# Recommendation for a decent film SLR for a new SLR user



## nonamexx (Dec 28, 2010)

What would you recommend? Currently I found very few options in the film SLR category which I can purchase brand new, but as far as used models are concerned, what should I buy and what are the factors I should look out for in a used camera of this nature?


----------



## j-dogg (Dec 28, 2010)

Cut and paste from the other thread.

The Rebel 2000 you mentioned earlier is a great film SLR and can be had  for pretty cheap. The only downside to a Rebel is the kit lenses that  come with them are usually junk, however there are a plethora of cheap  and sharp zoom lenses in the Canon EF line that will suit your needs,  like the 28-70 f3.5-4.5 Macro. 

Also check out any of the 80's manual Nikon SLR's, the FG is what I  started on, and the lenses for the FG are pretty cheap and give  excellent results. I absolutely love mine to pieces. To this day many  say the original Nikon Series E 50mm f1.8 that came with those cameras  as the kit lens is one of the best lenses Nikon ever made.

If you go the Nikon route, get a 105mm f2.5, it's a bit on the pricey  side but another one of those Nikon gems people rave about. It's  possibly their best portrait lens ever.

Nikkormats can be had for pretty cheap too and they are pretty beefy.  Get the Nikkormat FTN or the FT2, the FT2 can use a traditional  prism-mount hot shoe flash where as the FTN does not. Also, the pre-AI  lenses that the Nikkormat uses are generally a little cheaper than their  more modern counterparts. Best of all, with the exception of the  Nikkormat EL, all Nikkormats are full manual and only use a battery for  light metering, so if the battery conks out, you can still take a photo.  The light seals are a cinch to replace, I did mine in a half an hour,  and you will probably want to replace them if you get one.

I'll go ahead and throw my 4th camera in the ring too, my Minolta Maxxum  4. This is probably your cheapest and best alternative. Not only are  they dirt cheap, but the earlier kit lenses, like the Minolta AF 35-70  f3.5 4.5 are razor sharp and cost next to nothing. Their newer kit  lenses, not so much though. They had a LOT of gems, the 70-210 f4, also  called the "Beercan" and the 50mm f1.7, and they all generally trade for  less cash than their Nikon and Canon counterparts. Plus......if you  decide to go the DSLR route and get a Sony, which is compatible with ALL  auto-focus Minolta lenses, those awesome lenses will be image  stabilized because the Sony image stabilization is built into the body.


----------



## nonamexx (Dec 28, 2010)

Thanks mate. The biggest problem is availability. I have to check out ebay for all this since it's difficult to obtain a film SLR in the open market.


----------



## MichiganFarts (Dec 28, 2010)

Get a Nikon FM10 and a 50mm lens with a wide aperture.  Easy to use, basic, film slr camera.  

If you want something higher speed, shoulda said so in your OP.  

Any film camera can shoot great shots, the exact model is more personal preference than anything.

I'd put more stock into what lens you get.


----------



## nonamexx (Dec 28, 2010)

Thanks. FM 10 is fully manual, right? No aperture priority or shutter priority mode? I also heard that it's light metering system is broken. Other than that it seems to be the one of the best basic film SLR cameras around.

Not that I expect miracles, but I read some excellent reviews of the Canon Rebel 2000 camera as well provided of course I get a different set of lens from the stock lens.

Thanks for the tips on the lens system. I definitely will research this aspect to the full!


----------



## flea77 (Dec 28, 2010)

This really depends on what you want in a camera. 

Manual focus:
I second the idea of a Nikon FG, my first new SLR ever, and I still have two sitting on my shelf (one for sale BTW with the famous 50mm Series E, heh). They have full manual, full auto, A and S modes. One of my favorite features for people starting out is the little beeper (which you can turn off) if your shutter speed drops below 1/60. They are also small and light. You can get more information at Allan&#39;s Stuff - Nikon FG FAQ do watch out for the fact that any older camera like these may need a new light seal kit installed.

Autofocus:
I like the N90s personally. It has pretty much all the features you could want in an AF film body and is quite cheap. The rubber coating tends to come off the back on these, the one I have I completely removed the coating off the back and it is great.

Allan


----------



## MichiganFarts (Dec 28, 2010)

flea77 said:


> I like the N90s personally. It has pretty much all the features you could want in an AF film body and is quite cheap. The rubber coating tends to come off the back on these, the one I have I completely removed the coating off the back and it is great.
> 
> Allan



Funny, because I just pulled out my Nikon N90s, that's been packed away for some time, and the rubber coating on the back turned very sticky, and hard to remove.  I still haven't gotten it all off yet.


----------



## Evansshoots (Dec 28, 2010)

I second the 'N90' idea (called the F90 over here). In fact, any F fit Nikon will be a pretty good buy. They seem never to want to die!

There are a few of the old AF models on ebay atm, things like the F-501 and 801.

