Minolta X700, Canon AE-1, Nikon FM2, Olympus OM-1 Minolta X700, the fighter in the film starter. Born in 1982, it is estimated to be bigger than all the comrades who play film now. Cost-effective, very suitable for salaries and students to use, but it is never a low-grade machine.
What are the recommended film cameras for starters?
The Canon EOSRebel 2000 is a 35mm film and is one of the best film cameras for beginners. It has an autofocus feature that allows for full manual control. It is also useful for those who have basic knowledge of film cameras but want to further their knowledge.
The Canon is arguably the best 35mm film camera for beginners because it also has a built-in 35-area exposure system. This will result in fewer lens corrections for you. It also offers 11 shooting modes, 7-stage autofocus and a high-speed sync mode for faster uploads.
Canon AE-135mm Film Camera Best 35mm Film Camera. This is a single lens reflex camera with automatic exposure monitoring and a focal plane shutter for precise shooting. All lenses are compatible with any lens in Canon's FD lineup and also feature coupling to that particular device, making it a great companion camera for stills.
It comes with a Canon BreechLock mount and is compatible with Canon FL and R lenses. The camera uses a pentaprism fixed viewer for over 90% accuracy and image capture reflections, which is high for any camera. It has a stop-action pointer and an aperture scale for viewing information.
Pentax K1000 Manual Focus Film Camera
The Pentax is one of the best film cameras for beginners. It uses 35mm film to produce high resolution photos in the K1000SLR feature. It comes with simple controls for shutter speed, aperture and focus. Pentax is a simple camera.
The Old Master speaks of Nikon Sharp, Canon Soft and Pentax Oil, for portraits, which one do you favor?
I don't think I can reach the level of Old Master, but I have quite a lot of feelings about portrait photography.
Nikon's sharpness, Canon's softness, and Pentax's oil have become a style of the camera brands themselves. That's naturally a matter of carrots and greens. Nikon and Canon, in particular, have been in a battle since the beginning over which brand of camera is better for portraits.
My current DSLR is a Canon, but the first great DSLRs I saw were Nikon. At that time, my college classmate bought a Nikon DSLR, I don't remember the specific model, and the first thing I felt was that the portraits were so clear, so clear that the hairs appeared after zooming in. At that time, we also joked that even the most beautiful people can be photographed with imperfections.
In fact, at that time, DSLR is still considered a new digital product, people's pursuit of it, mainly high pixel, so the sharpness of Nikon, on its own is a plus.
But, to the time of their own SLR, because it is a colleague out of the second-hand SLR, the price is beautiful, there is no choice on the Canon 60D, began to appreciate Canon's soft interpretation of portraits. In fact, Canon's marketing and promotion, dominated by portraits, and out of the style of the film, but also more suitable for studio portraits of the tone, more likely to be welcomed by the audience. And the feeling of Nikon portrait film, closer to realism.
The Pentax oil, as I understand it, is a colorful interpretation, just as I like the color of Fuji. The "oily" feeling of the Pentax film should be described as a flavor, a texture. This kind of texture is generally not like Japanese, Mori system, light girls like, also belongs to a niche taste. I think Binder to shoot Tibetan portraits, the feeling of the film should be more in line with the flavor, thick, vicissitudes.
So, more like which brand DSLR shooting portraits, or depends on the photographer's own portraits favor which style. If your style is versatile, innovative and experimental, you may also want to try more DSLRs of various brands.
Come on, the questioner edited the question before getting the allusions right, duh a inexplicable sentence looks really embarrassing
The correct legend is: "Canon winks, Nikon sharpens, Pentax gets people drunk."
The word "Pentax" is the phonetic translation of "Pentax", which is what older photographers called "Pentax".
This allusion to the film era summarizes the characteristics of the lenses of Canon, Nikon and Pentax.
Time has changed, and today pentax is half dead, with less than 2% of the market and a large number of its lenses being Tenglong OEM stuff. It doesn't help to use this outdated "quote" to put a face on pentax anymore.
And there are still people blowing "Olympus" is the "Leica of the East", the ghost believe ah
Old master, after all, old, after all, with a little bit of film era of the old eyes.
It is undeniable that there are some subtle differences between lenses of the same level, but of different brands. Different lens materials, different coating processes will determine the color differences.
The old optical design theory, the lens contrast is large. Must be poor in detail (such as the old Nikon lenses tend to be high contrast), the lens contrast is low, must be excellent in detail (such as the Canon FD lenses tend to be high detail); the lens is designed to balance between contrast and detail.
