# Photojournalist Camera?



## LittleMan (Aug 23, 2005)

I'm looking to get a professional 35mm camera that I will be able to use alot and hold onto for a long time.
I want to carry it around almost everywhere, so it can't be too super huge.
It also has to be very durable/somewhat rain/dust resistant.
I don't really care how fast it fires bursts/rewinds film etc...  
It just needs to be able to adjust to all natural light conditions quickly and it needs to have easy-access buttons for quick compensation.
and a quick autofocus.

it will be a lot of photographing people and in the future I hope to be able to go out in third world countries and get stories there.... and I've looked around and I'm thinking of either getting a Nikon F100 or a Canon EOS-3.

They are both in the same price range and I haven't really spent much money on glass yet.  All I have is a Canon 50mm f/1.4 which I can easily sell and get the equivelant Nikon lens. Without losing much money.

So, what should I do? Which direction do you think I should go?

btw, I haven't tried either of these cameras out *yet* so I guess just give me personal choice and specs.

Thanks!
-Chris


----------



## santino (Aug 23, 2005)

Eos 1N or 1N-RS (or even 1V but it's a bit expensive). all Eos 1 stuff is great and pretty reliable.


----------



## vonDrehle (Aug 23, 2005)

I can't really suggest a camera but if you want to save some money I would check out ebay. I know they had some good offers on EOS-3 but I haven't looked at any Nikons. With buying a camera however I would stick with the stores rather buying a used one, just in case. I bought a new Lowepro Photo Trekker AW II Backpack for $149.
Here are some store listings for the EOS-3 
Here are some store listings for the Nikon F100


----------



## LittleMan (Aug 23, 2005)

santino said:
			
		

> Eos 1N or 1N-RS (or even 1V but it's a bit expensive). all Eos 1 stuff is great and pretty reliable.


Do you think that by any chance ebay would be an ok place to buy a camera this expensive?  Or would I be better off saving longer and getting it new?


----------



## photogoddess (Aug 23, 2005)

If you want something on the cheap that is a great camera, look at the Canon A2. I bought one earlier in the year and absolutly L-O-V-E it! I don't think I've ever loved a 35mm film camera this much and I paid $295 used (in a camera shop) with the auto drive attachment. It was my favorite thing to shoot with in JT with the rest of the TPF crew. :thumbsup: The controls are really similar to the 10D so it's easy to learn (well, if you already have a Canon DSLR)  ) You should be able to get a screamin deal on one on ebay. 

If you're determined to go Nikon - get an N80. Also a rockin camera!


----------



## santino (Aug 23, 2005)

ebay could be ok, depends on the condition of the cam. such cams are pro cams, so if you get one from a "pro" photojournalist it could be in pretty used condition, but those cams are tanks, really, incredible stuff. the eos 3 isn't that good, it's autofocus isn't that fast and it hasn't got 100% field of view  (and that is important to me). if you would get a 1N (1V) try to get the power booster too, it's pretty handy to own a extra vertical grip. 
btw. Jim Nachtwey owns a 1N (from 1995) he still uses it, he's journalist for 20 years now and been to all wars that happened in those 20 years. He has the 1N (two to be honest) for 10 years now and trust me, he works under really bad conditions and the cam still works.


----------



## LittleMan (Aug 23, 2005)

photogoddess said:
			
		

> If you want something on the cheap that is a great camera, look at the Canon A2. I bought one earlier in the year and absolutly L-O-V-E it! I don't think I've ever loved a 35mm film camera this much and I paid $295 used (in a camera shop) with the auto drive attachment. It was my favorite thing to shoot with in JT with the rest of the TPF crew. :thumbsup: The controls are really similar to the 10D so it's easy to learn (well, if you already have a Canon DSLR)  ) You should be able to get a screamin deal on one on ebay.
> 
> If you're determined to go Nikon - get an N80. Also a rockin camera!


I'm not too woried about the money... At the moment I am just trying to figure out what I need for my future.
And I'm also not biased to either Nikon or Canon... like I said.... I can go either way.
This weekend I will be going to the camera store to try out the different high-end cameras... but until then..... give me direction. 

ummm... what will I gain (realisticly) by going for the EOS 1v rather then the EOS-3.  Is it necessary for photojournalism?  I was under the impression that it doesn't really matter for photojournalism unless you're doing sports.

of course I could very easily be wrong.... hahaha


----------



## LittleMan (Aug 23, 2005)

> the eos 3 isn't that good, it's autofocus isn't that fast and it hasn't got 100% field of view (and that is important to me).


ahhh, thank you.


