What makes one SLR any better than another?

steveo_mcg said:
But when cameras weren't cheap each of the manufacturers would have produced a range of lenses comparable to each other and third parties would have a made their lenses in each mount so it still wouldn't matter. The only way manufacturers really had to discriminate their products was the quality of the glass.

What would have been nice were bodies only made by one group of manufactures and lenses only by another so there was no manufacturer lock in either way. A bit like large format.
Click to expand...

...but you've fallen for the big names cunning plan and that is to lock you into their system and have no freedom of choice...at least someone tried to do something with adapters, but Nikon and Olympus must be the worst as they can't even use M42 screw lenses which were\are so common. So for me e.g. I have a Pentax S3 M42 (no exposure meter) with three lenses yet when I inherited a Nikon EM about 14 years ago with just a 50mm lens, I couldn't use the Pentax lenses on it.......a universal mount would have solved that (as any camera would accept a M42 adapter)....but still it started me carrying two cameras around and still do today.
 
TheGreatSoprendo said:
Can't let the 'don't go near a Nikon F2' comment pass... :)

They are of course simple mechanical cameras without bells and whistles but then you could say the same thing about most Leicas, Hasselblads or Rolleis.

I would advise caution when buying any of the above, given their age and price variation, and common need for servicing, but they are highly valued for good reason.
Click to expand...
I don't mind you saying "I can't let the don't go near a Nikon F2 comment pass" that's fine.
I have stated no less than three utterly ridiculous things about the F2 that are facts.I don't know how you could say those things about Leicas, Hasselblads or Rolleis when they did not have the same problems at all. And if you could does that make the F2 any better? no it just make Leicas, Hasselblads or Rolleis AS BAD! Then you go on to say that they are high valued for a reason( not by me) BUT you don't say why.That's because the answer would be that hype and marketing make it that way. Because believe me the Nikon F2 was a rubbish camera,absolute rubbish.Strong yes,But just about any other top end Camera by Minolta,Canon,Olympus,Contax would do the job of photography easier and better. Nikon F2 :mooning:

Anyone thinking of buying have a look first and see how you need all the different adapters to do what most other cameras do without any of them!
See meter in dull conditions,fit an on camera flash or fit a cable release. :runaway:
 
shapeshifter said:
Because believe me the Nikon F2 was a rubbish camera,absolute rubbish.
Click to expand...

Clearly you have some sort of personal issue with the F2, which is both slightly bizarre (because when most people don't like a camera, they don't harbour a massive amount of active dislike towards it) and also slightly misplaced, because its popularity and appeal to professional photographers of the period clearly proved that the "utterly ridiculous things about the F2" clearly didn't make a huge amount of difference to Nikon's target market.

shapeshifter said:
See meter in dull conditions,fit an on camera flash or fit a cable release. :runaway:
Click to expand...
  1. The CdS meter was just the available technology at the time - other cameras were also fitted with similar spec CdS meters. Besides, it was just an additional useful tool and the average photog of the time would've already had a rough estimate of exposure based on experience. Also, incidentally, the SPD meter in the F2AS and F2SB metered down to -2EV @ ASA100, so the meter would've been fine in dull conditions.
  2. Fair enough, but this was only because a design with interchangeable viewfinders would not have been strong enough to support a hotshoe mounted flashgun.
  3. Anyone who needed to use a cable release would've probably just bought an adapter/Nikon cable release. This was Nikon's top level camera, so anyone who was investing that much money in the system probably could invest in the accessories as well.
 
Ah the accessories scam...once upon a time any flashgun would fit any camera, but the camera makers decided that you only buy their flashguns by changing the pin arrangements around the centre pin.......well it does give me something to play with like :- putting a Canon T70 flashgun on a Nikon camera (inc AF) to see if it works. ;)
 
Last edited:
excalibur2 said:
Ah the accessories scam...once upon a time any flashgun would fit any camera, but the camera makers decided that you only buy their flashguns by changing the pin arrangements around the centre pin.......well it does give me something to play with like :- putting a Canon T70 flashgun on a Nikon camera (inc AF) to see if it works. ;)
Click to expand...

In all fairness, that was only for TTL communication, and it's because the manufacturers never sat down and tried to agree on a standard.

With a flash gun with a light sensor, you can still use it in auto mode and get good results.
 
Steve Smith said:
That would explain why hardly anyone ever used one then!


Steve.
Click to expand...
Your doing now.Tell us then why it was a good camera I have told you three things that were ridiculous about the design and use of the F2. STATE why you believe the F2 was used by so many people.Did you ever own one! I did.
 