However, after the 1990s, the use of simulation in optical design was a very popular thing. So, lens convergence is a big situation in this world. Including the coatings that we often say have a decisive effect on color, they are all simulated in advance in the design software, and you can have whatever coatings you want. Including temperature changes, spectral range, all of these can be simulated. The lens has not yet been made, in addition to knowing the imaging performance of the lens, the software even helps you calculate the approximate weight of the lens in the future, and even cost analysis.
Now, Canon and Pentax don't necessarily have the high contrast of Nikon, and Nikon doesn't necessarily have the detail of Canon.
Because everyone uses pretty much the same raw solutions. So there's less and less left to determine the difference in a lens' ability to portray.
Tell me about my own feelings. I've had Nikon, Canon, Pentax, and Sony cameras, and I started out in college with a Nikon D90, plus a kit lens, and shot with the D90 wherever I went. Later found that the Nikon machine real sharp awesome, and then used the 70D, 6D, and gradually like the Canon's warm kind of tone. Then this year, accidentally out of the 6D, bought the Sony A7R2, it is true that the Sony production, shooting photos, video is actually compared to the Nikon camera, the sharpness is more powerful. But then consider shooting portraits more, and then got most of the photographers dream 5D4.
Used so the camera, each brand has its own characteristics, in fact, now the retouching technology is so mature, their own retouching ability to be more powerful, it will not affect how much of the shooting. The camera is just a way to give you a sense of what's going on before the final product comes out.
But then again, I personally like the softness of Canon and the colorfulness of Sony. It's just a variety of fun.
Canon just does marketing well, and is technically inferior to Nikon. Canon shot out of the clarity is not enough, like a layer of masking, hazy feeling, so it seems soft. Nikon shoots out very high definition, so it looks sharp. Canon spends money on advertising and marketing, Nikon spends money on specializing in technology.
Using all three brands, Pentax is the favorite,
I used Hasselblad early on, Mamiya medium format, and only in the digital age did I start using 135 format. Naturally Nikon at first, over 10 years, then Canon for 7 years when I liked to get straight out of the box, then switched to Sony micro for lightness and ease of focus
Here's the Canon
Florence, Italy
Milan, Italy
4/3 is also a good choice. Olympus is also a favorite of mine. the Em10 is always with me. Look at how it looks straight out of the camera.
2019 Taking pictures of Nha Trang, Vietnam
The only thing that most often accompanies me is the Olympus
2020 added another Sony microslice for work. Sony is another style. The most prominent Sony has a focus system that rarely misses. Basically you can shoot with confidence.
Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge
Wish you all friends to shoot satisfactory works
The title itself is incorrect, the original statement is:Nikon sharp, Canon charming, Pentax intoxicated. The so-called Pentax is now Pentax, mainly said that the Nikon is very sharp, high contrast, so many people say that suitable for landscapes; Canon shoot portraits, especially the yellow people is really very pleasing to the eye. As for Pentax, the most German flavor in the Japanese system, especially on the green performance. Said the development of equipment now, Pentax is indeed behind, but can not deny the historical contribution of Pentax in the optical and deep merit. Like Minolta has long been even brand did not retain, but also left a lot of classics. In the past year or two, Pentax's new 720 lens and Star Wizard are no worse than any of Nikon Canon's in the same focal length, and Pentax's biggest gap is in focusing. Handling is very good, image quality is good, the new Star Wizard is the first motorized aperture star head. Pentax's backwardness is because of the original mount can not give up, unlike the Canon as bold as the original said to put down, always burdened, hope that this time the Pentax can stand up, back to the first line!
