35mm film survey (Page 10): Panasonic Lumix and Leica are partners. Much of Leica digital camera guts are made by Lumix. Since their full frame models share the same L-Mount with Sigma...

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

BebuLamar wrote:

If I were to buy a Leica it makes more sense to buy a film camera than a digital.

Panasonic Lumix and Leica are partners. Much of Leica digital camera guts are made by Lumix. Since their full frame models share the same L-Mount with Sigma (and others), you can choose from a wide array of bodies and lenses that all work interchangeably.

BebuLamar

burkphoto wrote:

Panasonic Lumix and Leica are partners. Much of Leica digital camera guts are made by Lumix. Since their full frame models share the same L-Mount with Sigma (and others), you can choose from a wide array of bodies and lenses that all work interchangeably.

The Leica M film cameras are all Leica. Has nothing to do with Panasonic or Sigma and as I said if I were to buy a Leica it makes more sense to me to buy a film camera.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

burkphoto wrote:

Panasonic Lumix and Leica are partners. Much of Leica digital camera guts are made by Lumix. Since their full frame models share the same L-Mount with Sigma (and others), you can choose from a wide array of bodies and lenses that all work interchangeably.

Leica film cameras use Leica’s M mount. So do all of the Leica M digital rangefinders.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

burkphoto wrote:

Panasonic Lumix and Leica are partners. Much of Leica digital camera guts are made by Lumix. Since their full frame models share the same L-Mount with Sigma (and others), you can choose from a wide array of bodies and lenses that all work interchangeably.

Isn’t this a recent phenomenon? Something that started since digital times began? So, if you want ‘all Leica’, wouldn’t film be the way to go?

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

rehess wrote:

Isn’t this a recent phenomenon? Something that started since digital times began?

It’s not. My wife still has a Leica branded pocket camera made before the digital era.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

selmslie wrote:

It’s not. My wife still has a Leica branded pocket camera made before the digital era.

I wasn’t aware that there were any Panasonic/Lumix branded film ‘still’ cameras.

MrPhotog

selmslie wrote:

It would make more sense if they skipped the meter altogether.

Anyone who shoots film has better ways to determine exposure than with an unreliable in-camera meter.

I suspect the non-metered Leica M-A is sold with that group in mind. But just removing the battery turns off a meter, too.

The Pentax Spotmatic, which turned into the K-1000 had a well deserved reputation for having an accurate and reliable meter. It was surprisingly fast to use, too. When I taught beginning photo classes in the early 1980s the most common cameras used by the students were Canon AE-1s, and a few had Pentax K-1000s. On the first day I would have them stand, point their camera at me, set the exposure, ( maybe click the shutter) and sit down. Surprisingly, in class after class, the K-1000 owners did this faster than the AE-1 owners.

The stand up/sit down part of this activity was to keep the students from falling asleep in my class. They got to stretch. It also separated the students who were completely befuddled about setting their cameras. Anyone still standing after 10 seconds got more coaching.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

rehess wrote:

I wasn’t aware that there were any Panasonic/Lumix branded film ‘still’ cameras.

I bought it for her around 2000. She hasn't used it for years.

Nice little camera with a retractable zoom lens, automatic film advance.

It's buried somewhere in the house with the CR2 (?) battery removed.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

MrPhotog wrote:

The Pentax Spotmatic, which turned into the K-1000 had a well deserved reputation for having an accurate and reliable meter.

The Spotmatic's meter was reliable enough but is only had one metering mode - center weighted with emphasis on the spot.

An incident meter was more useful.

bvogel Loc: Evergreen, CO

Minolta 9

RodeoMan Loc: St Joseph, Missouri

whfowle wrote:

I have a collection of Nikon and Canon film camera... (show quote)

I'm curious. When you have both your digital and your film equipment readily at hand and a subject before you you want to record, how do you determine that the subject is of a sufficient degree of sharpness that your film equipment would be preferable to use to do this rather than your digital? Thank you.

RodeoMan Loc: St Joseph, Missouri

Rab-Eye wrote:

My first SLR, a Pentax ME Super.

I enjoyed mine. I liked the controls and thought it was a good size to hold.

RodeoMan Loc: St Joseph, Missouri

bvogel wrote:

I use a Minolta Max 9 along with some Minolta lens from that era. My darkroom is still intact, so I do my own processing.

I have had my eye on one of those for a long time or maybe a Max 7. I remember that the 9 caught hell from the reviewers because Minolta had the temerity to add an on camera flash to it. What has been your impression of the camera after having used it for some time? Thanks.

bvogel Loc: Evergreen, CO

The on-camera flash has been used as a fill flash on a number of occasions. I have the battery grip attached at all times. The Sony optics that I have work well as do the old Minolta lenses. The camera just feels great, and I love shooting with it. The only negative is the flash attachment, which is no problem for me as I use a Metz potato masher so the flash can be moved to the side or bounced.