Are film SLRs worth buying?

[Chamelion 6]

It seems to me that what everyone is skipping over is that the OP appears to be interested in the BARE NECESSITY ENTRY cost to start shooting NOW. He seems to be asking what's the cheapest way to get started, not what will cost more over time.

He clearly doesn't have the startup costs associated with decent digital gear, so that's out at this time.

He could save up for digital gear, but it might take quite a while, and during that time, he'll not be shooting anything. But he clearly wants to start shooting, so that's not much of an option either.

Or he can get a decent film SLR cheap, and shoot rolls of film cheap enough to at least be shooting - right now - and he can afford that low entry fee - right now.

He's stated he's already got a digital camera so getting started shooting isn't the issue. Nor is cost, really, as many of the options considered rival the cost of an entry level DSLR. It's pretty much been stated that interest in marginal even...

I think the insterest lays more with being unique and different than everyone else. That's what I'm getting from the flow of what I've read. Some filks like muscle cars, some like film cameras. Either way, I think he's pretty much decided.

 

[Buckster]

It seems to me that what everyone is skipping over is that the OP appears to be interested in the BARE NECESSITY ENTRY cost to start shooting NOW. He seems to be asking what's the cheapest way to get started, not what will cost more over time.

He clearly doesn't have the startup costs associated with decent digital gear, so that's out at this time.

He could save up for digital gear, but it might take quite a while, and during that time, he'll not be shooting anything. But he clearly wants to start shooting, so that's not much of an option either.

Or he can get a decent film SLR cheap, and shoot rolls of film cheap enough to at least be shooting - right now - and he can afford that low entry fee - right now.

He's stated he's already got a digital camera so getting started shooting isn't the issue.

First, I went back looking for his statement that he's already got a digital camera, and couldn't find it. What I did find is what I thought I was reading all along: That he wants to shoot with an SLR. So, I should have clarified: Shooting WITH AN SLR, per his opening statement that defined his goal, as well as the many statements he made after that, reitterating that same goal.

Nor is cost, really, as many of the options considered rival the cost of an entry level DSLR.

Here's what he opened this with:

I was looking for a decent SLR camera but digial SLRs are way beyond my budget and spending capacity

Not really ambiguous, to my mind. And none of the options considered that rival the cost of an entry level DLSR were options HE considered. In fact, what HE considered was a used model for around $67.

It's pretty much been stated that interest in marginal even...

I think the insterest lays more with being unique and different than everyone else. That's what I'm getting from the flow of what I've read.

Then you're reading a different thread than I am, because he directly addressed that in this thread multiple times and stayed on track with the theme that his goal is SLR shooting with as little money up front as possible, even with the knowledge that it will cost him more over time.

Some filks like muscle cars, some like film cameras.

He shows no interest in that, and I think you're reading into it what you want. Of course, only the OP knows for sure, but at this point, I'm still getting that he wants the control, quality and versatility of a Single Lens Reflex camera, and is considering a film SLR as a less expensive means to get there. That would work, as it is much less expensive in the short term or, as I said, "entry fee". Of course, I'm only going by what he wrote, rather than reading his mind.

Either way, I think he's pretty much decided.

That's usually the case with folks who ask these kinds of questions; They're 99% sure they want to pull the trigger already when they ask, and are looking for a just a bit more confirmation and reassurance that they're not totally off their rocker, enabling them to go for it.

 

[Higgs Boson]

Let me ask you film advocates this:

Why was the digital format created?

Because Texas Instruments invented the integrated circuit, which replaced tubes. EVERYTHING has been going digital ever since.

Why does digital outsell film by leaps and bounds today even with a higher cost of entry?

There are many reasons for this. Most, from convenience to quality to long-term expense, have been thoroughly covered, but there's one more that is often overlooked: People are sheep who are led by the advertising industry, who paid good money to think tanks over the past 70 years or so to figure out EXACTLY how to make most of us want to buy EXACTLY what they want to sell, as though it's a coincidence.


I wouldn't think of it.


Best thing about the internet: It's full of experts willing to tell us "why".

Because that's what the customers want. Just like anything else. if they didn't want it, it wouldn't get produced and it certainly wouldn't sell.

Riiiiiiiight. Keep telling yourself that's the way marketing works.

Next step:
Why do customers want it and why do they pay more for it (the camera bodies)? Surely not EVERYONE is a fool.....with no soul....or are they????

I'm having flashbacks to idiots in polyester leisure suits and gold chains wagging their cocaine-numbed fingers at me while explaining why disco is so awesome.

Well I won't profess to know how marketing works just because I got my bachelors in marketing and hold an mba because that's just paper.

But we aren't talking about marketing, we are talking about economics, so I will just leave it at that.