Canon does not think of progress, ready to change the door
Old Master I dare not be, on my experience to say it! Shooting portraits or preferred Canon, the picture color, imaging quality are not to say. Control the wedding dress can be straight out, this is 5D3 + Sigma 851.4 shot
Portrait with Nikon or Canon
Question 1: Canon DSLRs are good for portraits or landscapes? FYI on Nikon. Canon and Nikon are very good, just focus on different, Canon's fast and in the field of telephoto than Nikon has a clear advantage, which depends on the Canon body caliber than the Nikon large, research and development of large aperture lens potential is greater, more convenient, more affordable cost, Canon's ultra-wow focal length of 1200mm, while the Nikon research and development of the 600mm, and the effect is not as good as the Canon 600mm, and the wide-angle aspect of the Nikon has a slight advantage in imaging sharpness than Canon strong point, in terms of color tone, Canon accurate natural warm, Nikon cold and rich, so shoot portraits with Canon, shoot landscapes with Nikon, Canon is the sharpness of the level, Nikon is the level of the sharpness, or have their own focus. Because of Canon's speed so sports journalists generally use Canon, that is, we see the white cannon on the side of the stadium, but Canon's low-end products can be said to be cheaper, but not as thick as Nikon, especially the lens, Canon's dog head can be a dog to the can no longer dog, relatively, Nikon to do a little more generous, that is, Nikon's dog head can still make do with, but the body is not strong to go, you can say so, the Nikon is good, the Nikon is good. Low-end Nikon good, high-end Canon good, it depends on how you choose, if you play film, I will not hesitate to tell you: use Nikon! If you ask the digital SLR I will say: not comparable, entry-level or relatively cost-effective with Nikon, after all, SLR play is the lens ah, I am using Canon to talk about objective it?
Say a budget, I help you recommend, I recommend not look at the parameters provided online, is to rely on the use of experience, did not touch the not Hu spray!
Question 2: Shooting landscape shooting people SLR Nikon or Canon in Nikon's territory to ask the answer is of course all Nikon hungry
However, shooting portraits, Canon's high end is very good ~
85mmf1.2L is a good thing that Nikon does not have
Recommended if the Nikon d9018-105 set + 50mmf/1.8D
Or, Canon 40D17-85 set + 50mmf/1.8II
Question 3: Is it better to shoot portraits Canon or Nikon Canon and Nikon are not better than each other. Canon is softer, Nikon is sharper, except that Nikon's is rougher on the skin if it comes straight out of the camera. But after post, it's fine. And the sharper photos have more feeling.
Full frame or half frame is better. Obviously, full frame is better. What's good about it is that many people will tell you that the image quality is better, but many people understand that the better image quality is determined by the hardware of the camera. In fact, the advantage of full-frame is the same framing, for example, I take a half-body photo, in the large aperture conditions, the full-frame image quality to be better, because, for example, 50mm, 1.8 aperture lens, half-frame Canon is 80mm, f1.8, Nikon's is 75mm, 1.8, from the perspective of the depth of field, full-frame will be better, and all of these can be obtained through the calculation. That is to say, full-frame is better than half-frame to utilize the performance of the lens, especially in large aperture conditions more obvious. So the owner has the money and suggests going full frame.
As for the camera, the full-frame one is fine. Half-frame Canon recommended 60d, Nikon recommended d7000 or d7100. canon's 60d half-frame is the most cost-effective, and 550d, 600d, 650d, 700d compared to the 60d viewfinder is a five diamond mirror, the other four is a five-side mirror. 60d official standard battery 1800 mAh, the other seems to be 1200. 60d there is also a display on top of the iso. shutter window, the other does not have a window, The 60d also has a window that displays iso, shutter, and so on, while the others do not. Of course, 650d, 700d processor is 5 generation, other 4 generation. But the biggest role of the processor is speed, which is reflected in continuous shooting and video. But you don't take it to the stadium to shoot, it's unwise to shoot video with a DSLR, so the processor is not very meaningful. And the 70d is an upgrade of the 60d, that is, 18 megapixels upgraded to 22 megapixels, and the processor 4 generations upgraded to 5 generations, so it makes little sense, but the price is much more expensive. And Nikon's, d90 and canon 60d is the same configuration, but 12 megapixels always feel low, so recommend its upgraded model d7000 or d7100. you have to be detailed, canon 60d and nikon d90 are two of the most sold DSLR, there is its reason, and it is the success of these two machines, kodak, fuji, samsung, olympus out of the river and lake. And on lenses, it is recommended that that one is cheaper to buy, because you will find out later that the 18-55,55-250,17-85,18-135,18-105,18-200 lenses, whether Nikon or Canon, are just some dog heads that don't take the shots you want, and are far inferior to the 600-fast 50mmf1.8 fixed focal length lenses. By one lens, I mean one with a large zoom range, not one with good image quality.
So photography, technology first, the lens second, the camera third (such as card, micro-single, SLR and full-frame SLR, its own structure determines the same framing in large aperture conditions, full-frame and half-frame micro-single card machine, embodied in the sharpness and the degree of background need, and these also make the photo image cleaner. (But these are the result of the role of the lens, so the role of the lens than the camera)
Question 4: Shooting people and night scenes is a good Nikon DSLR or a good Canon DSLR? You get a D3. absolutely awesome. Either the D300 or the Fuji S5. the Canon 5D is too old.
