Film SLR?

This is a discussion on Film SLR? within the Film Photography Equipment forums, part of the FILM PHOTOGRAPHY FORUM category; I have been looking at SLR cameras, I had an old Canon SLR that was bought in Viet Nam, more on that later. I have ...


Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Film SLR?

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    8
    I have been looking at SLR cameras, I had an old Canon SLR that was bought in Viet Nam, more on that later. I have looked at digital SLRs but have recently been thinking about going back to 35mm. I have a hard time spending the money for a good DSLR when it will be obsolete in a few years and not worth anything like what I would spend on it now. I have a P&S that is still a good camera, it's a Sony DSC F717 that I just got back from Sony after they had to repair it, it had one of those bad sensors in it that they had to repair for free. So a digital camera isn't that important to me. I have been reading that a manual film SLR is the most versatile and will teach you more about taking good photos than almost any other camera.

    I had a Canon, the one bought in Viet Nam, but it was dropped in some water in Nam. I believe it was a Canon A-1 if I remember correctly. But I still have several lenses that went with this camera, one is a FL 135 lens that I think it is considered a breech mount lens. I was wondering if I should try to get a Canon that uses that type of lens to be able to use these lenses. I have cleaned them up and they look to be in good condition, they didn't get dropped in the water back when. Is this something I should consider and if so what newer Canon film SLR uses these lenses?

    There is a Canon EOS Elan 7 NE on Adorama for $449.00 but I don't know if it will use the lenses I have. The other option is a Nikon FM-10 that sells for $250.00 with a 35-70 F3.5-4.8 zoom lens. The Canon is an auto and the Nikon is pure manual which I wouldn't mind as it would refresh my mind on basic photography. I'm starting to lean towards the Nikon manual for versatility but if I could use the lenses I already have I might go with Canon.

    I'm not interested in any Canon verses Nikon battle, it's been done before with no results so please lets not go there. I know they both make excellent cameras and that is not the point in this post. My question is which of these two options would be a better choice for me? Is there any reason to consider the Canon lenses I already have or is that a moot point? The Nikon looks like it would do everything I would want, but how hard would it be to get some more lenses for it? Any input is welcome from film photographers out there. Sorry for the long post, but I thought some history would be relevant here.


  • #2

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Posts
    494
    PHOTO EDITING NOT OK
    I'm a Nikon user so I'm no authority on Canon. If I'm not mistaken, though, when Canon came out with their EOS series of cameras they are not backward compatable with the older Canon lenses like what you would use on your A-1. You might want to research this a little to make sure.

    I've always shot with Nikon ever since high school. The nice thing about Nikon is backward compatability. I've mounted 20 year old manual lenses on my D200 and they work just fine.

    If you don't have a huge investment in Canon lenses then you might want to consider the Nikon FM-10 for shooting film. Also take a look on eBay. For a fraction of the original cost you can get yourself a Nikon F4 or F5 which are pro level film cameras.

  • #3

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Minnesota, USA
    Posts
    111
    PHOTO EDITING OK
    I'm a Nikon user so I'm no authority on Canon. If I'm not mistaken, though, when Canon came out with their EOS series of cameras they are not backward compatable with the older Canon lenses like what you would use on your A-1. You might want to research this a little to make sure.
    That is true. Canon came out with the EOS system in 1987 and switched to the EF lens mount from the FD lens mount. You need a compatible lens to fit this type of camera. The Canon EOS Elan 7 you are looking at has the EF lens mount and will not work with the old lenses. Obviously the Canon lenses will not go with the Nikon camera you are looking at either.

    I really do not have a suggestion for a film cameras, but it looks like the latest Canon 35mm film camera released was in September 2004 as the EOS Rebel T2. I have the EOS Rebel 2000 (aka EOS 300) and I really enjoyed using it. I know exactly where it is, but I have not taken a single frame with it in a couple years. Another option is to look on eBay, Craigslist, or the like for a FD lens mount camera. I bet you could pick up a gently used one for not all that much.

