Should I get a 35mm Camera?

[andythebrave]

To be honest I wish I still had my first OM-10.

And I could get one on ebay in decent nick with proper Olympus lenses in 28, 50 & 135mm all for less than £75/$150 with the manual adaptor for the camera too.

Now that's a decent basic camera with full manual control and the three prime lenses that will cover pretty much anything for starters.

It's a steal.

When I were a lad (say that in a broad Lancashire accent please for the full effect) everyone, but everyone, had an OM10 or a Pentax K1000 or ME Super. They're all tremendous in that they were cheap then (and cost little more than a couple of beers now) and enabled a whole generation of photographers to understand the first rule of equipment which is:

It's the lens that counts.

Not forgetting the second rule which is:

It's the lens that counts.

And the third and final rule which is:

It's the lens that counts.

Better get those bids in quick because I can feel my mouse moving towards the bid now button of its own volition.

 

[andythebrave]

I guess I should have also said that I think the answer has to be YES, get a film camera, you'll learn so much and even if (when) you get some digital stuff the lessons learned from working with film will carry over and stand you in good stead.

 

[Mike_E]

(and look into a yashica mat or an autocord just for fun)

 

[Hegs]

wow thx for all the responses. Looks like its an overwhelming YES. But what if I want to make colour prints - im particularly interested in that....it seems to me that film produces particularly rich, deep colour photos. But a few of you seem to think that its a total waste for me to get them developed at a 1 hour photo. So where exactly can I get colour photos developed?

Also, particularly when i start out i expect my photos will probably suck quite a lot. Is it also considered a waste of quality to get my photos put on a CD/online so I can review them first rather than wasting money printing lots of poor photos?

cheeeers!

 

[Perfect Hair Forever]

All these lng replies fr simple questin. es, u shuld get 35mm camera.

(I have same tw kes miss on m kebard, I understand u..)

 

[Mike_E]

Hegs, you can get your film developed at a 1 hour place but you may have to shop around for a good one as much as for your camera. When just starting out you really want not to have any correction done to the film so you can see what you've gotten right and what didn't work. You need to keep notes so that you know how you did what to become consistent.

Consistency is the key because even if you are consistently bad you can correct that and be good all the time. If you are all over the place you'll stay that way because you won't know what to change.
Good luck

mike

 

[sabbath999]

Truth is today if I was going to put a buck and a half in a film camera I would buy a mamiya 645 not a 35mm.....

yes the film is more expensive.... Yes the lenses are not as varied but the quality of the image blows 35mm away.... and I shoot both regularly.

EXACTLY!

 

[Mike_E]

Hegs, I was meandering about and saw this.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...Track=true&ssPageName=VIP:watchlink:middle:us

The 35-70 f2.8 is supposed to be a sweet lens, too.

mike

 

[Reginald Herring]

Hi, I'm in a pretty similar situation to Hegs, although I'm not a filmmaker, I am a student on a similar budget, aiming to spent £50-£75 ($100-$150). Reading this thread I think I've decided I'd be best going with a 35mm camera because of the value you get with them and because it all sounds like good experience. As nice as the F80 looks, the body itself is at the top of my budget and I would end up with a fairly standard lens which according andythebrave is what counts , I think I'd be better off with something like the K1000, could anybody give me some more info on lenses availalbe for that camera?

I have also been given the SLR camera pictured below by a friend. He never uses it and so is lending it to me. Just wondering if you could give me any information about it, how good(or bad ) it is. Unfortanately he wants it back in the not too distant future so I'm still looking for my own camera.

 

[Don Simon]

Hi Reginald, welcome to TPF. the K1000 uses the Pentax K mount, which means the lenses available for it are any and all K-mount lenses going back a few decades and made by numerous companies... there is absolutely no way they can all be listed, but needless to say you will find a lens to suit almost any purpose. The same applies for a Canon or Nikon or any of the major companies when looking for a basic manual SLR; there is a huge choice of lenses.

