# Camera help



## AnthonyLuisGarcia (Apr 24, 2012)

Okay so Im one of the new guys here in the forums. Just joined. I am new to photography and need camera help! lol. Like I said im new and just started, so i've been using the camera in my house (Sony Cybershot) its a 10.1 MP camera. So I've been talking to some lady about buying her cannon. It is an older model, atleast 4 years. but I'll be buying it for 75 bucks. Is that good? also is 35mm good? Its a Cannon EOS rebel T3 300x 35mm .... I have no idea what that is. So thats why I'm here asking you guys, so will it be an upgrade? downgrade? Since its film do I need a black room? can I transfer directly to my PC? Sorry just have alot of questions and any help will help, thanks!


----------



## zcar21 (Apr 24, 2012)

You might be talking about a canon eos 3. It is a professional film camera, you set the role in the camera shoot 36x (for most roles), and go to a lab to get it developed and printed.
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-EOS-3-3...I542/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1335328716&sr=8-1

A canon eos t3 is digital and don't use film, and you get the pictures the same way as your sony.
Amazon.com: Canon EOS Rebel T3 12.2 MP CMOS Digital SLR with 18-55mm IS II Lens and EOS HD Movie Mode (Black): Electronics


----------



## Josh66 (Apr 24, 2012)

If it's film, it's a lot older than 4 years.  For $75, I really doubt it's a T3 (or anything else digital).  Also, it's Canon - not Cannon, unless it's an artillery piece.  

I think you need to ask her to clarify what it is some more.  Get pictures of it if you can.  "300x", I'm assuming means it comes with a 300mm lens, probably one of the 75-300 lenses.

You don't need a dark room unless you want to make prints on an enlarger.  You will have to either develop the film yourself, or take it to a lab.  The lab will give you prints and a CD if you want (and your film back too, of course).  You will need a film scanner or a CD from the lab to get them on the computer.

Have you used film before?


----------



## Dao (Apr 25, 2012)

That is most likely is the Canon Rebel EOS T2 (US) / 300x (Europe) / Kiss 7 (Japan) film camera.  (Not the Digital Rebel series)

$75, it seems a little high without lens.  Or it comes with a lens?

For around $7x, you can pick up a Canon Elan body at keh.com


----------



## AnthonyLuisGarcia (Apr 25, 2012)

I appreciate everyones feed back, like I said I dont know anything about cameras and its helping. I looked more closely at the pics and its not t3, its t2. So I do believe its film. But is film quality just as good as digital? I'll put the pics up and tell me if it will be worth it.


----------



## AnthonyLuisGarcia (Apr 25, 2012)

O|||||||O said:


> Have you used film before?



Nope, have no idea about film cameras, on how good they are or anything. I wanna get into photography and just want some kind of starter camera for now, something better than a Sony Cybershot lol


----------



## KmH (Apr 25, 2012)

Here is a commonly used roll of film - Kodak Gold Film 200 ASA 135 - 36 Exposures 

That roll has 36 frames on it. The roll costs $6.95. Once you make the 36 exposures, you take the roll of film out of the camera and take/send it to a lab to have it developed Film Services : Mpix.Com, unless you set up your own wet darkroom and acquire the chemicals, tools, and skills needed to develope the film your self.

Mpix charges an additional $0.19 per exposure ($6.84 for 36 exposures) so that roll of film has now cost you $13.76 and you don't have any prints yet. You can get a DVD for $10 more of up to 50 of your film photos, but those will be somewhat small 1228x1818 pixel digital images.

So to see those 36 film photos on your computer will cost you about $23.76 for each 36 exposure roll you shoot.

Oh, if you goof and make a bad exposure, you not only won't know until you get the film developed, you have to pay to have the bad exposures developed in the first place. 

In short, film is rather expensive when compared to shooting digital.


----------



## Josh66 (Apr 25, 2012)

Just one note on Mpix (I have used them for film developing a lot in the past) - they don't charge for blank or nearly blank frames.  So, at least if you really mess up, it will only cost you the wasted film.

The way it works with Mpix is: You request mailers (free - see the link Keith posted).  You mail them your film (free).  They e-mail you when it's ready, then you log in and pay for it.  Once you pay for it, they ship it back to you, and the scans appear in your online album there.  You can then order prints/CD of the ones you like.  Keep in mind that Mpix only does 35mm C-41 (color negative).  No slides, no B&W (other than C-41 B&W), no medium or large format.  


Really though, if you're going to shoot film, it would be a good idea to learn to develop it yourself.  Not only will you have more control, you will save money in the long run (especially true for B&W).


$7 for a roll of Kodak Gold is extortion.    Yes, that is a common film, but it's not really a good one.  You can buy "Pro" film cheaper than that.  On average, figure $5 a roll for decent film.  You'll save a few bucks buying 5-packs too.

Shooting film isn't really about 'matching' digital.  Film has a different look (that a lot of digital shooters like to emulate).  It's not really better or worse - just different.  I'll leave the film vs. digital debate at that.


If you're just now learning photography, digital may be the more efficient route though...  Film is a slower learning process, since you can't see your mistakes right away, and by the time you see them - you may not remember exactly what you did wrong (you should take notes to prevent that).
You can learn photography with film (it was done that way for about the last hundred years), but you'll probably learn faster with digital.

_Shooting_ film is more expensive than shooting digital, but the equipment is far less expensive.  You can buy a top-of-the-line 35mm body for a couple hundred.  That won't even get you an entry level digital body 3 or 4 generations old.  The same lenses can usually be used on either, so that will cost the same which ever way you go.  Film cameras are generally built a lot better too (that Rebel you're looking at probably being one of the exceptions though...).  I was never impressed by the 35mm Rebel line.


----------