A few reasons then:

1. Reliability. For pros that is the biggest most important issue and the F2 had it in bucketloads
2. The system - it could be adapted for more purposes than any camera available, only surpassed by the F3
3. The F2AS (which is where I started with this discussion), has an incredibly accurate meter, that's impressive by today's standards, not just those of the 70s
4. Fast, accurate shutter
5. Clear 100% viewfinder

Of course it has quirks, but as a simple mechanical camera it was unsurpassed for pro use in the 70s, and for many well into the 80s too.
 
I still own an F2 (well 2 actually) and although all those negatives may well be true it still has the best shutter sound of any SLR ever! And that makes it unbeatable IMHO :D
 
freecom2 said:
Clearly you have some sort of personal issue with the F2, which is both slightly bizarre (because when most people don't like a camera, they don't harbour a massive amount of active dislike towards it) and also slightly misplaced, because its popularity and appeal to professional photographers of the period clearly proved that the "utterly ridiculous things about the F2" clearly didn't make a huge amount of difference to Nikon's target market.


  1. The CdS meter was just the available technology at the time - other cameras were also fitted with similar spec CdS meters. Besides, it was just an additional useful tool and the average photog of the time would've already had a rough estimate of exposure based on experience. Also, incidentally, the SPD meter in the F2AS and F2SB metered down to -2EV @ ASA100, so the meter would've been fine in dull conditions.
  2. Fair enough, but this was only because a design with interchangeable viewfinders would not have been strong enough to support a hotshoe mounted flashgun.
  3. Anyone who needed to use a cable release would've probably just bought an adapter/Nikon cable release. This was Nikon's top level camera, so anyone who was investing that much money in the system probably could invest in the accessories as well.
Click to expand...


You have not understood my comment about the meter you need to read thread from the beginning.The meter needle in the viewfinder could not be read in dull light. It could on other makes of camera.The Nikon photomic head had a small hole at the top that did not let in enough light.It was so bad that Nikon made a device that screwed onto the eye piece and went over the top of the photomic head with a light in it to illuminate the needle in the viewfinder so the needle in the viewfinder could be read.it needed to be attached in all but bight lighting conditions.Nikon corrected this problem by using LED's in the F2AS.They had tried to correct it with the F2SB in 1977 but it was a failure because the LED's could not be read unless the eye was exactly in the correct position.

As for the flash having to carry an adapter that was not even a hot shoe(when many other cameras had them) around then fit it and have to take the flash and adapter off to rewind the film and reload another film was crazy.

As far as point number 3 is concerned it is not a case of"Anyone who needed to use a cable release would've PROBABLY just bought an adapter/Nikon cable release" it WAS a case that the had to buy the adapter and carry it around like it or not.

That's before one gets into all the messing around with AI and none AI lenses and having to make sure that you spun the aperture ring from one end to the other to make sure it coupled with the pin on the photomic head! On other manufacturers you just put the lens on and took photos.

The F2 was worst camera I ever owned :banghead:. I fell for all the hype and the fact the the press used them.I did not find out until years later the Nikon used to give them the cameras.I am not surprised they gave them away.

So to answer the original posters question"What makes one SLR any better than another" I have given the glaring example of the dysfunctions of the Nikon F2.

The things that make one SLR "better" than another is the way they operate and do the job they are supposed to do(are you listening Nikon).
The way in which a lens mounts can be a factor.The Canon FD range of lenses had a suspect mount as they could be misaligned easy causing damage ( I had FD it never happened to me but I was always cautious as know those who did damage).Yet the Olympus OM range had a superb lens mount with a nice big plat base plate making it easy and fats to mount.If the OM1 had used LED's in the viewfinder it would have been my perfect film camera(see below).

Another factor was the position of the shutter speed control, most cameras had it on the top right near the shutter release that required the removal of the finger from the shutter button to alter the shutter speed.Unless there was a readout in the viewfinder it was just about impossible to know what speed you were shooting at.However the Nikkormat and the Olympus moved the shutter speed control to a large ring around the lens mount area.That way there was no requirement for the finger to be removed from the shutter in order to alter the shutter speed and you had a good idea of the shutter speed in use due to the position of the ring. Altering the aperture, focusing and shutter speed was all done with the left hand. Brilliant!:olympus:

