We can discuss without fighting too ! which one does /p/ prefer

>>3002967
i prefer a gear thread

>>3002967
>gear thread
>how do i p mode on muh nikon d3100 DSLR

this is a kaiser class 35mm film camera thread !

>>3002973
ment to quote this lol
>>3002969

>>3002967
No one can discuss why you should buy a Leica without bringing woo woo about the "leica look" which I would bet every cent I own could not be discerned through a double blind test.

I don't know much about Contax but I'll take them because there is no "contax look" people BS about.

>>3003009
you would get contax bc they made the first 35mm rf cameras, has probably the best 35mm lens ever made and you don't get the parts out to load a film like in 1930
also for the titanium body !

>>3002967
Contax

Fujifilm X-Pro2.

File: 1359877840728.png (46KB, 1637x296px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 1637x296px

Daily reminder.

>>3003037
Sugar one day you will die and I will stumble upon your obituary and I will smile for the world will be a better place.

>>3003037
this guys gets it !

>>3003037
Kek, now i'm regreting selling my zenit, gonna buy a FED to make up for it.

>>3003037
why do photography at all? there are many better hobbies

File: 0014976-1024x768.jpg (90KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 1024x768px

>>3002967
the contax is an objectively better camera

but the shill in me is saying m6.

muh bright viewfinder
muh m mount
muh engaging film winding experience

>>3002967
the one you have with you

>>3003257
>that picture
>muh brassing
>muh patina
>muh now it's worth more

The Contax is about as much a rangefinder camera as a fuji x-pro, i.e. not at all. The Leica has jack shit in terms of controls (A without EC, needle-matching manual). Neither has a shade of the proper metering (TTL! multisegment evaluative!) expected of any camera in that price class.

They're both shit, but Leica stuff depreciates slower.

File: dirt.jpg (223KB, 800x308px) Image search: [Google]

223KB, 800x308px

>>3003037
I took every single piece apart on a zorki 4 cleaned and lubricated it and put it back together.. it actually works now unlike when i got it but it is a hunk of shit. They copied the leica design but after the 2 they did not build them in a similar fashion at all. Leica's are not worth 20k but the zorki is worth about 20 bucks.

>>3003407
>>3003191
zorki fed zenit ...which one is the better one ?
i would grab one one day maybe...i like old film cameras

>>3003420
its all the same shit. the older ones are a bit more solid and look more interesting. don't pay more than 40 bucks for any Russian camera. Do not buy a Russian camera made to look like a Leica they never get put back together right.

>>3002967

The Contax is the better camera, but the Leica has muh feels and you can be confident in the resale value.

Oh, good luck repairing the Contax when it breaks. The Leica isn't an issue to repair.

The Contax glass is better than Leica.

>>3003191
Why did you sell your zenit? You probably got little money and lost a piece of history doing it

>>3003420
>i like old film cameras
Well you won't for much longer if you pick a Zenit or a Zorki for your first one and don't take autistic pleasure in tinkering and cleaning. Zorki aside, Zenit is a crappy camera even when it works due to the abysmal finder, poor selection of shutter speeds and reliability issues. Due to having a mirror mechanism it's also more difficult to service than a Zorki, and boy you can be damn sure you'll be servicing it sooner or later. Soviet cameras are robust in the externals only, while their mechanisms are prone to failures due to shitty materials and nonexistent quality control. It's a novelty camera that you can never rely on.

If you're new to film cameras, you pick pretty much any Japanese-made one (or Praktica if you just HAVE to have an commiebloc camera) and stick with it until you know what you're doing.

If you absolutely must have a Soviet camera, spring for the FED-2. People still service them and the glass has come down in price in recent years thanks to the abysmal Russian economy.

Don't pay more than 50 dollars for a pristine copy. Don't buy one made after 1960 (or anything Soviet for that matter) and don't buy the colored ones, I'm not talking about the 1955-1957 2b which was offered in red, blue, green or gray bakelite I mean the aftermarket painted ones. Don't buy any of the Leica knockoffs. Yuri Boguslav at Fedka sells them for a much higher premium but you will be guaranteed against DOA and he cherry-picks from the Motherland (thank you Igor) and sells his cream puffs. He has been servicing and working with these cameras longer than most of us on this board have been alive, so he is a trusty source but you will pay for it, most of his FED-2's are 100-150 dollars. He's got some cool oddities on his website.

That being said I have one, serviced by him, with two lenses. Is it a fun camera? Absolutely. Don't drop it. Will you get better results from a 50-dollar Nikon EM with a Series E 50mm? God damn right you will.

>>3003420
They're all the same. Spare yourself the pain and pick up a fixed lens rangefinder like a Canonet or Olympus 35, or something like a Canon P or 7.

