Should I buy a used film SLR?

[AFC-911]

I've seriously been thinking about it seeing as how there are numerous 35mm Canons for around $50-60, with some including accessories.

I currently have a big zoom digital (Canon S3IS) which pretty much gets the job done and I don't really need a DSLR. But at the same time, I've been thinking about film cameras and might as well get an SLR...I've actually never used film (in still cameras).

I figured it's something new to learn...Here's some sample shots of my P&S:













Thoughts, comments or suggestions on which one to get?

[masraum]

There are tons of great old SLRs out there really cheap. Canon and Nikon have made some spectacular cameras over the years. It'd be hard to go wrong with either. Film and developing aren't as cheap as they once were. I'm not sure how easy it would be to get B&W film and develop yourself. (B&W developing isn't hard, but finding the stuff might be.

Honestly, I'd get a DSLR and be done with it. The stuff for film is only going to get harder to find and more expensive. With a digital, you can take 1000 pictures in a day and all it will take is your time. Taking 1000 shots with a film camera would cost a fortune for the film and developing, and you'd have to wait to get the pictures back.

Really nice shots, BTW.

[Heel n Toe]

Whatever you get, get something that can go full manual on aperture and shutter speed... those are a lot of fun to play around with.

[AFC-911]

Steve,

Thanks for the compliments! Can pictures from a film camera be put into a CD (so I can select which ones to print) or does every single shot have to be printed?

BTW, I'm not in the position to drop $400 in a used DSLR. I just put new seats in my Miata.

HeelNToe,

My S3IS has full manual & shutter speed. The only thing it doesn't have is manual focus & and the ability to shoot really high ISOs.

[dhoward]

I would try using new film.

[gtc]

They are dirt cheap now, so why not. Many places will scan the film and put it on a CD for $10 give or take.
I borrowed a neighbor's Canon EOS A2 for a few months last year... it worked great and was a lot easier to use than the Canon digital point & shoot I have now. He asked for it back, then traded it in on a new DSLR. I think he got $100 for the body and lens I would have offered him more for it... it was a really nice camera.

[stomachmonkey]

Originally Posted by AFC-911

Steve,

Thanks for the compliments! Can pictures from a film camera be put into a CD (so I can select which ones to print) or does every single shot have to be printed?

BTW, I'm not in the position to drop $400 in a used DSLR. I just put new seats in my Miata.

HeelNToe,

My S3IS has full manual & shutter speed. The only thing it doesn't have is manual focus & and the ability to shoot really high ISOs.

You need to process the film regardless.

For that you should really shot E6 for a color slide which then needs to be scanned/imaged to disc.

Otherwise yes you can get prints and scan them.

Point is film is no longer cost effective.

Shooting 1,000 digital shots is essentially free and if you want only 1 out of that 1000 printed thats all you need to pay for.

With film every shot you take costs money and if you toast a whole roll of film for just 1 shot then that one shot was expensive.

[RPKESQ]

You should know that electronic devices only have to be supported for 7 years after production has ended. And most models that you can purchase new today are not still in production. The companies are producing the replace for the current model. This means that you can purchase a new camera and not be able to get it repaired in just a few (2-5) years,

Old film cameras are cheap because of this. Few will be good value for the money when film, developing and printing costs are factored in. Old (non-digital) cameras are mechanical devices that need regular maintainace just like mechanical watches.

Get with the 21st Century. Get a digital, learn photoshop (its not that hard) and you can do anything and more than you will ever be able to do with film.

BTW, nice shots AFC 911

[masraum]

Originally Posted by AFC-911

Steve,

Thanks for the compliments! Can pictures from a film camera be put into a CD (so I can select which ones to print) or does every single shot have to be printed?

BTW, I'm not in the position to drop $400 in a used DSLR. I just put new seats in my Miata.

HeelNToe,

My S3IS has full manual & shutter speed. The only thing it doesn't have is manual focus & and the ability to shoot really high ISOs.

You'd be better off saving a bit for the DSLR. Get an old Canon EOS camera. Then you should be able to buy Canon EOS lenses for the camera. Then when you're ready to step up to a DSLR, you'll still be able to use the EOS lenses that you've invested in.

BTW, what seats did you put in your miata? Stock replacements or something else?

[Porsche-O-Phile]

I still have (and use) a Pentax K1000 SLR. One of the most venerable 35mms ever made. I love it.

[AFC-911]

Originally Posted by masraum

You'd be better off saving a bit for the DSLR. Get an old Canon EOS camera. Then you should be able to buy Canon EOS lenses for the camera. Then when you're ready to step up to a DSLR, you'll still be able to use the EOS lenses that you've invested in.

BTW, what seats did you put in your miata? Stock replacements or something else?

I appreciate your thoughts. I've always been curious about film cameras (it's only natural considering I've worked in TV, sports & docs). I never thought of a film SLR being a replacement for my Digital, but as a complimentary toy.

PS - here's the seats.

[Eric Coffey]

If I was going to go (back) to film, it would have to be medium or large format.

[ruf-porsche]

Oh I thought you were talking about buying a Mercedes SLR. LOL

[vash]

you could even get a leica rangefinder...arguably the best film camera ever developed for relatively little money.