The D80 and 450D are all on the same side. Don't think Canon's noise suppression is good. After using it, you'll realize that Canon's noise reduction is at the expense of detail. Personally, I feel it's better to do noise reduction in software myself and Canon's JPEGs, even at ISO100. All of them have already done noise reduction. So it looks as if there is less noise. In fact, it is not. Nikon is characterized by less in-camera processing. So Nikon's film straight out doesn't look as clean as Canon's film. In fact, this is done to preserve details. Even if you use the D80 to shoot. As long as you use NEF, you can use NX to do it later. It's absolutely beautiful.
Currently, except for the Nikon D3. any machine with an ISO higher than 1600. basically wasted.
Question 5: Is a Canon camera good for portraits? Or Nikon? Both are big brands and have no problem taking portraits.
But Canon has the EF85mmF1.2L super large aperture portrait head. Nikon's 85mm lens only has a maximum aperture of F1.4. other than that Canon shoots people's skin **** through red, which is better. But nowadays digital photo color randomly adjusted don't care.
All in all both are good, the number of people who use Canon for portraits is a bit higher.
Question 6: Is Canon really better than Nikon for portraits? Why actually both are quite suitable, what matters is what lens you use and who you shoot. Even if there is a difference for people who are not great for the difference is not big
Question 7: shooting people with Canon or Nikon good in the past, there are Canon portrait, Nikon landscape said, but now the new listing of the SLR in the color is basically not a big difference, the Nikon shoot portraits is also very good.
Question 8: Nikon and Canon that good. Which is better for shooting people. It depends on what you consider, Nikon out of the film sharp, high degree of reproduction, can be very objective to reflect the subject. And Canon out of the film more soft, more tension. Obviously to express the character Nikon, to shoot a little more artistic, the Canon. Of course the actual difference between these two brands is very often difficult to observe.
2011
Question 9: Is Canon really better than Nikon for portraits? Why a Canon shot out of the color style is more suitable for human skin color, the second is not photographer so-called Nikon's "stupid sharp", in fact, there is no equipment suitable for not suitable, the key is that people will not shoot is really
Question 10: shooting portraits Canon 70d and Nikon d7100 which is good 70D focus, D7100 color is not good. D7100 color is not good.
70D video function is strong, but the focus of the photo is not real, loose imaging.D7100 no low-pass filter, the sharpness of the photo dump 70D a few streets.
70D amateur, D7100 professional.
70D big plastic shell, D7100 big metal.
70D 19-point full cross focus, photo focus accuracy is very average, video can be realized autofocus, fast and accurate.
D7100, 51-point AF focus, same focusing components as D800, two steps above 70D, but video recording can't realize autofocus.
70D has wifi module to transfer photos into cell phone in time, D7100 has no wifi module.
70D has a touch screen, good to get started, newbies learn fast. d7100 does not have a touch screen, it is not very easy to get started, but after familiarizing with the operation will be found obviously more scientific than canon machine, ergonomics do better.
70D portraits have better skin tone performance, but low tolerance. D7100 color is suitable for any subject other than portraits, if you are proficient in PS, then ignore it.
70D + mid-low-end Canon lenses = garbage. 70D + bullhead = can't take advantage of all the advantages of full-frame lenses
D7100 + Nikon mid-low-end lenses = good imaging quality. d7100 + bullhead = can't take advantage of all the advantages of full-frame either
Canon has the most abundant lens group, but the high school and low-grade imaging varies a lot, and workmanship quality is uneven, so it's a good idea to use a full-frame lens to get the most out of a full-frame lens. Typical 10 bucks for 3 cents.
Nikon lens group is not as rich as Canon, but the quality of workmanship is more uniform, the middle and low-end head generous, from the low-end to high-end have good imaging quality.
If you are just playing around, then it is recommended that you choose the 70D, if you want to work hard to improve their level of hard work, please choose the D7100.
If you are around more with Canon, please choose the 70D, if you are around more with Nikon, please choose the D7100.
Personally, I feel that the D7100 comprehensive quality in the 70D on top of the difference between the two and the actual price match. The difference between the two is in line with the actual selling price. （
I'm a Canon Nikon dual repair advocate, purely hand-typed, I hope you have some help!