So it is things like those that make one SLR better than another NOT a vacuum back( I just want a toy and not a camera) that runs the battery down in no time (Contax gimmick) or needing to carry three different adapters to take a flash,see the meter readout in the viewfinder or use a cable release and the blasted thing used to cost £400 in 1980.:runaway:
 
shapeshifter said:
You have not understood my comment about the meter you need to read thread from the beginning.The meter needle in the viewfinder could not be read in dull light. It could on other makes of camera.The Nikon photomic head had a small hole at the top that did not let in enough light.It was so bad that Nikon made a device that screwed onto the eye piece and went over the top of the photomic head with a light in it to illuminate the needle in the viewfinder so the needle in the viewfinder could be read.it needed to be attached in all but bight lighting conditions.Nikon corrected this problem by using LED's in the F2AS.They had tried to correct it with the F2SB in 1977 but it was a failure because the LED's could not be read unless the eye was exactly in the correct position.

As for the flash having to carry an adapter that was not even a hot shoe(when many other cameras had them) around then fit it and have to take the flash and adapter off to rewind the film and reload another film was crazy.

As far as point number 3 is concerned it is not a case of"Anyone who needed to use a cable release would've PROBABLY just bought an adapter/Nikon cable release" it WAS a case that the had to buy the adapter and carry it around like it or not.

That's before one gets into all the messing around with AI and none AI lenses and having to make sure that you spun the aperture ring from one end to the other to make sure it coupled with the pin on the photomic head! On other manufacturers you just put the lens on and took photos.

The F2 was worst camera I ever owned :banghead:. I fell for all the hype and the fact the the press used them.I did not find out until years later the Nikon used to give them the cameras.I am not surprised they gave them away.

So to answer the original posters question"What makes one SLR any better than another" I have given the glaring example of the dysfunctions of the Nikon F2.

The things that make one SLR "better" than another is the way they operate and do the job they are supposed to do(are you listening Nikon).
The way in which a lens mounts can be a factor.The Canon FD range of lenses had a suspect mount as they could be misaligned easy causing damage ( I had FD it never happened to me but I was always cautious as know those who did damage).Yet the Olympus OM range had a superb lens mount with a nice big plat base plate making it easy and fats to mount.If the OM1 had used LED's in the viewfinder it would have been my perfect film camera(see below).

Another factor was the position of the shutter speed control, most cameras had it on the top right near the shutter release that required the removal of the finger from the shutter button to alter the shutter speed.Unless there was a readout in the viewfinder it was just about impossible to know what speed you were shooting at.However the Nikkormat and the Olympus moved the shutter speed control to a large ring around the lens mount area.That way there was no requirement for the finger to be removed from the shutter in order to alter the shutter speed and you had a good idea of the shutter speed in use due to the position of the ring. Altering the aperture, focusing and shutter speed was all done with the left hand. Brilliant!:olympus:

So it is things like those that make one SLR better than another NOT a vacuum back( I just want a toy and not a camera) that runs the battery down in no time (Contax gimmick) or needing to carry three different adapters to take a flash,see the meter readout in the viewfinder or use a cable release and the blasted thing used to cost £400 in 1980.:runaway:
Click to expand...

Well I find the shutter speed control most annoying on the Olympus and in cold weather with gloves surely awkward to use...but I suppose in non cold weather (maybe in cold weather as well) you are going to know what aperture and speed you'll need before the shot and can alter the settings in your lap (or car) if you like. Anyway if it was a great idea who copied it (well unless it was patented).
 
TheGreatSoprendo said:
A few reasons then:

1. Reliability. For pros that is the biggest most important issue and the F2 had it in bucketloads
2. The system - it could be adapted for more purposes than any camera available, only surpassed by the F3
3. The F2AS (which is where I started with this discussion), has an incredibly accurate meter, that's impressive by today's standards, not just those of the 70s
4. Fast, accurate shutter
5. Clear 100% viewfinder

Of course it has quirks, but as a simple mechanical camera it was unsurpassed for pro use in the 70s, and for many well into the 80s too.
Click to expand...
It was a strong camera (agree) and had a lot more accessories available than most other cameras but many would not use them( it's a fact but for 95% of togs would not matter).
The meter was no better or worse than most other cameras in a real world situation possibly on some computer readout it read an 18% grey car 0.3% more accurate, it is only ever a device for reading 18% grey so I can not give that much credence.
The same would apply to the fast accurate shutter many cameras had them not just F2's Amateur photographer and SLR magazine use to test them I remember the big shoot out Canon F1 v Nikon F2 and the accuracy of the shutters was similar very tiny percentages, not of any significance a real world situation.
I did like the 100% viewfinder I think that is important but other cameras where again only a few percent of 97/98% the worst camera for that I ever used was the Pentax 6x7 it only showed 90% that did cause problems but I never had a problem with any 35mm camera viewfinder.

