Film Cameras

episodic

Lifer
Feb 7, 2004
11,088
2
81
I can't afford a digital SLR. There is no way I can justify it.

What I'd like to do is to get a decent film SLR and then scan the negatives.

Can someone that does this point me to a home film scanner that will work well.

Also as an absolute beginner to SLR photography that DOES want to learn more about the manual aspect of it, what is out there free for me to read that is quality and geared towards newbies.

I'm considering the Canon Rebel SLR - it seems to get good reviews and for less than $200 it comes with a 28-80 mm lens.

Also, I keep reading about how good a 50 mm lens with a 1.4 something - any comments on this?

Thanks!
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,268
126
What you ask is reasonable, however the problem is with the scanner. The resident photo guru can correct me, but I believe that one that will really do justice to a negative costs a substantial amount of cash. I don't think you would save much for your efforts, but I may be wrong.
 

Raiden256

Platinum Member
Feb 11, 2001
2,144
0
0
You sound like me. I bought a Rebel 2000, and have been thrilled with the quality, even though I mostly only use the point and shoot or "portrait" modes. I know I could get even better shots if I would take the time to learn anything about photography.
 

upsciLLion

Diamond Member
Feb 21, 2001
5,947
1
81
Originally posted by: episodic
I can't afford a digital SLR. There is no way I can justify it.

What I'd like to do is to get a decent film SLR and then scan the negatives.

Can someone that does this point me to a home film scanner that will work well.

Also as an absolute beginner to SLR photography that DOES want to learn more about the manual aspect of it, what is out there free for me to read that is quality and geared towards newbies.

I'm considering the Canon Rebel SLR - it seems to get good reviews and for less than $200 it comes with a 28-80 mm lens.

Also, I keep reading about how good a 50 mm lens with a 1.4 something - any comments on this?

Thanks!

The Nikon n8008s comes with a spot meter which is very important. Only camera you'll ever need. Should be able to get it with a good 50mm lens for under $200 on eBay.
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,393
8,552
126
read photo.net

good scanners cost a boatload.

you can get decent scans with a normal scanner. you won't be blowing them up to huge sizes, but they'll work. i'd almost suggest getting a photocd from a good developer rather than doing it yourself. but i don't know what file format or resolution the photocd pics are at
 

myusername

Diamond Member
Jun 8, 2003
5,046
0
0
Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
The resident photo guru can correct me, but I believe that one that will really do justice to a negative costs a substantial amount of cash.

I'm not the resident photo guru, but that statement needs no corection :)

I would recommend looking into the Kodak RFS 3600. I have done NO research, and this is not an endorsement of the product, but it is relatively inexpensive (and discontinued, so purchase used) and should have recent generation tech inside. Kodak's professional scanners have been phenomenal, and if the quality carries to this consumer scanner, it could be a great bargain.
But, like I said, not an endorsement, just a suggestion of where to do some research.


Originally posted by: ElFenix
i'd almost suggest getting a photocd from a good developer rather than doing it yourself. but i don't know what file format or resolution the photocd pics are at

A: Suckass resolution.
 

montanafan

Diamond Member
Nov 7, 1999
3,551
2
71
I learned the basics of photography from my brother when he was a journalism student in college, so if you have any friends or family who are into photography you could probably get some help from them. I also took a photography class in college, though it mainly concentrated on teaching you how to develop your own photos, I did learn a few new things about perspective, composition, etc. It's one of those things you mainly learn by doing and reading, and talking to people over time. There are some good tutorials on the net like someone else pointed out and your camera will come with some basic instructions on apertures and shutter speeds etc.

I don't know how much you already know, so I'm not sure where to start, but if you have any specific questions I'd be glad to answer them for you. BTW, I like the Canon Rebel, but just about any good SLR body is going to be fine, it's the lenses that are most important. The length of the lens is important depending on what kinds of photos you'll be taking, but the aperture capabilities (that 1.4 thing) are more important.
 

episodic

Lifer
Feb 7, 2004
11,088
2
81
What about this scanner? Many of the persons that reviewed it indicated they used it as a negative scanner and that it was outstanding.