Recommended Cameras for Portraits
Recommended cameras for portraits are as follows:
1. Canon EOS5DMarkIV
Its AF tracking and AF face detection ensures that you get the sharpest possible images in both still portraits and action shots, and even if you miss the focus by a few millimeters, the Dual Pixel RAW technology allows you to shift focus in post-processing. For example, if your eyelashes are sharper than your eyes, you can make some adjustments and voila! _the eyes look sharp. Another benefit of Dual Pixel RAW technology is the ability to adjust bokeh in the background for a more pleasing effect.
2. Canon 6D Mark II
If you're looking to upgrade to a full-frame camera but aren't quite ready to move up to a pro model, the Canon 6DMarkII is the perfect entry-level DSLR for portraiture. It has a high-quality 26-megapixel sensor and good noise performance at higher ISOs, even if it's not on the same level as the top cameras on the market today.
3. Canon EOS90D
The sensor is 32.5 MP, which gives it a higher resolution than the full-frame 6DMarkII recommended above (despite the smaller sensor, this fact makes a host of differences in terms of sensitivity, dynamic range, etc.). The cropped sensor keeps this model in the producer-consumer or enthusiast category, but that doesn't mean it's not a great camera. For certain types of portraits - couples or family sessions, for example - you can definitely do professional work.
4. Canon EOSR5
If you're a professional looking for mirrorless technology, the Canon EOSR5 is a good choice, assuming you can afford the price.
The EOSR5 is equipped with a 45-megapixel full-frame sensor designed for professional photography (if you're looking for an aftermarket version, you should check out the powerful EOSR6).
5. Nikon D850
For action shots, you can get bursts of up to 7fps, and the D850 also features focus peaking (manual focus only), which lets you identify the sharpest areas of a picture by displaying a color overlay. If you prefer autofocus to manual focus, you'll love the 153-point autofocus system.
Ten film camera recommendations for beginners
While film cameras are now playing very few people in addition to pretending to be, they are at least considered to be equipment recommendations, in the spirit of benefiting the public's mentality, in accordance with my own preferences for the equipment recommended the following specifications of the ten film cameras, which are basically geared towards new film users, film beginners.
135FilmMFSLR
NikonFA
Originally I was going to recommend the Nikon FE-2, but then I thought of a model overlooked by the domestic doudoune moncler pas cher film fans, the Nikon FA, and then I went to a certain treasure to take a look around, and the NikonFA was cheaper than the Nikon FE-2, so I decided to recommend the
The NikonFA is different from MF film cameras of the same period in that it is equipped with Nikon's zone metering system (AutomaticMultiPatt-ern), which is the initial version of the matrix metering system that Nikon later upgraded on its digital cameras. The advantages of zone metering over center-focused metering need no elaboration, and this system was originally intended by Nikon to be designed into the FE-2 body, but due to time schedules, the system ended up on the FA, which still uses the 60/40 center-focused metering system.
The NikonFA already has the four ASMP exposure modes that are so common on digital cameras, and if you're experienced with digital cameras, the NikonFA has nothing but manual focusing to offer.
The NikonFA has a 1/250-second flash sync speed, a maximum 1/4000-second shutter, and a honeycomb titanium curtain. The NikonFA's silver top cover is not made of metal, and the FM-2 and FE-2 are all metal bodies.
OlympusOM-2
It's a reverse doujinshi, Olympus stole the work from Takatenkara, although I prefer the OM-3 or OM-4, but for beginners do not be contaminated by all kinds of metaphysics first, first get a good camera is the right thing to do. Visually, the OM-2 has a compact body with a refined look, and the pentaprism down design makes it look very pocketable.
It's a body that also features aperture-priority automatic programmed exposure, and the OM-2 also has OTF metering. Shutter speeds are up to 1/1000th of a second, and programmed exposures offer ±2 stops of exposure compensation adjustment.
135FilmAFSLR
NikonF100
If you're tired of using digital for too long but find MF film a bit cumbersome, you might want to experience the NikonF100. It's a film body with performance comparable to Nikon's early digital cameras, five-point AF, a sophisticated and accurate metering system, and a fast and reliable auto-pass. With its reliable autofocus, you can use the F100 as if it were a Nikon digital camera.
The F100's full range of Nikon's D and G lenses, with the exception of the latest E-type lenses that won't work, slot very smoothly into the F100's body, and the autofocus and metering are perfect.There's an F4S option further down the F100, but I don't think it's a very good-looking one, and the buttons on the post-film-era F4S look like a pain in the buttons, not clean and elegant.There are an F5 and F6 option further up the F100, but I'm not sure they're very good-looking. There are F5 and F6 options upwards, but the F5 focuses surprisingly without a closing red dot, and the F6 is too elegant and expensive to be a godsend for beginners.