>>3003471
>If you absolutely must have a Soviet camera, spring for the FED-2. People still service them and the glass has come down in price in recent years thanks to the abysmal Russian economy.
Russian glass has gone up steadily in value since mirrorless cameras came out.
Do you actually put effort into being fundamentaly wrong 100% of the time? How does this work?

>>3003499
>>3003466
>>3003436
i actually have the contax g2 lol...i was thinking of getting the old contax ii just for fun...i guess i'll save muh shekels and get a RF MF fuji maybe some day...

i bought the contax g2 with its 45mm f2 lens 1 1/2 years ago for 500€
now they went up like 900€ ?
i won't give away my fav camera though
just can't afford bw negatives :( but i have tons of expired fuji 200 films though...

oh and in my opinion...
contax g2 is fucking great...hands down !

>>3003508

I just had a look at lens prices and they're still half of what they were three or four years ago.

lrn2globaleconomics fuckface.

>hurrr it's shergar im going to post disinfo

>>3003613
>I just had a look at lens prices and they're still half of what they were three or four years ago.
No they're not you dumb motherfucker. They're appreciated on average between 30 and 80% with the most expensive options (like Jupiter 3s) soaring rapidly in value due to both diminishing supply of serviceable copies and lomography reviving interest in the lens by rereleasing it.

>hurr it's sugar he's actually mentally challenged

>>3003634
>>3003613
noone is going to adapt great ruski lens on their fuji or sony anyway.
people feel fine with old canikon, minolta or cz lenses.

File: jupiter-12_35mm_2.8_sony_a7.jpg (189KB, 800x450px) Image search: [Google]

189KB, 800x450px

>>3003644
It's not like you need to do some advanced modding like you were putting a Contax T2 lens on an M mount. You literally just have to buy an M39 adapter, just like you would with any other vintage lens.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D800
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.5.1 (Windows)
Photographer	Bastian Kratzke
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.4
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	872
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	85 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016:05:01 10:01:28
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
F-Number	f/11.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/11.0
Exposure Bias	0.7 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	Flash, Compulsory, Return Detected
Focal Length	85.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	Low Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>3003644
Lol you're fucking dumb. Soviet lenses are by far the most commonly adapted non-SLR lenses to mirrorless.

If you're using Canikon or Minolta SLR lenses on mirrorless you a) don't understand the optical disadvantages of them b) are sticking giant lenses on a tiny camera for shit ergonomics

>>3003650
what are the optical disadvantages of using i.e. a c/y cz 50mm f1,4 or lets say another ff lens on muh fujica xpro1 ?

>>3003650
I always thought the only advantage of using LTM lenses was that you didn't have that big 1" gap of nothing between the rear element and sensor.

The Leica M6. I don't need fancy things for my film stuff - a basic meter is enough. It feels nice, if it gets wonky it can still be serviced etc. so basically, mostly sentimental reasons. And that's okay for me in film stuff. A black M6 & 35mm Summicron while le ebin street meme, is also my basic bitch dream kit.

That said I like the G2 too. If I ever come across a good deal on one, I'll probably buy it. It's more sophisticated and objectively better than the Leica, but then if I start going down that path, I'll rather just buy the modern G2 aka Xpro 2 instead.

But in real life I just shoot a Bessa with a Voigtländer.

>>3003658
no the big advantage is not being stuck with massive retrofocal designs which are much worse off optically at equal apertures

thats not even mentioning that most SLR lenses have pentagon shaped bokeh because people stopped having visual literacy.

>>3003675
Modern retrofocal designs are superior:
Less vignetting and better corrected.

>>3003676
nice 8 inch lens dude

>>3003646
>>3003650

>putting shitty commiebloc glass
>on a fucking A7 II

Gearfags, everyone

>>3003650
you actually are the dumb one.

>>3003650
steven seagull detected

>>3003736
but that's an A7s you retard

File: super retard.jpg (104KB, 411x462px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 411x462px

>>3003753
It's just Sugar being Sugar.

>>3003420
Zenits are like, the worst SLR.

The Zorki (aka Zorki 1) is good. The rest are rather bad.

Fed 2 is good; find one in working condition and it'll still work for the next owner. Contrary what the tripfag said, post-1960 is fine for Fed 2. It's the slow-speed mechanism that dies first in these cameras, and ones with that are trickier to set, so avoid those where possible.

Try to get either a zebra lens (because of the slightly better coating), or one with the finger-tab (earliest Fed 2's came with these) because they're from a period before QC started dipping and will likely be very nice to use. Whatever you do, get a hood for that lens. A Chinese 50mm Leica hood for a 40,5mm screw will do just fine.

All of these Soviet cameras have poor viewfinders. No framelines, no parallax hints, approximate framing. But the glass is really quite good for what it is: a $8 Tessar from the USSR. The Jupiter-8, despite being a f/2 standard lens, is neither as full of character nor as good value as the 50-ish mm Industars.