----------



## santino (Aug 23, 2005)

on the other hand the Eos 3 has 45 autofocus spots and the 1N just 5 but that doesn't really matter unless you do sports photography (btw, the 1V has 45 too).
however, you will love a Eos 1, I'm sure, it's IMO the best AF 35mm camera.


----------



## LittleMan (Aug 23, 2005)

santino said:
			
		

> on the other hand the Eos 3 has 45 autofocus spots and the 1N just 5 but that doesn't really matter unless you do sports photography (btw, the 1V has 45 too).
> however, you will love a Eos 1, I'm sure, it's IMO the best AF 35mm camera.


So, is the EOS-1v an upgrade to the EOS-1n?  I'm not too familiar to the 1n's specs.


----------



## santino (Aug 23, 2005)

yeah, there was the Eos 1, then the 1N and now the 1V. (there were different types of N's and V's with pellicle mirrors, power boosters and so on). the 1V is pretty much the same as the 1N but it has 45 AF spots instead of 5 and you can connect it to your computer to download the data of your taken pics (f stop and so on).


----------



## darin3200 (Aug 23, 2005)

santino said:
			
		

> Jim Nachtwey owns a 1N (from 1995) he still uses it, he's journalist for 20 years now and been to all wars that happened in those 20 years. He has the 1N (two to be honest) for 10 years now and trust me, he works under really bad conditions and the cam still works.


One of the things that got me to buy a 1 series was seeing those poor cameras getting beat up and working perfectly in all the crazy places Nachtwey went in "War Photographer"

I just bought a Eos-1 with power booster and it works great. Its rugged and heavy, but I really like how it feels in my hands, its a big camera. The only bad thing about an Eos-1 is only 1 autofocus point, but its fast.


----------



## LittleMan (Aug 23, 2005)

Wel thank you Santino, and everyone one else!
I think I will go with the 1v
I understand I'll have to save a while... but it looks like it will last me a looong time.   and that's what I'm looking for mostly.

Thanks again!
-Chris


----------



## Dave_D (Aug 23, 2005)

Okay, enough Canon talk already!..... I actually do have a few Canons, but I can't speak to anything of the newer models. I switched to the Nikon system when Canon came out with there EOS system. All of my Canon lenses became obsolete as there was no compatibility retained. Nikon, on the other hand, does retain backwards compatibility with there F mount lenses. 

As far as something light weight in a "Professional SLR", they are all heavy by comparison to amateur cameras. In the Nikon family of cameras, the F designation indicates the professional line of cameras (F3, F4, F4s, F5, F100, and F6 to cover the last 30 years). They all have 100% view through the view finder with the exception of the F100 coming in at a close 96%. The F100 would make for a nice professional class pocket camera.


----------



## KevinR (Aug 24, 2005)

Lets talk Nikon now. Either the F100 or F6 would be recommended if thats the way you want to go. I have a N90, and can hold onto it for a long time without a problem.

But for photojournalism...... I might go into a different direction. Maybe a Leica M7. Amazingly sharp lenses and very quiet shutter. Or possible a TLR. Being able to hold at your waist gives you nice advantage if you are trying to be discreet. And again, a nice quiet shutter.


----------



## LittleMan (Aug 24, 2005)

KevinR said:
			
		

> But for photojournalism...... I might go into a different direction. Maybe a Leica M7. Amazingly sharp lenses and very quiet shutter. Or possible a TLR. Being able to hold at your waist gives you nice advantage if you are trying to be discreet. And again, a nice quiet shutter.


Much, much too expensive... unfortuniatly...
The max I could possibly spend is on a used Canon EOS 1V and I think that is the best I can get with the money I have.


----------



## KevinR (Aug 24, 2005)

I am a biased Nikon user, so I would still go for F100 for the build of the body.


----------



## LittleMan (Aug 24, 2005)

KevinR said:
			
		

> I am a biased Nikon user, so I would still go for F100 for the build of the body.


Well, I am going to go and try both the Nikon and the Canons side by side... I will make my decission there.
I just had this thread to make sure I was heading in the right direction with my thoughts. 

Thanks!
-Chris


----------



## danalec99 (Aug 24, 2005)

LittleMan said:
			
		

> Well, I am going to go and try both the Nikon and the Canons side by side...