[alf]

ummm...where do you even buy film these days?

I have been having fun with my Panasonic Lumix LX3 P&S. My DSLR is collecting dust...

[emcon5]

Originally Posted by RPKESQ

You should know that electronic devices only have to be supported for 7 years after production has ended. And most models that you can purchase new today are not still in production. The companies are producing the replace for the current model. This means that you can purchase a new camera and not be able to get it repaired in just a few (2-5) years,

For what it's worth I still have a Canon AE1 that belonged to my father. He bought it in the early 1980s, but stopped using it in the '90s because his eyes had deteriorated a bit so he had trouble focusing it. He gave it to me, and I have used it off and on since then.

It has held up extremely well. It is not all that complex, as far as film SLRs go, manual wind and focus, but auto shutter speed and F-stop if you let it. You can also run those manually if you prefer. I usually set the shutter speed where I want it, and let the camera handle the aperture settings.

The lenses will not wear out, and since it doesn't have auto-focus there isn't much on the camera itself that will wear out. Plus, quite frankly they don't make them like they used to.

If it ever quits on me, all I need is a new camera body, which a quick look on ebay shows are readily available and pretty cheap. I suspect if I needed to replace it, I could get a new body pretty cheaply. Here is one for $44: http://cgi.ebay.com/CANON-AE-1-CAMERA-BODY-NICE-NO-RESERVE_W0QQitemZ290340319375

It is more work than a point and shoot digital, or full auto DSLR, but I kind of like it that way.

Processing can get expensive, but it is usually only a couple bucks more for a photo CD.

It takes decent pictures too: http://www.ngnl.net/alms/lagunaalms2004.html

[masraum]

I've also got an old AE-1 that was my dads. Actually, mine is an AE-1 Program (insurance replacement for an AE-1 before it). It takes (well, took) great photos. I haven't used it in a long time. I've also got my old EOS 630 from 1991 or so. It was also a great camera with tons of features. I loved the old film cameras, but unless I was a pro that really needed something that the new DSLRs couldn't do (I think films got a greater dynamic range than most chips), I'd stick with my Digital Rebel XT.

The film camera should be cheap enough that even if you use it a bit and then decide you don't want to any more, you won't be out tons of money, and you'll have a piece of history.

For your first lens, get something like a 50mm f1.4. That's the most all around lens you could have. Try to stick with the "fast" lenses (f values are low numerically). They'll be the most useful and probably a higher quality than a comparable "slow" lens.

[RPKESQ]

Originally Posted by emcon5

For what it's worth I still have a Canon AE1 that belonged to my father. He bought it in the early 1980s, but stopped using it in the '90s because his eyes had deteriorated a bit so he had trouble focusing it. He gave it to me, and I have used it off and on since then.

It has held up extremely well. It is not all that complex, as far as film SLRs go, manual wind and focus, but auto shutter speed and F-stop if you let it. You can also run those manually if you prefer. I usually set the shutter speed where I want it, and let the camera handle the aperture settings.

The lenses will not wear out, and since it doesn't have auto-focus there isn't much on the camera itself that will wear out. Plus, quite frankly they don't make them like they used to.

If it ever quits on me, all I need is a new camera body, which a quick look on ebay shows are readily available and pretty cheap. I suspect if I needed to replace it, I could get a new body pretty cheaply. Here is one for $44: http://cgi.ebay.com/CANON-AE-1-CAMERA-BODY-NICE-NO-RESERVE_W0QQitemZ290340319375

It is more work than a point and shoot digital, or full auto DSLR, but I kind of like it that way.

Processing can get expensive, but it is usually only a couple bucks more for a photo CD.

It takes decent pictures too: http://www.ngnl.net/alms/lagunaalms2004.html

What you are not seeing is that the manual shutterspeed and apeture is still selected by electronics in that camera. AE-1s are full of exposed electromagnets, coils, condensors, unsealed variable resistors and many, many solder joints.

And depending on age and environment that it is exposed to will be far less reliable than the solid state electronics in more modern cameras. Buying used off of ebay gets you (at best) a body that works when you receive it. No warranty or parts support (and that includes the lenses too).

In my opinion, the low end Nikon, Canon, etc digital SLR cameras are significantly better made and engineered than the first generation electronic control cameras like the AE-1, A-1, etc. YMMV.

[jyl]

Here is an alternative idea. Buy a higher end Nikon DSLR that will meter with the older Ai and Ai-S manual focus lenses. Then buy those lenses cheap. For many subjects you do not need autofocus or the fanciest metering modes. And a high quality, all metal, fast manual lens will be far more affordable than the equivalent current AF Nikon lens. For example, a Ai-S 50mm f1.4 will be roughly an 80mm f1.4 on a DSLR with the smaller image sensor. That is a wonderful lens for portraits and available-light and it will be very affordable. The guy with his slow kit lens won't be able to take the same shots you will be able to.

Similarly, the 85mm f1.4 will be a 136mm f1.4, or a very fast short telephoto. A 200mm f2.8 . . . you get the idea.

[jyl]

In my view, film bodies only make sense now if you are into the darkroom art. Which I am. But it isn't a practical approach otherwise.