EOS-1V
and Nikon F6 adhering to the film at the end of the era of the double, if you count Minolta's a7, should be one of the three male. The reason for recommending the EOS-1V is very simple: accurate focusing and a reliable body. If you are a Canon digital camera user, the EF lens plugs in and works, the performance in all aspects is much better than the F100 that I recommend for Nikon users, it's not cheap but definitely not expensive, and if you get the grip, you can totally experience the feeling that comes with a 1-digit model.
135FilmMFRF
MinoltaCLE
This is the product of the honeymoon period of Leica and Minolta, Leica launched the CL version, Minolta launched the CLE version, in general there is no performance difference between the two bodies, the biggest difference is still in the appearance and price. For beginner users, if you want a compact but delicate size, over the film powerful but gentle, shutter firm but quiet, viewfinder wide and bright side axis film camera, the most cost-effective choice than the MinoltaCL-E, sold the CLE is almost the most deplorable event I regretted. 2,000 yuan can buy such a body is simply a godsend.
CLE can use all Leica M-mouth lenses, whether Leica, Folanda or L39 adapter, not a big problem, the only egg of pain is the CLE frame line is 28mm, 40mm, 90mm, optional lenses less than 35mm and 50mm two very common focal lengths. In addition to Minolta's matching 28mm and 40mm lenses, you can also choose the VM40mmF1.4 from Frenda. if you don't care about the framing, there is no problem with a 35mm lens plugged in and shooting it right you're using a side-axis, what do you care about the framing!
135FilmAFRF
CONTAXG1
Thinking about the autofocus bypass film, cost-effective is CONTAXG1, thousand dollars or so of the body of the investment, or very worthwhile. CONTAXG1 is a very classic body launched by Kyocera, followed by upgraded version of the G2 swept across the North and South. G1 support autofocus, of course, not TTL, shutter speed up to 1/2000 seconds, the shutter is electronically controlled vertical curtain. Support for automatic exposure, TTL metering, the center focus metering is quite accurate. The body can automatically read the film's DX code, automatic recognition of film ISO degrees.G1's viewfinder is a real-image viewfinder, but it's too small, this point is one of the few shortcomings of the G1.G1 use two CR2 batteries, relatively easy to buy, Jingdong is available.
120FilmMFTLR
BronicaETRSi
Possibly the best value for money 120 film SLR you can buy in China.
Of course Bronica's equipment is known for its excellent price/performance ratio, and the ETRSi is one of the best for the money.The ETRSi is a later, more mature version of the series, and if you have the energy to distinguish it carefully, the other ETR models are well worth getting as well. As a modular system, the ETRSi can replace backs, focusing screens, viewfinders, and a surprisingly wide range of accessories.PE series lenses are not cabbage, but the resolution and out-of-focus can still be maintained above the level. For entry-level users, this system is considered to be more worthwhile in-depth system, front and back with all the basic can play to the pit, as compared to like to buy a medieval color Hasselblad 500C and then with a single lens, just to buy Hasselblad standard, this system is more fun and more practical cheaper disadvantage is that the appearance is not enough to Hasselblad, can not be pretentious.
Oh yeah, it also supports 135 wide format.
YASHICAMat124G
I don't know if YASHICAMat124G counts as a national double-lens reflex, in any case, this is the most popular double-lens reflex camera in the country in addition to Rollei. It's a very inexpensive, popular product that uses a lot of plastic parts, but it's still very reliable overall, and serious mechanical and optical failures are rare. The Yashica 124G uses a very classic 3-group, 4-element 75mm F3.5 Tensel lens, and the overall optical quality is good, with high center resolution and weak edges. This camera sold much better than the Seagull, and was available in department stores in small counties, thus the number of 124G's that have been handed down is very high, and finding one in good condition is not difficult. Of course after the popularity of a camera, even used, the price will be subject to fluctuations, if you can not find a 124G at the right price, we recommend Locke Kodak, 2000 out, and fun.
Pentax67
Old foreigners call "MONSTER" 120 SLR, very heavy to start, but the price is very high, 3000 out of the beginning of a machine and a mirror is not a big problem, want to enjoy the 6 × 7 large format cheap, that is Pentax 67. The overall use of the Pentax 67 is like a large 135, in addition to the serious disadvantages of the machine vibration is not much. The sound of the huge reflector falling and lifting up feels like a cannon firing, no matter what subject is being shot, no matter how many people are involved in a group shot, as long as you are holding a Pentax 67, unleash