It is only 90$
 

EULA

Senior member
Aug 13, 2004
940
0
0
The best film camera I have ever used is the Canon AE-1. Pictures and lens selections are awesome. Several local newspaper photographers still use them.

the Canon Rebel SLR is an overall decent camera, but I found out I was shooting far too many rolls with it (taking advantage of the automatic settings) so I gave it up.

A digital rebel would be a far better investment, however. I've used one extensively (hope to purchase my own soon) and It's probably paid for itself in film processing savings alone.

I recommend you start with the AE-1, and then save yourself some money, and get the digital Rebel.
 

m2kewl

Diamond Member
Oct 7, 2001
8,263
0
0
Originally posted by: EULA
The best film camera I have ever used is the Canon AE-1. Pictures and lens selections are awesome.

the AE-1 is classic. but after shooting sports/wildlife with a 1d2, i don't think i can ever go back to film. i love digital too much.
 

littleprince

Golden Member
Jan 4, 2001
1,339
1
81
You probaly were looking at the Canon 50mm 1.8
Nice and sharp lens. Super cheaper for the speed. AF is slow and noisy, and cheap construction though. But its hard to go wrong at that price.
Have you considered saving up and going used digital? I started many many years ago in film. And although I liked it, i never learned or shot much, coz of developing etc...
 

montanafan

Diamond Member
Nov 7, 1999
3,551
2
71
I used my Canon AE 1 for over 20 years and loved it, but I finally switched to the Digital Rebel a couple of years ago wouldn't want to go back to film. Even if he did go with the digital he'd still have to learn the same basics for shooting manually.

Edit: Sorry I can't help you with the scanner. I always developed my own film when I had access to a lab and sent them off for developing when I didn't. I've only used a scanner for making copies of prints.
 

Joony

Diamond Member
Jan 17, 2001
7,654
0
0
The Canon Elan series are pretty nice, you can find one under 200 these days for an older model such as the A2E
 

EatSpam

Diamond Member
May 1, 2005
6,423
0
0
Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
What you ask is reasonable, however the problem is with the scanner. The resident photo guru can correct me, but I believe that one that will really do justice to a negative costs a substantial amount of cash. I don't think you would save much for your efforts, but I may be wrong.

I'm pretty sure you are correct. The OP might as well just buy a Digital SLR, since his idea will cost just as much. Just wait for Best Buy or Circuit City to do a 24 months Same-As-Cash thing and buy.
 

EULA

Senior member
Aug 13, 2004
940
0
0
Originally posted by: m2kewl
Originally posted by: EULA
The best film camera I have ever used is the Canon AE-1. Pictures and lens selections are awesome.

the AE-1 is classic. but after shooting sports/wildlife with a 1d2, i don't think i can ever go back to film. i love digital too much.

Digital is the way to go now. So much more efficient and cost-effective.
 

kyutip

Golden Member
Jul 24, 2000
1,729
0
0
While the upfront cost might be a little high, you will save quite a lot in the long run.

Let's see (including tax) :
Canon Rebel SLR around $200
Scanner around $100
Film & Processing fee per roll around $4 - $5
Scanning & processing neg takes time
Waiting for your neg to come back takes time
Since you say you can't afford DSLR, I'd say you can't afford to shoot film willy nilly
That will affect your creativity.

Right off the bat, you are almost half way to Digital Rebel price.
Or 2/3rd there if you can find a decent used DR.
Canon 50mm f/1.4 cost around $300, I think the f/1.8 version should be fine @ around $75.