    Here are some links for information about Canons. I do not know anything about Nikon.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EOS
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EOS#Film_cameras
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_FD
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_FD#FD_cameras

    I will keep an eye on this thread if you have any Canon questions. I am sure someone here will have the answers you need. :)

    --Jason

    EDIT: Oh, and welcome to the forum!
    Canon Rebel XT (350D); Canon EF 24-70mm /2.8 USM; Canon EF 50mm /1.4 USM; Canon EF 75-300mm /4-5.6; Canon Speedlite 430EX

  • #4

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    8
    Thanks for the input. It looks like if I want to be forward compatible with any lenses I get for a film SLR, I can see going with a D200 in the future, I would need to go with Nikon. What I'm getting is that even though a manual lens it would still work on a DSLR in the future. I like what I see about the Nikon F4, but I'm not sure about buying used on Ebay. Not even sure about buying new from some of the Ebay dealers, a bunch of them have some bad reps using gray market items. The FM-10 seems to be what I'm looking at, a pure manual camera that has a lot of versatility. I would like to get back to setting the F-stop, shutter speed, focus, and different ISO film to get the results you want. Something about having to set up everything makes the entire process feel more personal to me. I think some of you know what I'm talking about with this. I know that something like a D200 can go with a manual set up, but how many of us go with that when the P&S option is there? By the way, 35mm film would be comparable with what MP, or can the two even be compared?

  • #5

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Minnesota, USA
    Posts
    111
    PHOTO EDITING OK
    By the way, 35mm film would be comparable with what MP, or can the two even be compared?
    You cannot compare the two. If I remember right from my High School photography class years ago (I am not that old, but digital cameras were hardly prevalent and still in the 1-2MP range) that film can be blown up to pretty much any size, depending on the enlarger and paper. A digital print will start showing the pixels at a certain point. With that said, you really cannot compare the two.

    I completely understand your thoughts about staying film. When I go out shooting I am usually disappointed that most of my photos are garbage. I went to a local zoo and orchid show this weekend and took 114 shots. About six of them are decent, and I really could have put more thought into those to make them better. My problem is that I do not want to wait to get the proofs back (and my own darkroom is out of the question at the moment) and digital shots are free, other than my time. I am not quite experienced enough to get all Jim Brandenburg* and Chased By The Light, but I just need to focus on the shot at hand a bit more.

    Good luck. :)

    -J

    * = Jim Brandenburg is a world-famous Minnesota photographer who made a book where he took one shot a day for 90 days. He is one of my idols.
    Canon Rebel XT (350D); Canon EF 24-70mm /2.8 USM; Canon EF 50mm /1.4 USM; Canon EF 75-300mm /4-5.6; Canon Speedlite 430EX

  • #6

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Puyallup, Washington.
    Posts
    2,027

    Right now there are some outstanding deals on film equipment. Nikon is my choice and I have an F-100 and an F-4 I shoot with. You can pick up some really good F-3's for next to nothing now days also. Med format is also cheaper.

    I just finished reading an article and the author says that the digital MP's would align like this: 35mm = 25MP,
    120/220 = 100 MP's and on and on.
    To make a difference in someones day or life, just be nice.

    IAFF L-726

  • #7

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    8
    Thanks for everyone's input on this. I'm torn between going digital or staying film, so my solution is both! I'm thinking going Nikon F-4 for my film camera and Nikon D-200 for digital. This way I can have my cake and eat it all at the same time. Correct me if I'm wrong here, but the lenses for the F-4 will also work on the D-200? I know I will want some newer generation lenses for the digital but it would be nice to be able to use both on the digital if I want to. What do you think of this idea?

  • #8

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Puyallup, Washington.
    Posts
    2,027
    I don't know your budget but for the small difference between the D-200 and the D-300 I would consider going with the 300. Lenses should work between the two.

    I just noticed you picked up your camera in Viet Nam. I was a photographer in the 9th I.D. and used more than one F-2 that saw a few tours over there and that was in 1976.
    To make a difference in someones day or life, just be nice.

    IAFF L-726


  •  

    Remove Ads

    Sponsored Links

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •