrote:
Leitz/Minolta CL is your best bet. $400-500 if you shop around. Mechanical and serviceable. Saw a beater for for $300 last week. That's as good as it gets unless you go screw mount in which case you have a bunch of sub-$200 Canons.
CLE, Hexar RF, Bessa are all around $1k now which is about what you can get an M3 for and I've seen/purchased M4 and M2s for close to that amount too.
Yea, Minolta is the only option there.
If have to spend around $1k I rather look for M2 or M3
ottokbre wrote:
Leitz/Minolta CL is your best bet. $400-500 if you shop around. Mechanical and serviceable. Saw a beater for for $300 last week. That's as good as it gets unless you go screw mount in which case you have a bunch of sub-$200 Canons.
CLE, Hexar RF, Bessa are all around $1k now which is about what you can get an M3 for and I've seen/purchased M4 and M2s for close to that amount too.
The Bessa R2/3/4 series prices are loopy now. They are going for $1200+. I had an R3a and sold it because I asked myself why would I ever want to use this over my Ms?
Right now the cheapest Ms are the 3 and 4-2. Both are super.
I had two CLEs but both had electrical failures. One CL that I bought for the 40 Summicron that was attached to it. The camera itself was jammed but handling it made me think just keep saving until you have enough for an M.
I always wanted to use a Konica Hexar RF as the specs are so cool, but was scared away by the reliability horror stories.
The Zeiss Ikon ZM I had suffered from a film transport failure - they use the same cheap plastic gears as the $100 (at the time) Bessa L - and I have also seen shutter failures where the blades have literally come apart. Same thing as in the Bessas because they share the same parts. Either way, the ZM is about $1400 so might as well get an M4..
Anyway my definition of dirt cheap is under $50 for a decent camera. Like a Nikon N/F80 or equivalent from the other mfgs. Those cameras are legit so good.
brick33308 wrote:
are there any dirt cheap film cams on which I can use my M lenses?
CL, fifty year old consumer camera technology. Often dead meters, most haven’t been serviced since new. Don’t forget the battery adapter.
CLE, forty five year old electronics which can be problematic. There may be a technician who will work on them
M2, always a good choice. Many have been serviced and with an extra spool, very fast to load. Balsam separation of the rangefinder is always possible, not the best choice for using flash.
M3, same as the M2 but for 50mm. Wider lens required finders.
M4, currently probably the best bargain, unless you want black paint.
M4-2/P, the ugly duckling workhorse. Many pros and a few cons. First M camera with a hot shoe but the plastic is now old and brittle so the chance of yanking out one of the pc syncs is a very real possibility. The missing condenser and viewfinder flare can happen but can be remedied as can the flash block.
My joke has been the best bargain Leica’s are ones I have just sold. Several years ago, someone bought my M2 that had just been serviced by Don Goldberg.
The Ektar has been an impuls buy, but it took a while till it was finally loaded into a camera. Guess I am more a Iso 400 guy and carry and ND filter... colors are nice though a bit too punchy for my taste...
Speaking of less expensive Leica related things, while unrelated to the M mount, I went to the Leica store in Zürich today to check out an R6.2 they have for sale that was in seemingly pristine condition, but I didn't care for the feel of the camera at all. I finally get what people complain about the R6 and R6.2 regarding shutter lag, and the camera body felt much less pleasant than my Nikon F2AS. I know that much of the R lineup was a collab with Minolta, but it's hard to fathom that the same company making Ms also made the R3-7 bodies. The glass is lovely of course, but for now I will pass on picking up an R mount film body (I have the 100 Apo-Macro-Elmarit-R and the 180 Apo-Elmarit-R that so far I've only shot on the SL2-S).
I also got confirmation of a Thursday event this week with a major new announcement, but since it won't be an M7 re-release I have no interesting in going.
More Kodak Gold in Toronto, on the Leica M-A with a 50mm Summilux-M Asph. v1.
philipj wrote:
Speaking of less expensive Leica related things, while unrelated to the M mount, I went to the Leica store in Zürich today to check out an R6.2 they have for sale that was in seemingly pristine condition, but I didn't care for the feel of the camera at all. I finally get what people complain about the R6 and R6.2 regarding shutter lag, and the camera body felt much less pleasant than my Nikon F2AS. I know that much of the R lineup was a collab with Minolta, but it's hard to fathom that the same company making Ms also made the R3-7 bodies. The glass is lovely of course, but for now I will pass on picking up an R mount film body (I have the 100 Apo-Macro-Elmarit-R and the 180 Apo-Elmarit-R that so far I've only shot on the SL2-S).
I also got confirmation of a Thursday event this week with a major new announcement, but since it won't be an M7 re-release I have no interesting in going.
More Kodak Gold in Toronto, on the Leica M-A with a 50mm Summilux-M Asph. v1.
I found that using a soft release really helped reduce the sensation of the shutter lag, and I used them on my R-Es as well as R7. The R8/9 don’t need them. The R series was basically a collaboration with Minolta through the R3, R4 onwards are very different and all you need to do is handle an Xd11 and R5/6/7 to see the difference. The control layout is different, the feel and solidity of the body is very different, the shutter is different (including the range of shutter speeds), the mirror box is completely different, and the meter offers multiple exposure reading modes.
I sold my R-Es, R7 and R8 and kept the R9 - because too many cameras! I also have an F2as and really enjoy it, but it feels (and is) much older than the R series. It also does not have that ingot feel because of the modular body. But.. my F3P really feels the equivalent in build compared to the R line.
If Nikon by some miracle brought the F3 production back, that camera would still feel very modern and contemporary.
My wife and I were in Ashland, Oregon for several days. We saw some great theater and enjoyed some very good meals. I took my M4-2 kit and six rolls of Flic Film Aurora 800. I used a ND2 filter to bring the working ISO down to 400 and finished three rolls. After unpacking, I took the exposed film over to a local shop for developing. The salesperson told me it would be a little longer than normal because they had over a hundred rolls to develop. That kind of news makes me happy.
madNbad wrote:
My wife and I were in Ashland, Oregon for several days. We saw some great theater and enjoyed some very good meals. I took my M4-2 kit and six rolls of Flic Film Aurora 800. I used a ND2 filter to bring the working ISO down to 400 and finished three rolls. After unpacking, I took the exposed film over to a local shop for developing. The salesperson told me it would be a little longer than normal because they had over a hundred rolls to develop. That kind of news makes me happy.
Maybe you should post that in the "Has the film bubble finally burst?" thread...
I mentioned in it that my nephews in college told me that the kids there are only shooting film.
Delfi, Greece. Kodak ProImage 100, Canon EOS 300/600 and either 40/2.8STM or 40/2CV. They were stopped down to f/8 so it hardly matters what the lens was.
