[ChrisPlatt]

I used mine in manual for 15 years or so. I found the Av mode wasn't accurate enough when shooting slides (mainly Kodachrome 64).
It would expose for the sky leaving the buildings (or whatever) about a stop or so under-exposed which with slides is not good.
Mind you, it isn't that the ME Super was bad in that respect, most cameras I have used are similar.

Some Pentax models include AE lock, a powerful feature when used with the technique known as substitute metering.
In AE simply point camera at a scene that indicates your preferred exposure; activate AE lock; recompose and shoot.
In the example you give this would mean simply pointing it down slightly to include less sky.

Since you never need remove your eye from the viewfinder, with practice this is much faster
(and much easier) than switching to manual or fiddling with the exposure compensation dial.

Chris

---

Last edited by ChrisPlatt; 12-04-2011 at 07:14 AM.

[stevebrot]

I know this is an old thread, but the SLR I like (after first shooting in 1980 with a Yashica GSN rangefinder) is the Ricoh XR-7. Yes, it needs a battery to function, but it is a great camera. It has an electronically-controlled shutter that ranges from 16 secs to 1/1000. More info can be found in this thread:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-film-slr-discussion/131711-cant-find-much-info-camera-ricoh-xr7.html

The XR7 has its fans on this site. Another good one is the XR-2s. I own and shoot with both. Hinman shoots with and is very fond of his XR-P.


Steve

[patrick9]

MZ-6/L or 7 are a great bet but you need luck to get a good one

+1 for the MZ-7. I have a ZX-7 I Love the feel and ease of use. It has become the camera in my hand most often.

[Digitalis]

KX,K2,MX and LX - are the pentax bodies I would consider, a 645,645NII or Pentax 67,67II are also excellent.

Bronica 645,6X6 and 67 cameras aren't all that expensive the 80mm f/2.8 that comes with the Bronica 6X6 outperforms the equivalent Zeiss lens at f/2.8.

Hasselblad - some of the early 6X6 film SLR cameras can be bought on the cheap,and they are robustly built.

Just about any Nikon F body is worth looking at, with the exception of the F4 which is to be frank: a brick. The F100 and F80 are rather good though I have never used either of them, If I had to pick a favourite film body from Nikon I would pick the F6.

Contax - superb cameras, they are typically very expensive on the second hand market but they are totally worth it. the Contax Aria has a superb viewfinder, and the RTS is simply the Ideal SLR body IMO

But why settle for an SLR? when there is plenty of interesting cameras out there:

Konica Hexar RF, Konica Hexar AF - both cameras are considered cult classic cameras. The Hexar RF is a superb camera, the Hexar AF is also extremely well constructed and designed. The Hexar AF has the quietest motorised film advance I have ever (not) heard in my life.

Zeiss Ikon RF - superb camera, intended to be a competitor to the Leica M7 - and both get soundly beaten by the Konika Hexar RF in my not-so-humble opinion.

Leica, it depends on what you are willing to spend pretty much anything from a Leica M3 to a M7 will be more than adequate the Leica M4-2 is quite popular and relatively inexpensive, same goes for the M5.

[cbope]

ZX-5n might be a bit plastic-y, but it's a fairly solid body. I believe it ticks all your requirements, but I don't recall if it has a pentamirror or prism. Have to check mine. It's often overlooked compared to the MZ and MX models.

I still have a working ME Super, although several consecutive metering led's in the viewfinder no longer light up. I've been thinking about getting it fixed, if parts are still available and it's not too expensive...

[whojammyflip]

MZ-M is nice, I find the viewfinder brighter and easier to focus than the ME Super, its also a bit easier to hold for me. I think it also does exposure lock and autowinding/rapid shooting. Why you'd want that with film though...