I know how you feel, I've shot much more film (35mm & 120) in the last year than used my K-5 (hardly at all). I now use my MX-1 or GR almost exclusively when I want to shoot digital.

I haven't used the FA31 - I bought the FA43 to use on film (43mm doesn't work for me on APS-C). It depends whether you want the 31mm focal length - right between 28 (possibly slightly too wide) & 35 (possibly not quite wide enough) or the legendary IQ.

I think you'd struggle to get (and scan) print film these days to do the lens justice, even chrome film is likely to struggle. In the old days you could use Ektar 25 or Kodachrome 25 - Velvia 50 might be an option though.

I've settled on these lenses for my usual film setup: FA20-35/4, FA43/1.9 and M135/3.5, but no comment about film should end without suggesting that a larger format might be worth thinking about...

John.

My only contribution is that I have an old Sigma 70-300 Apo Super (circa 2000), it is my only AF lens that goes out to 300mm. It appears to lose IQ once you get above 200mm, I think my Tamron AD2 60-300 SP is sharper but it's manual focus. Given that Sigma don't seem to want to support the K mount, I don't see any reason to buy their lenses at the moment.

It's not the data you need to worry about - if you lose that you're stuffed - it's the ability to read & process the data that matters. I met a Canikon shooter who said he couldn't process his original digital images from 2003 anymore because he didn't have a computer that could read the data. Ignoring simple issues like software licenses, you need a computer running the right operating system with the right image processing software - for 'common' formats that's do-able - for specific formats, maybe not so do-able.

The best way is probably to simply* spin up virtual servers in the cloud with the right operating systems to run the software you need, install the image software and store your data there.

[luddite mode] I have 3.5" (720Kb from the '90s) and 5.25" (from circa '83) floppy disks and suitable hardware to read them. The vast majority are still readable on the original hardware and disk drives (which didn't evolve very fast at the time).[/luddite mode]

Be wary of promises of longevity from companies who haven't had the benefit of time to test their claims. Remember the 'super permanent' printer ink guaranteed for at least 20yrs turning orange after a few weeks - "Oh that's exposure to Ozone said the manufacturer - you need sealed frames to stop that!". Kodachrome has a proven life of at least 50yrs (at the last count based on when it was introduced), monochrome film over 100yrs (film recently found in Antarctica from 1913-14 could still be processed). Factory produced (pressed) CDs are very durable - but CD-R & CD-R/W still rely on dyes impregnated between pieces of plastic - and many people fail to check they're readable immediately after writing them!

* Of course this is really easy and everyone can do it!

John.

Hi Jonathan, Yep I know this is a 'feature' but the problem I have is that the meter doesn't work even with the lever in the stand-off position. I think there's a problem with the switch. My previous comment may not have been very clear.

John.

I'm a bit late to this thread but I've got and used most of the options mentioned above. My take on the cameras is below (note: this is based on on my experience of buying up to 40yr old cameras on ebay - condition varies enormously):

LX: The ultimate option in my view, expensive and may require a service but easily the best. If you think you want one in the end and are committed to film it's probably better to just buy one.

Mechanical cameras:
MX: Small lightweight (LED meter info plus aperture), plentiful and much newer than the KX, KM etc.

K1000: Bigger than the MX (but many prefer that), crude metering and no aperture readout/self timer/DoF but very robust. Have a 'cult' status so prices can be high but they were made into the '90s so some of them are fairly young.

KX: Similar to the MX, bigger with Mirror Lock-up - but one of mine has a problem with the metering circuit or switch (the wind lever needs to be 'offset' for the metering to work). Much older than the MX and most K1000s.

Electronic cameras:
Super A: Small multi-mode with LCD display in finder and top plate. Everything you'd need apart from exposure lock (the LCD display in manual mode is a bit clunky). My preferred electronic camera after the LX. Works with DA lenses in program & Tv modes. Shutter speeds by up/down buttons.

P30n/T: The workhorse starter SLR in the '90s, Program, Manual & Av modes (the earlier P30 only had M & P). Has meter lock and DX film speed setting (not sure if you can override it?). Shutter speal dial.

ME Super/MEF: The ME Super is a classic, LED display with Av & M modes. Workhorse cameras but I'd prefer a Super A. The MEF is similar with crude AF confirmation in the finder (if it still works - the sensor is from the very early days of AF), but the battery door is fiddly. Shutter speeds by up/down buttons.

MZ-M: Basically a MZ-5n without the AF and really needs the AA battery grip to simplify battery choice. Plasticy with a 'penta-mirror' finder and may have the plastic mirror drive cog problem. BUT it's a very good camera - M, P, Av & TV modes, meter lock, exposure compensation and DX with override. It has an LCD readout in the finder shutter speed (and aperture when the lens is set to A) and a proper shutter speed dial on the top. Motorised film advance (either you like it or not).

K2: Early auto-manual, has a strange ISO dial around the lens mount which doesn't seem reliable 40yrs on. Mine has a shutter problem (always shoots at one speed). If you can find a good one it's probably a reasonable choice, but I'd look for something more recent.

Also consider the P50 - similar to a P30n/T but with two programs (action & depth) and it will take the Motordrive A.

That said, most of the above go for very little (the mechanical cameras are more expensive - although you can get cheap K1000s from auctions rather than BINs), you can get and try several - many cost little more than a couple of films + processing.

John.

For me it's either one extreme or the other. If it's a 'gallery' feel you're after then each print is probably best in a frame that suits the image behind non-reflective glass (i.e. not some generic 'photo frame'). I feel that stretched canvas prints have had their day. On the other hand for an informal arrangement, I'd prefer randomly positioned and overlapping prints of different sizes and alignments simply attached with that blue tacky adhesive type stuff (especially for prints of the family etc.).

Thanks John. I'm surprised that apparently 'professional-ish' companies spamming in this way think they can get away with it. They leave themselves wide open to ridicule and end up looking like an amateurish outfit pretending to be professionals. It's a good job we're camera geeks and not a bunch of hackers!

John.

The ES is a beautiful camera which has a charm about it that later cameras seem to lack. I should use mine more than I do.

I have a black K2 in beautiful condition but with a shutter problem - it always shoots (in manual or auto) at the mechanical speed (1/125th I guess). The shutter is timed electronically so the fault could be either the shutter or the control circuitry. I've spoken to Harrow Technical in the past - who explained if the problem is with the shutter, it requires a new shutter but they didn't have any spares. They did offer to look at it when I sent my LX in for repair, but it sounded unlikely they could repair it so I didn't follow it up.

The legendary 'Eric' mentioned on the US forum might be another option - although sending a camera to the US for repair is unlikely to be cost effective.

As others have said, #4 is a definite 'no-no' for 'elf & safety reasons, my favourite is the guy carrying the wheels. In many ways I feel the documentary approach (or 'abstract' if you prefer) tells a better story than most 'action' shots because these are the shots that 99% never think about.