Back in the days of film I have always had good luck buying used rangefinder cameras. I only bought Japanese brands and came to like Minolta, Yashika and Cannon. I spent a lot of time with SLR's but sometimes I preferred rangefinders for their lighter weight, ruggedness and simplicity. These were especially good for backpacking and camping. With rangefinders, they are pretty well sealed until changing film.

Rangefinders are not as sophisticated as SLR's. For instance the metering is either average across the scene or just a photo cell placed on the front of the camera. Often the lenses were not going to be as good as SLR lenses because rangefinders were made more as a consumer level camera and price was important. I also came to appreciate rangefinders when taking pictures of people. When you point a big SLR in their face they can get self consensus. A rangefinder is not as intimidating. People tend to act more naturally.

That is just my opinions. I have a soft spot for Film photography and darkroom processing (the other half of making pictures). Despite that statement and a wild thought of getting some Tri-X film and shooting some rolls I have not done any film photography. I tossed my film tanks, contact printer, bath trays and even my thermometer. It was sad, but I was done with processing film. Nowadays. it is all digital with lessons learned from the days of film.

By the way is there any free software that lets me "Dodge and burn" area within the print? I often used this technique to bring back the sky in a landscape. Or is the digital sensors not as sensitive as film?