Canon 1V and Nikon F6. 
Both are fine tools!


----------



## LittleMan (Aug 24, 2005)

danalec99 said:
			
		

> Canon 1V and Nikon F6.
> Both are fine tools!


I'm just curious... since I haven't held either of them yet... Is the Nikon more bulky?  It looks that way in the photos.


----------



## KevinR (Aug 24, 2005)

I think they look bulkier than they are. The balance is really nice and the materials that they put on the right hand grip is good too. I have to admit, I have fairly large hands though.


----------



## montresor (Aug 24, 2005)

Never mind that I just jammed up the magazine back, I still think the Zeiss Ikon Super BC I just got is potentially the best manual camera I've ever played with -- built to last. Just make sure you get the _standard back_!!!

It's sturdy, fast to operate, and quiet, the latter being especially important in street/journo photography.


----------



## thebeginning (Aug 25, 2005)

both the 1v and the f6 are terrific cameras, the f6 being the better of the two.  I say an f100 would do just great,  or an f4 or f5 (even an f3 if you dont mind manual focus). 

the 1v you can get for ALOT cheaper though, a quick search on ebay, for instance shows that you can easily get it for under $1000.  The f6 is going to start at $1800 or so on ebay, so you might want to go f100 (~600).  these are all quite good cameras, so i'm sure you'll be happy with any of them.


----------



## danalec99 (Aug 25, 2005)

Chris, if bulk is not your friend, you might want to take the rangefinder route!


----------



## LittleMan (Aug 25, 2005)

danalec99 said:
			
		

> Chris, if bulk is not your friend, you might want to take the rangefinder route!


bulk isn't a problem, and I would like to have a reliable/fast autofocus...
so I would rather go towards a more technicly advanced camera. 

I think I am going to go with the EOS 1V


----------



## santino (Aug 26, 2005)

good choice, best choice


----------



## thebeginning (Aug 26, 2005)

does the 1v also have only one autofocus point?


----------



## LittleMan (Aug 26, 2005)

thebeginning said:
			
		

> does the 1v also have only one autofocus point?


no, it has 45.  lots lots lots...


----------



## thebeginning (Aug 26, 2005)

weird, i dont know why i thought it had 1.  i wonder what the focusing screen looks like with 45 little dots on it :shock:


----------



## LittleMan (Aug 26, 2005)

thebeginning said:
			
		

> weird, i dont know why i thought it had 1. i wonder what the focusing screen looks like with 45 little dots on it :shock:


Like this:


----------



## thebeginning (Aug 26, 2005)

sweeeeeeet, i want one.


----------



## LittleMan (Aug 26, 2005)

thebeginning said:
			
		

> sweeeeeeet, i want one.


Don't we all... 

Just wish I had about $500 more dollars to spend....


----------



## thebeginning (Aug 26, 2005)

heck, i wish i had $5,000 more to spend!


----------



## Ghoste (Aug 26, 2005)

Dave_D said:
			
		

> Okay, enough Canon talk already!..... I actually do have a few Canons, but I can't speak to anything of the newer models. I switched to the Nikon system when Canon came out with there EOS system. All of my Canon lenses became obsolete as there was no compatibility retained. Nikon, on the other hand, does retain backwards compatibility with there F mount lenses.




Canon changed because they wanted a better quality AF motor for the lenses, meaning they needed to open the lense mount larger. What you speak of Nikon not changing their mounts makes it better is just them saying we don't feel like making a better AF so we will keep the old lenses and just keep putting the motor in the lenses and not the body making it less quality  

Somone is going to flame me lol.


----------



## LittleMan (Aug 26, 2005)

hmmm... interesting... none of the Nikon users have come screaming yet... 
EDIT: Maybe they know it's true... :meh:

(That will get em)


----------



## Ghoste (Aug 26, 2005)

Give them time.. they are lazy  Man am I asking for it today or what!


----------



## LittleMan (Aug 26, 2005)

Ghoste said:
			
		

> Give them time.. they are lazy


well.... they _are _Nikon users... :mrgreen:


----------



## Ghoste (Aug 26, 2005)

Haha, peace with Texas, we are going to war with Nikon, me and Chris united!


----------



## LittleMan (Aug 26, 2005)

Ghoste said:
			
		

> Haha, peace with Texas, we are going to war with Nikon, me and Chris united!


:mrgreen:


----------



## KevinR (Aug 26, 2005)

Sounds like jealousy to me. Hope you enjoy all that plastic.