When you weigh up these small things against using the camera and not being able to see the meter needle in the viewfinder(something used for every shot) unless bright or a device is attached.Taking photos whilst using a flash and having to take the flash off,remove the adapter then and only then could you rewind the film and put another in.Then put all adapter back on and the flash.Plus all the other problems, cable release requiring adapter,change lens spin ring from one side to other to make sure pin was coupled up. I think a couple of percent on the view finder and shutter speed accuracy pale into insignificance

Regarding motor drives the Nikon could do about 5fps and the Canon F1 was similar but what was worth a mention was that the Olympus OM1 could do 5fps and had a nice set up.I doubt it was a strong as the Nikon /Canon drive.:)
 
RaglanSurf said:
I still own an F2 (well 2 actually) and although all those negatives may well be true it still has the best shutter sound of any SLR ever! And that makes it unbeatable IMHO :D
Click to expand...
Yes mine did make a good sound .But then I remembered I had bought it to take photos,or had I ! :LOL:
 
shapeshifter said:
Taking photos whilst using a flash and having to take the flash off,remove the adapter then and only then could you rewind the film and put another in.Then put all adapter back on and the flash.
Click to expand...


If it's the same as the F (which I think it is) then you could use a flash on a bracket, as most people probably did, plugged into the PC socket. Then it's not an issue.


Steve.
 
excalibur2 said:
Well I find the shutter speed control most annoying on the Olympus and in cold weather with gloves surely awkward to use...but I suppose in non cold weather (maybe in cold weather as well) you are going to know what aperture and speed you'll need before the shot and can alter the settings in your lap (or car) if you like. Anyway if it was a great idea who copied it (well unless it was patented).
Click to expand...
I think it was only on the Nikkormat and the Olympus.I don't know why it did not become more popular.The thing about the cold hands would also apply to the shutter speed dial on the top plate would it not?
 
For me it has to be idiot proof operation. I don't want anything that requires endless arsing about just to get one photo out of it. An exposure system which isn't easily fooled, along with an AF system that isn't easily fooled with a bright view finder and you can't go wrong really. I like the camera to deal with the technicalities so I can be free to take crap shots in peace :)
 
Steve Smith said:
If it's the same as the F (which I think it is) then you could use a flash on a bracket, as most people probably did, plugged into the PC socket. Then it's not an issue.


Steve.
Click to expand...
That was the thing it was bracket or adapter to carry around and the adapter was smaller and lighter so I used that.Neither were a hot shoe of course so a cable was required as well. I never noticed an improvement with red eye by moving the flash to the left of the lens but technically it is supposed to reduce it.
 
shapeshifter said:
The thing about the cold hands would also apply to the shutter speed dial on the top plate would it not?
Click to expand...

For some cameras I suppose you are right, but e.g. the Canon T90 and Nikon f90x have a thumb wheel and another e.g. is the Canon T70 has an up/down buttons...but they are more electronic.
 
excalibur2 said:
For some cameras I suppose you are right, but e.g. the Canon T90 and Nikon f90x have a thumb wheel and another e.g. is the Canon T70 has an up/down buttons...but they are more electronic.
Click to expand...

I had the Canon T90 and it was a really good camera.There were two small dislikes I was cautious about misaligning the lens mount and the thumb wheel was in the wrong position,I prefer it where Nikon have it now in front of the shutter button rather then behind.

The introduction of the thumb wheel may have been a reason why the method of having the shutter speed ring around the lens did not progress.

I first saw the thumb wheel on a Canon. Nikon copied it and put it in the right place.
 
shapeshifter said:
I had the Canon T90 and it was a really good camera.There were two small dislikes I was cautious about misaligning the lens mount and the thumb wheel was in the wrong position,I prefer it where Nikon have it now in front of the shutter button rather then behind.

The introduction of the thumb wheel may have been a reason why the method of having the shutter speed ring around the lens did not progress.

I first saw the thumb wheel on a Canon. Nikon copied it and put it in the right place.
Click to expand...

Could be a sign that camera makers were\are finally listening to user in what they want :jawdrop: ....less moans and everyone is happy ;)
 
excalibur2 said:
Could be a sign that camera makers were\are finally listening to user in what they want :jawdrop: ....less moans and everyone is happy ;)
Click to expand...

