wanting film camera

[bobby_7 0]

so yea, i've been wanting a film camera, because i think you can get some astounding pictures with them, and i love playing with shutter speeds. only problem is, i dont know what to look for, and also, i dont want to spend much at all. i know i wont use it enough to justify putting some cash into one, im just wanting it to take a few cool shots when im bored.

any advice on what kind of camera to look for? i dont care if it is old as hell and looks the same, as long as it works.

[buickid 0]

Look for an old Nikon F-series camera, maybe an F4.

Really though, if you find photography interesting, invest in a entry-level Digital SLR. You can play with shutter speed, aperture, and best of all, you don't have to use a whole roll of film to switch ISO sensitivities (ASA for film). The digital screen allows you to see the results of the the adjustment to the exposure ou just made. Not to mention you'll be saving film. :]

Edit: A new 6.1 megapixel Nikon D40 with a 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 lens is $469 at B&H Photo Video. Should last you years and years of shooting. And keep in mind, its not all about how many megapixels you have.

Edited July 26, 2008 by SteveSan

[topgun 262]

A great starter film camera would be a Canon AE-1 Program, I learned on one and put quite a bit of film through it and never had a problem at all, they take great photos and are easy to work with.

[JimJ 11]

If it's 35mm we're talking about...

For ease of finding good lenses, it really comes down to either the Nikon F-mount stuff or Canon. Both had a wide selection of good prime lenses, and I'd really recommend a 50mm prime lens for anyone starting out. Not only are they usually a lot "faster" than the short-zoom kit lenses (both have very good f/1.4's, heck of a lot faster than a standard medium zoom), having one focal length reduces your mental workload starting out and reduces the urge to get fancy with extreme wide angles or telephotos that compress the DOF.

I had a Canon A-1 starting out, worked great. Although I liked the Contax I had more, I could never afford more than one Zeiss lens - with the Canon, you can buy a whole drawer full of lenses and not break the bank

[bobby_7 0]

Edit: A new 6.1 megapixel Nikon D40 with a 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 lens is $469 at B&H Photo Video. Should last you years and years of shooting. And keep in mind, its not all about how many megapixels you have.

while $469 is out of my price range, it may also be a worthwhile investment, as i could use it for a long time and still get some great photos. and while i realize that its not about megapixels (necessarily), i definitely do not want to see pixelation (sp?)(even a word?) in my photos, as that is what i love about film. i have no experience with a digital SLR camera, so would that be an issue?

EDIT: found a few AE-1's and some F2's on eBay for about $100, here are some links

AE-1's:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Canon-AE-1-Program-Cam...1QQcmdZViewItem

http://cgi.ebay.com/Canon-AE-1-Film-Camera...1QQcmdZViewItem

http://cgi.ebay.com/Canon-AE-1-Program-w-5...1QQcmdZViewItem

F2:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Nikon-Nikkormat-FT2-35...1QQcmdZViewItem

F3:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Nikon-F3-35mm-SLR-Came...1QQcmdZViewItem

Edited July 27, 2008 by bobby_7

[jbob 0]

Edit: A new 6.1 megapixel Nikon D40 with a 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 lens is $469 at B&H Photo Video. Should last you years and years of shooting. And keep in mind, its not all about how many megapixels you have.

while $469 is out of my price range, it may also be a worthwhile investment, as i could use it for a long time and still get some great photos. and while i realize that its not about megapixels (necessarily), i definitely do not want to see pixelation (sp?)(even a word?) in my photos, as that is what i love about film. i have no experience with a digital SLR camera, so would that be an issue?

Well, with 6.1 MP you'd probably notice pixelation...if you print at 20x30. If you don't want to print huge, 6.1 is plenty. You could also go with something like a used rebel xt from bh for $350. The 2 megapixel difference isn't really as big as it sounds, but it is a nice camera, I've had mine for like 3 years now I think. If you go film I'd recommend sticking to newer Canons (with EF lenses) or Nikon because they're the two most popular brands and then you can use your lenses on a digital down the road.

[Aaron Clinton 2,372]

I still use my tandem bodied Richo SP1's. Then can use a few other mount lenses, at the moment I have 4 between the two camera bodies, plus a 2x lens boost. 70-210mm zoom, 18mm wide angle with built in filters, 55mm fixed, and 50-175 zoom. Fully manual cameras. I wish I could afford to shoot film.

[buickid 0]

while $469 is out of my price range, it may also be a worthwhile investment, as i could use it for a long time and still get some great photos. and while i realize that its not about megapixels (necessarily), i definitely do not want to see pixelation (sp?)(even a word?) in my photos, as that is what i love about film. i have no experience with a digital SLR camera, so would that be an issue?

Unless you print huge, ~5 megapixels is sufficient for most prints you will do. Even with cropping, you can still make good sized prints. What is more important is how the sensor handles you cranking up the ISO (ASA in film terms). A good sensor will have less noise and mottling then a lesser sensor. Really though, most modern consumer DSLRS handle pretty well up to 1600 ISO. Beyond that is pushing it, but with my D80, if an ISO3200 shot is exposed well, the grain is acceptable. When I shoot for my school yearbook and newspaper, most of the shots were published in black and white, which means I can pretty much ramp the ISO to as high as I like. Printing in B&W makes the grain all but invisible.

If you want a cheap used DSLR, look for a Canon Rebel XT or XTi, or a Nikon D50 or D70. All of these are great cameras which for a casual user, should do everything you need. If you're going to buy film, a Canon AE-1 or similar ancient camera, be aware that these cameras have been out of production for manymanymany years, and as such, repair parts could be a bit hard to come by. You may want to look at a newer camera, a Nikon F4 or similar Canon used camera. The F4 was a professional camera, built to last, and parts should still be availble. In addition, it has autofocus (invaluable, in my opinion). I'm a bit Nikon biased, as you may have noticed.

[bobby_7 0]

yea it is starting to look like it may get into more money than i want it to. im not exactly the richest yet. i will give it some time and maybe buy a good one on down the road.