I have quite a few film SLRs, My personal favourite is an Asahi Pentax (Yankees will know this as a Honeywell Pentax) Spotmatic. I have two at present, and tehy can take a real beating. The latest one has dents all over it, brassing and the works, but is absoloutely fine inside...pretty much (in fairness, the previous owner left the shutter cocked for a decade, but considering that, it's working pretty accurately)

If you wan an automatic, if it's older than 30 years, it had better be a Nikon. I reccomend the F801 or F801s (second has slightly faster AF) which are both nice, hard to destoy cameras.

If buying second hand, I'd reccomend getting a mechanical one, they are easier to repair yourself, more reliable (No probs with batteries running out) and they are built like tanks, so if anyone gives you trouble, you can whack 'em one!

Not that I condone violence of course....


----------



## Derrel (Dec 28, 2010)

The Nikon N90s is pretty straightforward, and has an excellent viewfinder system. Prices are quite low these days, and these are more likely to have solid light seals than late-1970's and 1980's cameras. Budget is a factor as well...what one buys depends on the budget. As evansshoots says above, the older Nikon automatics are pretty good performers, and lenses are available quite affordably.


----------



## usayit (Dec 28, 2010)

As far as film SLRs go...  My favorites

* Pentax LX.. jewel of a design in a compact body.   interchangeable viewfinder too.
* Pentax Spotmatic.  Classic student
* Canon 1v.. fast precise of EOS design.
* Canon T90..  THe last of the FD mount cameras.  High end body very advanced.  FD lenses are plentiful these days.


----------



## maris (Dec 28, 2010)

Mamiya RB67 outfit. Going to medium format lifts you out of the miniature camera jungle. There must be at least 50 million talented energetic digital shooters who can easily swamp anything you might grind out on 35mm film.


----------



## nonamexx (Dec 28, 2010)

I was interested in medium format.

I am worried about film availability and cost for medium format though. Any thoughts?


----------



## djacobox372 (Dec 29, 2010)

harishankar said:


> I was interested in medium format.
> 
> I am worried about film availability and cost for medium format though. Any thoughts?



Film will be available for some time.  Check out www.freestylephoto.biz

Medium format film cost about the same as 35mm, however you will get many less shots per roll.  How many depends on the size of the format, 6x4.5cm is 16 per roll, 6x6 is 12, 6x7 is 10.

Finding people to develop medium format, and soon 35mm, is becoming difficult and more expensive. So I'd recommend developing at home and scanning. Developing black and white is very easy and cheap, color is a bit more involved and more expensive. 

For 35mm I'd recommend picking up a nikon FE with a 50mm f1.8 lens, shoudn't cost you more then $90 on ebay.  The Nikon FM series is also a good choice.

For medium format I'd recommend a yashica mat, they can be had for around $150 on ebay. They have excellent optics, and are very easy to use.  They shoot the 6x6 square format, giving you 12 shots per roll.  The quality, with fine grain film, is similar to 60+ megapixel digital.


----------



## Mike_E (Dec 29, 2010)

I have both an N90s and an RB 67 and both are great.

The RB far exceeds the N90s in everything but portability, metering and number of shots per roll of film.

If you're set on a 35mm camera you would be hard pressed to find a better one at the price point of the N90s (the s means that it has spot metering btw) especially since the N90s uses AA batteries.

But as I said, the RB puts you at a whole different level and is worth further consideration.


----------



## nonamexx (Dec 29, 2010)

Thanks. I'll go to an old photo store and check out what is available. 

35mm film is easily available here in India. Not sure about medium format or even B & W film. In fact, I heard that B & W is very hard to find here.

I am going to take a look at all options before buying because many of the models you  mentioned including the N90/F90 doesn't seem to be either on ebay india or any other site that I can find. I guess new pieces are out of the question since most of the film SLRs have been off the manufacturers list for a long long time.

If I absolutely cannot find any other model that is suitable and available, my fallback is the Nikon FM 10 which is fully manual (and I guess will be tougher to use when I simply want a quick snap) or the Canon Rebel 2000 (which at least has some automatic modes for choice).


----------



## Mike_E (Dec 29, 2010)

I wouldn't worry about exposure for snaps, go here and read.. Ultimate Exposure Computer


----------



## Evansshoots (Dec 29, 2010)

Good choices there. Don't go medium format, whatever you do! I have a few medium format cameras, they're good fun, but cost a fortune to 'run' in film and developing costs. The advantages are nill, as I rarely develop photos past A4 size.


----------



## Mike_E (Dec 29, 2010)

Evansshoots said:


> Good choices there. Don't go medium format, whatever you do! I have a few medium format cameras, they're good fun, but cost a fortune to 'run' in film and developing costs. The advantages are nill, as I rarely develop photos past A4 size.




True enough if it's your only camera and you only print small but if you're looking to step up to hanging something on a wall..


----------



## usayit (Dec 29, 2010)

A 645 MFis a good compromise between size, handling, quality and frames per roll.....  

I think it is a viable option..


There's been whole galleries of "hung" sizes made from 35mm......


----------



## nonamexx (Dec 29, 2010)

I've more or less ruled out MF because of non-availability of film and development where I live, let alone costs. 

35mm seems to be still popular and might be around for a while.


----------