As for the Praktica... I don't know about the electronic ones, but the old manual ones are generally considered fairly reliable and good value. As you said yourself though, the lens is what matters. Unfortunately the lens mount on that particular Praktica is the Praktica bayonet mount, which is not as common as the Canon, Nikon, Pentax or various other lens mounts, so it wouldn't be as easy to find other lenses for it. If you went for an older, non-electronic Praktica however you would have the m42 screw mount, which is far more common.

£50-75 can get you a good camera and lens on ebay. You probably won't get a good quality zoom in that budget, so I would recommend looking for a camera with a fixed focal length lens like the 50mm on that Praktica.

 

[usayit]

I think I'd be better off with something like the K1000, could anybody give me some more info on lenses availalbe for that camera?
[/IMG][/URL]

The Pentax K-mount "Takumar" lenses have been around for generations. Just search on ebay and you'll have endless possibilities. Most "Takumar" are good to excellent in quality. There are also a lot of third party/unknown branded K-mounts out there too. Some of them have great quality and others... well questionable.

K1000's are a great grassroots type camera which are wonderful student cameras. A little more cash can get you to a MX or ME-Super body with fairly updated features.

Another nice thing is that all those wonderful K-mount lenses are still mountable to Pentax DSLRs today.

My fav lens still is the 40mm f2.8 pancake lens. Its a wonderful "street" lens and its so flat (hence pancake nickname) that the camera with lens can fit in your coat pocket.

http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/

 

[Reginald Herring]

Thanks a lot for the info, could you explain the differences between the K1000, MX and ME-Super? I'm guessing it would still be the lenses that would make the most difference.

Edit: I think the website you added to your post after writing this will answer the above question but a summary or extra info would still be apprecaited. Thanks again.

 

[usayit]

K1000 - Full manual only. Stop down metering, matched needle. Basically a spotmatic with a K-mount bayonet. Think Minimalist.
ME - Aperture priority only. Very simple to operate. Extremely easy to find in various conditions and prices. One of Pentax's best sellers... targeted at the amateur Claim to fame is its size... very compact
ME-Super - Basically ME with push buttons to allow for shutter settings.
MX- Upper end that era... tough.. professional.
LX - (my favorite) simply a genius in design. Way over priced though.
- (http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/pentaxlx/index.htm)

If I shoot with Pentax, I generally shoot with an LX and ME with winder/grip. Once I can find an *ist DSLR for under $200, I'll add that to my collection.

 

[Reginald Herring]

Thanks for the info, if I was going to be shooting landscapes and some buildings how useful do you think the DOF preview on the MX would be? Could I easily do without? Also when shooting landscapes with a small aperture and long shutter speed, what sort of speeds would I likely to be using? Would the 1 second on the MX and K1000 be adequate or would the ME be better ranging up to 4 seconds? Is the 'bulb' function easy to use for longer exposures if 1 seconds isn't enough? Sorry about all the questions, and sorry if they're all very amaturish, never sot a manual camera before. Thanks.

 

[Don Simon]

DOF preview is one of those features that is nice to have, but I don't consider it essential.

If shooting landscapes with a small aperture, your shutter speeds will still vary depending on the available light - with ISO 100 film and an aperture of f/16 you might need an exposure of several seconds with the camera mounted on the tripod, or you might be shooting handheld at 1/60th. The required shutter speed really depends on the light, plus obviously the film speed and aperture you are using. Also consider that using most filters will reduce the light and therefore extend the required exposure time, and also even with landscapes it is possible that you might be introducing light from artificial sources which will reduce the required exposure time. Basically there are too many variables to say for certain what shutter speeds you will be using. What I will say is this: A good tripod is your friend.

Having up to 4 seconds programmable might be convenient if you find yourself shooting at 2 to 4 seconds quite often, but it's another feature that's not really essential. The 'bulb' function is very easy to use, all you need is a cable release (much better than holding the shutter down manually) and a watch.

Oh, and don't be sorry for asking questions