All points were made in extreme tones for poignancy....please don't be offended.
And I am not a camera expert. I'm a beginner at photography. However, what I said can apply to anything.

Disco? Never heard of it.

 

[Chamelion 6]

First, I went back looking for his statement that he's already got a digital camera, and couldn't find it. What I did find is what I thought I was reading all along: That he wants to shoot with an SLR. So, I should have clarified: Shooting WITH AN SLR, per his opening statement that defined his goal, as well as the many statements he made after that, reitterating that same goal.

His statement regarding owning a digital camera...

I think you're not realizing that I already own a P&S bridge digital camera which I use for my regular use.

I asked for advice on Film SLR because I wanted the SLR experience without blowing tons of money on a DSLR.

Discussion over. I'm not a newbie to photography and I understand the basics quite well.

My comment on the muscle car was intended as an analogy... Some people like old stuff, some think it's a waste of time. Whatever the reason, he likes the idea of shooting film and I believe that weighs in far more than the cost... There are two threads by the OP and some of the cameras entertained, especially the medium format cameras, rival the cost of entry level DSLRs. Not that it really matters I suppose... Its not like he has to justify what he spends his money on.

Where we disconect here is my understanding of the original question was "What's the most cost effective way to get into a SLR / DSLR?" In my opinion, no matter how you dress it up, film isn't cheaper... Not if you look at ALL the options. Unless you plan to shoot 7 or 8 rolls of film and move on.

Which isn't to say digital is better... I just don't think cost was ever really the primary concern. Just my opinion...

 

[nonamexx]

First, I went back looking for his statement that he's already got a digital camera, and couldn't find it. What I did find is what I thought I was reading all along: That he wants to shoot with an SLR. So, I should have clarified: Shooting WITH AN SLR, per his opening statement that defined his goal, as well as the many statements he made after that, reitterating that same goal.

His statement regarding owning a digital camera...

I think you're not realizing that I already own a P&S bridge digital camera which I use for my regular use.

I asked for advice on Film SLR because I wanted the SLR experience without blowing tons of money on a DSLR.

Discussion over. I'm not a newbie to photography and I understand the basics quite well.

My comment on the muscle car was intended as an analogy... Some people like old stuff, some think it's a waste of time. Whatever the reason, he likes the idea of shooting film and I believe that weighs in far more than the cost... There are two threads by the OP and some of the cameras entertained, especially the medium format cameras, rival the cost of entry level DSLRs. Not that it really matters I suppose... Its not like he has to justify what he spends his money on.

Where we disconect here is my understanding of the original question was "What's the most cost effective way to get into a SLR / DSLR?" In my opinion, no matter how you dress it up, film isn't cheaper... Not if you look at ALL the options. Unless you plan to shoot 7 or 8 rolls of film and move on.

Which isn't to say digital is better... I just don't think cost was ever really the primary concern. Just my opinion...

Do you realize that film and development is cheaper where I live? How many times have I got to repeat this over and over again in this thread?

I don't think you even understand the economics of the issue.

Don't you understand the basic point I'm making that I would rather spend more money spread over a period of 3 years than blow a lot of money in a DSLR at one go?

I can get a decent film SLR + good lens at 1/10th the price of the starting DSLR with a good lens. So even if I spend a lot on film and development, it's going to take a long time for me to reach the price of the starting DSLR.

How many times do I have to repeat this?

I am NOT a film fanatic. I think Buckster has got this correctly. I want an entry into SLR photography that is initially cheap. The recurring expenses don't worry me so much because I don't intend shooting rolls and rolls of film every single day. If I click 50 snaps a month on average that's a lot for me, even with a digital.

 

[white]

Any classic film SLR will do. I prefer the all metal ones. The plastic stuff just feels cheap. I have yet to purchase a Nikon F (or F2 or F3), but it's on my list. Minolta SRT's are tanks; just bought an OM-1, lovely little camera; but the Canonet QL17 G3 is my favorite at the moment, but that's just because I can't afford a Leica M6.

 

[nonamexx]

I also wanted to add: I am not considering a brand new film SLR because of 1. cost and 2. non availability of most models.

So even though I was considering some of the options including medium format, I would practically never choose a medium format because it's very hard to get film and development where I live for such exotic media.

I like exotic hobbies, but equally I am practical enough to understand the cost-benefit of getting into it. I usually decide in terms of getting the most enjoyment out of the least expensive and if that expense is spread over a period of time, all the better for me, because I can balance my cash flow.

 

[nonamexx]

You know another thought occured to me: people are talking about cameras being an "investment" and how I could get a better return for value on a DSLR.

First of all the whole thing of it as an investment seems to be a specious argument at best. Unless I am a full-time professional, no photo gear that I purchase is an "investment" at all. It's a dead-end - I get no monetary return of it. Nothing. Zilch. This is true of both film and DSLRs. Anybody who earns from their photography is probably in a minority and I am not one of them. Don't even pretend to have the skills necessary to put up my pics on a microstock photo site, so there you go!

