What SLR to get to complement my film Ms?

[BernardC]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Given that they already have Canon manual focus lenses, any example of the A-1 series (A1, AE-1, AE1-P, and a few others) should be a strong contender. They are the best-selling SLRs ever, so they should be easy enough to find.

[budrichard]

On 8/8/2025 at 1:43 PM, BernardC said:

Honestly, all the big Japanese brands made some great products, and had their share of not-so-great products. In wouldn't pay close attention to brand wars from the previous century. It's more important to find a camera that is working and in good shape.

That brings me back to my university days, 35+ years ago. I was hanging-out in the student darkroom, as I did a lot, and one of the photogs from the student paper was shooting a cover. He had a Nikkor 24, and I had my camera with a Zeiss 25 (Y/C), so we loaded a short roll in each and he shot the same setup using both lenses. It was a tabletop flash shot, so exposure was the same. Both rolls came from the same bulk loader, and they were souped together. When we compared the images, there was absolutely no comparison. The Nikkor was noticeably softer/mushier, and it had more distortion. Maybe it was a bad copy.

On a related topic, one of the things I learned in that darkroom is that equipment doesn't matter. Many of the best shots come from the cheapest equipment. There was a huge range of gear, ranging from old to new, cheap to expensive (even the odd Leica). It had absolutely no influence on results. The students who had a great eye produced the best shots, regardless of whether they bought their camera for a fiver at a charity shop, or their parents gifted them an F3 and a sac full of Nikkors.

The reason the Nikkor 24mm f2.8 was a hit among News Photogs was that it was the fastest wide angle available for the Nikon F. Everyone used the F, it had nothing to do with picture quality. for News work, you could use a coke bottle for a lens. It is all about reliable equipment that can be used fast!!!

[250swb]

19 hours ago, budrichard said:

The reason the Nikkor 24mm f2.8 was a hit among News Photogs was that it was the fastest wide angle available for the Nikon F. Everyone used the F, it had nothing to do with picture quality. for News work, you could use a coke bottle for a lens. It is all about reliable equipment that can be used fast!!!

I don't think the 24mm f2.8 is a 'coke bottle' at all. In the days when landscape photography was also done in 35mm and not just large format the 24mm f/2.8 Nikkor was pretty much an essential lens to have in the bag because of it's sharpness and compact size. True there have been different optical formulas for it and the early ones aren't as good as the 2.8 Ai-s version and the f/2.8 version is better than the f/2 24mm, so knowing which lens is being used is important. But if it's such a crappy lens it makes you wonder why Nikon kept it in production for 45 years as well as make an AF version? The original 1977 Ai-s version kept the same optical formula throughout and was discontinued in 2022, beat that Leica. 

Edited August 26 by 250swb

[pgk]

FWIW there are some absolute bargains about if you are prepared to look for them. If size doesn't matter then they can be even better. I've just picked up a Nikon D800E and 18-35 lens, both with 12 month warranties, at significantly under 20% of their new cost. Admittedly bulky, they are also highly capable. It seems to me that the bottom has dropped out of the older dSLR/lens market because, in spite of age and advances these are highly capable cameras even today. (Mods: please excuse the non-Leica phot but it should show capability and will print larger than I am ever likely to need  it to).

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[MarkP]

29 minutes ago, pgk said:

FWIW there are some absolute bargains about if you are prepared to look for them. If size doesn't matter then they can be even better. I've just picked up a Nikon D800E and 18-35 lens, both with 12 month warranties, at significantly under 20% of their new cost. Admittedly bulky, they are also highly capable. It seems to me that the bottom has dropped out of the older dSLR/lens market because, in spite of age and advances these are highly capable cameras even today. (Mods: please excuse the non-Leica phot but it should show capability and will print larger than I am ever likely to need  it to).

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Stunning photograph.

[pgk]

31 minutes ago, MarkP said:

Stunning photograph.

Highly capable equipment. The era of the dSLR though appears to be in great decline and sadly/inevitably no offering from Leica and greatly reduced offerings from other makers. I personally like looking through an SLR though and find it a more pleasnat way of viewing the subject than an EVF, although this may well be familiarity and re-engaging with the camera type. My preference s in order: RF, SLR, EVF, GG (Ground Glass!).

[BernardC]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, 250swb said:

The original 1977 Ai-s version kept the same optical formula throughout and was discontinued in 2022, beat that Leica. 

Nikon had AI-s lenses in stock for at least a decade after production ended, but I don't remember any of them getting updates post-1990. It's like the F6: that camera was officially available until 2020, even though production ended in the 2000s. Nikon, to their credit, had enough stock to keep it in the catalog for a very long time, knowing that there would never be an F7.

Leica's R 24mm started earlier (1974), but was discontinued with the R system, so it's technically shorter-lived even if the last batch may have been later than Nikon's 24.

https://wiki.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/24mm_f/2.8_Elmarit-R

Zeiss's 25mm dates back to the 1960s, and died with Contax in 2005, so that's a 42 year run (if a 1963 date I found is accurate). It was replaced by the ZF/ZE 25 that has a different formula (10 elements in 8 groups, vs. 8/7 for the Contarex formula).

I'm not sure how much we can infer from these long-lived designs, other than the fact that retrofocus wide angles of moderate speed didn't evolve much between the early 1960s and the mid 2000s. Arguably there wasn't much reason to update them in the AF era, especially since the AF 16-35/2.8 zoom became the professional/premium default.

[pgk]

46 minutes ago, BernardC said:

I'm not sure how much we can infer from these long-lived designs, other than the fact that retrofocus wide angles of moderate speed didn't evolve much between the early 1960s and the mid 2000s. Arguably there wasn't much reason to update them in the AF era, especially since the AF 16-35/2.8 zoom became the professional/premium default.

Wide-angle lenses had become he last 'challenge' for lens designers. This seems to have changed over the last 25 years with ultra-wide zooms producing extremely good results, although this has required software adjustment of files in addition to the lens design parameters to produce the high standard lenses we expect today. Perhaps this is why we have such exceptional lenses; because they required digital files and all the adjustments that these enable, including more freedom for lens designers to concentrate on aspects of lens design which cannot be corrected by software. Perhaps the cost of making optically exceptional lenses which do not require software correction (the M lenses for example) was considered unacceptable by manu makers and it was the digital revolution which finally changed things?

The photo I posted was on Nikon's 18-35 which is a very lightweight, if bulky design. It is suprisingly good, or rather, the adjusted results are very good indeed, especially for its cost (and used it can be bought for below £200 which is great value to put it mildly).

Edited August 26 by pgk

[Bliz]

7 hours ago, pgk said:

they are also highly capable

Well the d800 is a fantastic professional camera, of course it still takes nice pictures. I still use a d7000 i bought more than 10yrs ago to scan my film and it doesn't skip a beat.

[budrichard]

Never Posted that the Nikkor 24mm f2.8 was a coke bottle,

what I Posted was "for News work, you could use a coke bottle for a lens."

The Nikkor was and still is a great lens optically!

-Richard

[pgh]

On 9/26/2025 at 2:19 PM, budrichard said:

Never Posted that the Nikkor 24mm f2.8 was a coke bottle,

what I Posted was "for News work, you could use a coke bottle for a lens."

The Nikkor was and still is a great lens optically!

-Richard

compared to a Leica or Zeiss lens, my old 2.8 24mm AF-D nikkor was indeed pretty close to a coke bottle!

images I made with it printed on a full frame d700 look notably worse in sharpness etc  at the same size as the 28mm el-marit on a the M8 (less resolution) at same size.

Never had a complaint submitting pictures from it to my editorial clients though. 

[Einst_Stein]

Reexamined my 35mm film cameras, including Leica R4, Contax N1, Rollei 35S, Kodak Retina IIIC, etc., most of them have been toys on the shelf, now I find my favorit is Nikon F5. It could be F6 or F100 but I don't have. 

If it is to complement all-manual mostly-prime Leica M, I would choose the opposite: capable auto zooms and fast shooting body. Better yet, also the complement to my digital camera. For the similar thought to complement my Leica digital camera, I also have Nikon D850 + 200-500mm + 16-35mm + 24-120mm. Among Nikon film-cams, the widely favorite FMxx are out, due to the incompatibility to the modern Nikon lens. As far as I know, the only Nikon left would be F100, F5, and F6. 

If I am buying it now, it could be f6, as it is the most capable and reasonable portable. Between F5 and F100, F5 wins in capability while F100 wins in portability. The functionality of F5 could be over-kill for my usage, but I hate the sticky body of all encountered F100. 

On the other hand, when I just want to shoot films with a camera similar to Leica M, Kodak Retina IIIC (50mm f2) is my choice.