File: Zenit 412 LS.jpg (197KB, 1600x1165px) Image search: [Google]

197KB, 1600x1165px

>>3003757
zenit is greatest and most prolific camera company in known world
sony and leica stole designs but no one knows original or thinks it is knockoff. all others need to go to fuck mothers

>>3003763
not sure if bait or just slavshit propaganda

>>3003763
That literally looks like a black tumour

File: bcf011d75f2f39acf22ebe0bfb9b21f7.jpg (30KB, 548x420px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 548x420px

>>3002967
buy both, try them out and keep the one you like more. you can generally sell these cameras for as much as you payed if not more if you keep them in good condition, so there is little risk to buying one to try it out.

>>3003757
Why do people critisize the Zenits so much? True they are not very sofisticated, but they never were intended to be, they were the cheapest SLR money could buy. People jerk over the K1000 but I don't really see how much different it is from a Zenit TTL. It does lack some shutter speed and it has a more limited ISO but otherwise its also a fully manual camera, with many cheap lenses and a sturdy body. I feel many people here need one of these, to truly learn how to work with limited gear, and stop gearfagging.

>>3004955
Compared to having no SLR at all, the Zenit is of course magical and wonderful. And the 1/30 - 1/500 mechanism is known to be reliable since it's ubiquitous over all Soviet cameras (besides the Contax/Kiev RFs).

But the finder coverage is absolute garbage. It's a tiny, dim peephole at any light where we'd shoot 1/30s f/2.8 = EV8 at 100ISO. This dimness makes it worthless for judging depth of field when stopped down, or using a slow lens.

Then consider that one will cost like 20-30€, and things like the OM-2 (which is totally a world apart) can be had, with kit 50mm f/1.8, for 50€.

The one thing that a Zenit is good for is shooting like great soviet man. But given its downsides, many go for a rangefinder or some such instead. If there's one good thing that Zenits do have, it's the somewhat adequate meter.

>>3003655
because you've got a 1.5x crop factor you won't be satisfied with the resolution wide open, but from f/2.8 it'll look great and CA will be sufficiently good for critical work. The CZ lenses really shine on an SLR like the 5DII. If you've got mirrorless it's much better to purchase and convert contax G lenses. The Contax G 45mm f/2.0 is one of the best lenses ever made, for example. The G 90mm f/2.8 is a *lot* of fun on an X-pro 1, literally huge amounts of fun but it does have a lot of CA until f/2.8.

File: display2.jpg (304KB, 1000x501px) Image search: [Google]

304KB, 1000x501px

>>3002967

>year 29 of the Heisei era
>still using film

What advantages do these have over say, an a7ii or other mirrorless?

a7ii can mount lenses from both systems (and autofocus them), has IBIS, and is also FF.

Am I missing something?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS5 Macintosh
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	1000
Image Height	501
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	200 dpi
Vertical Resolution	200 dpi
Image Created	2016:02:11 19:10:55
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1000
Image Height	501

>>3003763
>sony

Zenit was dead before Sony even got into cameras.

Do you mean Minolta? The best lens manufacturer hands down?

>>3005468
>Am I missing something?
35mm film doesn't have a lot of advantages over ff digital, but it is a cheaper way to learn film stocks and shooting. but MF and LF film cameras can (not always) vastly out resolve even the best digital MF for less money than an entry level DSLR.

also some people do find film processing and darkroom printing enjoyable. I personally like to have the tactility of the object and film lets me manipulate a physical object with each step of the process from capture to print.

The Contax is less fun to use.

>>3003368
g2 has ttl metering

>>3002967
Both great cameras

Contax pros:
Them legendary lenses
Better price
Apreture priority
Autofocus

Cons:
Not fully mechanical
Not as reliable
Can't shill

Leica pros:
Them lenses
More lenses to choose from (but you can only afford the voightlander lenses anyway so why bother)
Doesn't require battery's
That legendary Leica build quality and reliablility

Cons:
No automation
Manual focus
Too damn expensive

Honestly I would choose the Leica because the m6 has proven time and time again to just be a reliable workhorse in so many situations and I'm also a bitch for simpler cameras

Having owned both...

Contax - Can focus in pitch black and certain lenses are sharp. AF motor is loud as fuck and has limited number of lenses. Extremely limited, if not impossible to repair

Leica - Shutter is not as quiet as people say, but not as clacky as SLRs. Has more and better lenses, but expensive AF. Weather sealing is meh, and repairs can be expensive but can always be done

>>3003035
this

>>3006669
How fast is the g2 autofocus? Also are the lenses as god tier as people say they are

>>3008557
not that anon but the autofocus is actually fast as the xpro ...i mean...their not slow but also not superfast like you see in nikon dslr

the lenses are fuckin dream lol
but no real MF which you dont need actually
because the only thing you do is
AF and miss 1 shot out of 37
or
MF at f 22 and shoot crazy on the streets lol