By putting in tons of money on a DSLR up front, I'm losing out on interest on the money if it had been in a bank deposit or a mutual fund. Since DSLRs are so expensive, it means I lose out on a lot of interest on that initial "investment" with nothing to show in return except an expensive toy. While with a film SLR a lot of that money is still in my bank account and I could probably use the long term interest on that money for buying film and developing them. Also on the shooting front, I am not hanging a camera around my neck going around everywhere and snapping pics, so around 50 snaps/month is slightly more than average for me.

So there you go. I've answered all the arguments in this thread.

If people still think I'm a film fanatic or a sentimentalist they're free to do so. I cannot get more practical than this.

 

[Josh66]

It's only an investment if it makes you more money than you spent on it.

If you're not planning on using it to make money, you'll never get a return on the money spent...

That's why it's a hobby though.

 

[nonamexx]

It's only an investment if it makes you more money than you spent on it.

If you're not planning on using it to make money, you'll never get a return on the money spent...

That's why it's a hobby though.

That's precisely why I'd like to make it so cheap for the initial cost. I've already determined that I can easily afford the recurring expenses of film at my current rate of snapping away pictures.

Yes, if I could get a DSLR for around $100 I'd buy it, but I am dreaming

 

[Josh66]

Yes, if I could get a DSLR for around $100 I'd buy it, but I am dreaming

Actually, you can get one for not much more than that. Not a new one, obviously...

Canon Digital KISS N SILVER (JAPAN REBEL XT) 8 MEGAPIXEL WITH BATTERY & CHARGER (CF CARD ) DIGITAL SLR INTERCHANGEABLE LENS CAMERA - KEH.com

Canon Digital REBEL XT BLACK 8 MEGAPIXEL WITH CABLES, CD, BATTERY & CHARGER, INSTRUCTION BOOK (CF CARD ), DIGITAL SLR INTERCHANGEABLE LENS CAMERA - KEH.com

Canon Digital 10D 6.3 MEGAPIXEL WITH BATTERY GRIP BG-ED3 ONLY (CF CARD ) DIGITAL SLR INTERCHANGEABLE LENS CAMERA - KEH.com

It'll be a few generations behind, but they still work.

You can get a much better 35mm body for the same amount of money though.

 

[Josh66]

35mm bodies:
Canon EOS Camera Bodies - KEH.com

1N for $170 ... 3 for $180...

There are also a bunch for less than $50, and a few for $10 or less.


The camera in my avatar is a 1N RS that I got there for $260. It was BGN rated, but it looks perfect to me...

 

[nonamexx]

Yes, if I could get a DSLR for around $100 I'd buy it, but I am dreaming

Actually, you can get one for not much more than that. Not a new one, obviously...

Canon Digital KISS N SILVER (JAPAN REBEL XT) 8 MEGAPIXEL WITH BATTERY & CHARGER (CF CARD ) DIGITAL SLR INTERCHANGEABLE LENS CAMERA - KEH.com

Canon Digital REBEL XT BLACK 8 MEGAPIXEL WITH CABLES, CD, BATTERY & CHARGER, INSTRUCTION BOOK (CF CARD ), DIGITAL SLR INTERCHANGEABLE LENS CAMERA - KEH.com

Canon Digital 10D 6.3 MEGAPIXEL WITH BATTERY GRIP BG-ED3 ONLY (CF CARD ) DIGITAL SLR INTERCHANGEABLE LENS CAMERA - KEH.com

It'll be a few generations behind, but they still work.

You can get a much better 35mm body for the same amount of money though.

I appreciate the links. It all looks interesting and if I could choose any of those used models from a local source, I would be very happy indeed.

But one of my limitations is that of course I cannot risk having it shipped from outside India as I'm not sure of customs regulations regarding electronic products. I might end up paying double the camera costs as duty or something. This is why I've had to be so selective in my approach.

If I could have bought any of the used digital SLRs recommended in this thread without this drawback I might have chosen some of the more reasonably cheap ones.

I don't think people have appreciated this aspect of it either. Shipping + taxes might end up making it doubly expensive for me.

 

[Josh66]

Ah, damnit...lol. I completely forgot that you were in India...


---
They do ship internationally though... But yeah - there's always the tax/duty thing though...
And I know what you're talking about there ... once or twice I had to pay more to customs than what the item cost...

 

[nonamexx]

No problem. If only we could eliminate government and taxes

If I had any close friends in Singapore or the US, I could ask them to buy something for me and bring it back when they visit India. Let's see if that is an option.

Otherwise I have ebay.in as a fallback for the couple of models I've decided on.