With DSLR, you can shoot without worrying about the film & processing cost.
I'm pretty sure you will make up the cost in no time (SLR VS DSLR).
 

tami

Lifer
Nov 14, 2004
11,588
3
81
you mean 1.4 aperature, the f-stop number. that means it lets more light in than something that, say, has an aperature of 5.6. typically, something with a lower f-stop number is a LOT more expensive than the same lens with a higher number.

my friend is considering pursuing a similar path to you. she doesn't know if the digital SLR price is justifiable as she has never taken pictures with an SLR camera. she's considering the rebel 200, i believe (i don't know offhand), with a few sets of lenses, since it's relatively cheap ($200 or so). she said she'd practice with the camera and pay approximately $200 on film and developing that film. that total price (~$400) is less than a new digital SLR (e.g. my nikon d70 cost $999-$100 rebate -- and the prices have since gone up). still, if she likes it, she plans on buying a digital SLR, but first she wants to see if it's worthwhile.

to be perfectly honest, i have been trying to convince her that doing so is not the most desirable idea. first of all, there's such a tremendous market for digital SLRs that if she doesn't like it, she can sell the camera and lenses at maybe a very small loss, if any at all. second of all, the annoyance of learning is intensified by the fact that you're not seeing how your pictures are coming out since you don't have the ability to review your pictures as you do in a digital SLR mode. if you're unfamiliar with SLR cameras, it is NOT an easy learning experience and takes hours of reading and patience. i'm by far an expert (i've only owned an SLR for a little over a month, but during that time, i've been reading and taking thousands of shots), and i still don't take great pictures -- only a small fraction of my shots come out well.

that makes yet another digital feature -- the ability to post-process images, using such programs as photoshop -- even more desirable. if your picture is too dark (and trust me, you won't get the white balance and light metering stuff down pat for a good amount of time), you can brighten it simply by clicking a few buttons in your favorite photo editor. they come out great, and you can still develop prints.
 

NTB

Diamond Member
Mar 26, 2001
5,179
0
0
I know you said a DSLR is too expensive, but I thought I'd point this out anyway :)

Circuit city is offering 17 months 0-interest financing on both of the digital rebel models, and the old 6.3MP model is on sale for $760. Grab that and a 1GB CF carrd from Newegg, and you're still well under the MSRP of the Rebel XT.

EDIT: I should add that I went through the process of making the same decision about a year ago. Finally, a couple months ago I decided to bite the bullet and fork over the cash for a DSLR anyway. Versatility (especially the ability to change film speeds on the fly) and the prospect of being able to see my pics right after I took them (as opposed to paying to have the film developed before I found out I botched something) are the two big things that swayed me. I'm still paying on the camera, but it was well worth it, IMO.

Nate
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,393
8,552
126
Originally posted by: EULA
Originally posted by: m2kewl
Originally posted by: EULA
The best film camera I have ever used is the Canon AE-1. Pictures and lens selections are awesome.

the AE-1 is classic. but after shooting sports/wildlife with a 1d2, i don't think i can ever go back to film. i love digital too much.

Digital is the way to go now. So much more efficient and cost-effective.

you've seen how much an ae-1 and assorted lenses cost on ebay, right? a digital slr cannot beat that once you start tacking on those lenses. you'd have to go through a mountain of flim before you overtake digital. and of course digital prints cost money too.
 

alkemyst

No Lifer
Feb 13, 2001
83,769
19
81
Originally posted by: EULA
The best film camera I have ever used is the Canon AE-1. Pictures and lens selections are awesome. Several local newspaper photographers still use them.

the Canon Rebel SLR is an overall decent camera, but I found out I was shooting far too many rolls with it (taking advantage of the automatic settings) so I gave it up.

A digital rebel would be a far better investment, however. I've used one extensively (hope to purchase my own soon) and It's probably paid for itself in film processing savings alone.

I recommend you start with the AE-1, and then save yourself some money, and get the digital Rebel.
sort of outdated recommendation...AE-1 was a crippled A-1 which are cheap too. The Nikon F1? is a popular photag piece too...most are going dSLR though.