----------



## Ghoste (Aug 26, 2005)

I don't shoot the plastics lol. I shoot cameras that work.. Canon's


----------



## paul rond (Aug 26, 2005)

You should be looking into a rangefinder camera instead. They are smaller, lighter, quieter and much faster off the hip. Flash will sync at all speeds if you get a leaf shutter camera.


----------



## darin3200 (Aug 26, 2005)

Rangefinder = Leica. Leica = $$$. I don't understand how good an M6 or M7 can be to cost more than a 1v.

But of course I'll end up buying one eventually


----------



## LittleMan (Aug 27, 2005)

darin3200 said:
			
		

> Rangefinder = Leica. Leica = $$$. I don't understand how good an M6 or M7 can be to cost more than a 1v.
> 
> But of course I'll end up buying one eventually


That's how I feel about it...
They just cost sooo much... I don't think that for the money it could be better then the 1v.
But in time I think I will get my hands on one.


----------



## wharrison (Aug 27, 2005)

Littleman:

One has to keep in mind that cameras, lenses, and nearly everything else photographic are nothing more than tools in the hands of an artist.

With that said, there are, of course, some far better tools than others for certain photographic endeavors. For the type of photojournalism that you intend to do, you will need a camera/lens combination that will enable you to focus quickly and accurately; to compose and keep your subject in view at all times, i.e. no mirror black out; to allow you to shoot with the lens at or near wide open aperatures; and to do this under all types of available light conditions.

The only camera (tool) that easily meets and suprasses these requirements is the Leica rangefinder. I've been using one (a Leica M-4) for nearly forty years. Of course, if you're going to take photographs with a Leica, you should also keep in mind the necessity of either projecting or enlarging what you photograph with the same quality, i.e. look for a Leitz Valoy II or the Focomat Ic enlarger and/or the Pradovit Color 150 or 250 projectors. These older enlargers/projectors are usually available and may not cost you an arm and a leg to purchase them.

Otherwise, you'll be producing excellent quality negatives or slides through the camera only to (substantially) degrade the image when projecting or enlarging them.

Either an M-3; M-2; or an M-4, should suit your purposes very nicely. The M-3 has nearly a life sized viewfinder and has frames for the 50mm, 90mm, and 135mm lenses. If you wish to use a 35mm lens, you can either use the whole viewfinder as your frame of reference or you can make use of a 35mm Summicron with "eyes".

The M-2 has viewfinder frames for the 35mm, 50mm, and 90mm lenses and you can obtain the 135mm Elmarit F/2.8 with "eyes" for more accurate focusing needs.

The M-4 models have viewfinder frames for the 35mm, 50mm, 90mm and 135mm lenses.

However, before you decide to make a real commitment and spend your hard earned money, I would also recommend that you do some extensive "homework". It may save you some grief and some money. 

For example, I have the 35mm, 50mm, & 90mm Summicrons F/2.0 lenses and I sometimes wish that I had purchased the 90mm Elmarit F/2.8 instead, only because it is a little lighter to carry around, but, more importantly, the lens head of the 90mm Elmarit will allow you to focus from infinity to nearly 1:1 with the use of the Visoflex and Bellows. Of course, I can use the 90mm Summicron lens head on this combination, but the focusing range is limited. With the "right" focusing mount on the Visoflex, I can focus from inifinity, but not down to 1:1 as easily. When I purchased the 90mm Summicron, I was more into landscape and people photography and I find myself a little more interested in nature and macro photography.

Since even good used Leica equipment can be expensive, it is very wise to do some homework and then make a judicious choice.

As for the "homework" part, here are a number of interesting links.

The first two links are to Alfred Eisenstaedt, who was a Leica user and one of the original photographers for Life magazine. His book, "The Eye of Eisenstaedt" is still an excellent read and valuable for its autobiography, its technical information - although a little outdated as to camera models and film - and, especially, to seeing better photography. This book may be available at your local public library, through their inter-library loan system or through such places as abe.com or alibris.com both excellent sources of used and new books.