The thing is regardless of what camera manufacturers do they'll never make everyone happy. According to @shapeshifter Nikon have the thumbwheel in the "right place", how he can say that with such a level of certainty I'm not sure; I'd be much more tempted to say they have it where I prefer it if I were expressing that particular opinion but nonetheless, I hate where Nikon have it. It feels totally unnatural to me. That doesn't mean Nikon have made a bad camera, or not listened to users, or otherwise screwed it up, it merely means I prefer something else.

As Paul (@Mr Bump ) says, it's such an open-ended question and because of that it probably doesn't have a definitive set of answers. We all want different things from our gear; one photographer's dream camera is another photographer's nightmare, but so what? That's the way it's always been with any set of artistic tools be them coloured pencils, paintbrushes, musical instruments or cameras, and that's how it always will be. You just need to tailor your gear to whatever suits your needs.
 
freecom2 said:
In all fairness, that was only for TTL communication, and it's because the manufacturers never sat down and tried to agree on a standard.

With a flash gun with a light sensor, you can still use it in auto mode and get good results.
Click to expand...

Well I think in the older days we stuck to one camera system because of the price, and ignorance was bliss...but with the recent interest in other makes of lenses and cameras sooo cheap we are now finding out what a pig's breakfast the whole photography setup was ( I suppose digital owners have the same problem but less so with say the Nex)...Anyway if anyone is happy with say just Canon or Nikon lenses and flashguns there is no problem, but for me I find it interesting to try most makes of lenses esp the old fifteen blade types (nicknamed bokeh monsters), Sonnars, fleks, Russian and so on....well it won't turn me into a David Bailey but it's a nice hobby seeing if there is any difference in the results.
 
Right folks, had a quick of sweep through this thread with a broom, I am sure Roberts will be along shortly to tut over my slovenly ways, so before I get caught by him, just a reminder to keep things civil and NOT personal. Don't have to say that very often in F&C, would much prefer to keep it that way, enough to worry about beyond these hallowed halls ;)
 
I refuse to be swept under the carpet, my humorous comment deserves to be heard by a wider audience....right I'm off to twitface or sumink.:D
 
  • Like
Reactions: PMN
PMN said:
The thing is regardless of what camera manufacturers do they'll never make everyone happy. According to @shapeshifter Nikon have the thumbwheel in the "right place", how he can say that with such a level of certainty I'm not sure; I'd be much more tempted to say they have it where I prefer it if I were expressing that particular opinion but nonetheless, I hate where Nikon have it. It feels totally unnatural to me. That doesn't mean Nikon have made a bad camera, or not listened to users, or otherwise screwed it up, it merely means I prefer something else.

As Paul (@Mr Bump ) says, it's such an open-ended question and because of that it probably doesn't have a definitive set of answers. We all want different things from our gear; one photographer's dream camera is another photographer's nightmare, but so what? That's the way it's always been with any set of artistic tools be them coloured pencils, paintbrushes, musical instruments or cameras, and that's how it always will be. You just need to tailor your gear to whatever suits your needs.
Click to expand...

H'mm So how do you tailor your needs unless you buy or try all the different cameras and lenses to see which you like.....................................................................well lucky cameras bodies are cheap as I've chosen my favourites out of 18 cameras of 10 different makes ;) and I'd be happy (well in theory) with a couple of cameras that can take any make of lens...sorta mix and match.
 
Last edited:
excalibur2 said:
H'mm So how do you tailor your needs unless you buy or try all the different cameras and lenses to see which you like.....................................................................well lucky cameras bodies are cheap as I've chosen my favourites out of 18 cameras of 10 different makes ;) and I'd be happy (well in theory) with a couple of cameras that can take any make of lens...sorta mix and match.
Click to expand...

I already know what I like, I don't need to try every camera ever manufactured to figure that out. That's like saying everyone needs to drive every model of car on the roads to find one they like!
 
PMN said:
I already know what I like, I don't need to try every camera ever manufactured to figure that out. That's like saying everyone needs to drive every model of car on the roads to find one they like!
Click to expand...

Well I didn't know about the later 35mm cameras, coming back to 35mm from a long time with medium format and made initial mistakes with inferior cameras...and I wish I had a say choosing my wife's car as I hate the close together, tiny foot pedals when driving it :eek:
 
You can't go far wrong with Contax :)
Other, inferior, brands are available.
 
kendo1 said:
You can't go far wrong with Contax :)
Other, inferior, brands are available.
Click to expand...


Well I have a Contax 139 but can't afford the lenses...it's a nice camera (but nothing special) and have a few Yashica lenses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top