>>3237199If you wanted to go digital I would recommend Sony or at the very least mirrorless. Their bodies can adapt and autofocus lenses (at least with their pdaf bodies) from quite a few mounts. Autofocus for at least Minolta A, Canon EF, Nikon F, and Leica M( Yes, Leica M, that is not a mistake) off the top of my head.
Many recommend Fuji, but I am not sold on their x-trans sensor.
>>3237608>My first reaction was reluctance because I wanted the convenience of digital cameras, but after a little research I believe this is an excellent suggestion. I may adopt it. Thanks.My recomendation is a Hasselblad 500cm.
Tough as balls, easily repairable, and fantastic image quality.
Pricey though, close to $1000 now-a-days.
As for what the other anon commented, a 35mm rangefinder is also a solid choice. Leica is pretty much the go too. They will always be repairable and are built like tanks. Minolta CL and CLE are also an option, but they are less easy to repair. I personally am not a fan of rangefinders.
You could go best of both world and get a new Leica M7 and M10 and share lenses between them. Gonna be pricey as fuck though.
>>3237636>film is deadWhich is why Kodak and numerous other manufacturers are putting out new films this year.
Besides no digital camera will last him the rest of his life. Most will be heavily outdated in five years. Digital sensors just aren't mature enough yet.