Read the last paragraph in the first link and take note of his statement that it is more important to click with people than to click the shutter in the second link.

http://artscenecal.com/ArticlesFile/Archive/Articles1997/Articles0397/AEisenstaedt.html

http://www.life.com/Life/eisie/eisie.html

You also might enjoy taking a look at the work of Ernst Hass a more contempoary Leica user.  Here are two links as well.

http://www.ernsthaas.com/

http://www.iipa.org/permanentcollection/haas/

Of course, there is a whole range of Leica photos to view at this link as well.

http://www.leica-gallery.net/


With all of this said, you must also remember that it is the photographer that takes the photograph, not the camera. Again, the camera is only a "tool" in the hands of an artistic and intelligent photographer. And, of course, there is also the collary statement that an excellent "tool" (camera) can produce really lousy results in the hands of a non artistic person and/or not too bright photographer or one who isn't paying attention.

For that reason, I will provide you with a link to a person, whom I consider to be an superb photographer and who uses Canon equipment to create his images. Since I grew up and lived for many, many years on the Tallgrass Prairie of Illinois and love photographing people, especially those with character, I will admit my bias for the type of photography exhibited by Mike Marcotte. 

Beyond my own "bias", his photography will show you what can be done with Canon cameras and lenses. So start working on getting the best out of your camera and lenses before moving up to a Leica.

Here's the link to Mike's work.

http://www.photo.net/photodb/member-photos?include=all&user_id=57948

As usual, I hope that this discussion and the links will prove to be more than helpful and useful in your photographic endeavors.

Best regards,

Bill


----------



## wharrison (Aug 27, 2005)

Littleman:

You made the following statement: 

"I'm looking to get a professional 35mm camera that I will be able to use alot and hold onto for a long time."

I forgot to mention another reason for suggesting a Leica rangefinder. And that reason is that they rarely make anything that becomes outdated - they try to think into the future - for want of a better term.

For example, the old 135mm Hektor F/4.5 was first designed for their screw mount Leicas. With a screw to M-mount adapter that old lens will not only fit on any older or current "M" rangefinder and bring in the correct viewfinder frame, it will do so in milliseconds and without any reservation.

I can't think of any other photographic manufacturer whose equipment can be still useful over a very long period of time.

Just in case you wanted to know. . . . ;>)

Bill


----------



## Karalee (Aug 27, 2005)

Rangefinders dont have to cost leica money either. I picked one up for 20 bucks - so you figure thats a 40 yr old camera, if you bought a new or near new one, how long do you think it would last


----------



## thebeginning (Aug 27, 2005)

^good point.  You can pick up some older leica rangefinders for 300 or so on ebay.  I'm thinking about it in the future.


----------



## usayit (Aug 27, 2005)

man.. someone really sounds like a Leica Sales rep... ;-)

I absolutely love Leica's and I will most likely add one to my collection of cameras some day.  Rangefinders in general are still great on the "street".  A canonette and yashica serve me quite well.  However, I still wouldn't recommend one in the original poster.  The number reason... cost.  Leica's are very expensive and so are the lenses.  Its a very well known name with big $$$ attached to that name.  It brings attention as well as worry of theft and loss.  This is especially true to a new photojournalist on the run.  Leica's are very nice but simply put... it doesn't fit ~all~ the poster's criteria as it seems there is a certain comfort with 35mm SLRs.  

Also.. I do know there are older less expensive ( relatively ) used leica's out there..  how are they with rain and mosture resistance? 

I was extremely fortunate to find a photographer who sold me their 1v for a good price ( he was in the process of financing a pro-digislr ).   I highly recommend the camera.  Its extremely quick in almost all situations.  My major complaint towards it is the weight.  Its not a light camera and adding a battery grip just makes it worse.  I would not recommend the grip just carrying a spare battery as a fully charge battery seems to last a while.   I chose the used 1v over a new eos 3 for a number of reasons but I still would recommend you handling both.  The eos3 is significantly lighter which is a good enough reason as any.  

If I'm looking for a compact 35mm slr for an unobtrusive quick shooter on the street, the extremely compact K-mount pentaxes from the 70s and 80s with the 40mm "pancake" lens fits my needs.


----------



## santino (Aug 29, 2005)

> I can't think of any other photographic manufacturer whose equipment can be still useful over a very long period of time.



Hasselblad's V System
M42 mounted stuff (Voigtländer still produces a M42 SLR called Bessaflex)
Most new Bessa cameras use the m39 mount (but it's "the" Leica mount )

Leicas are great (rangefinders) but IMO they can't provide you enough speed for real fast shooting (sure, you can get the M winder but the 1V is 10fps and super fast AF). Leica rangefinders are for camera lovers, real collectables of superior quality and timeless design.


----------

