If I wanted to fool around with film
Nov 11, 2015 09:52:17 #
Bike guy wrote:
Many (many) years ago I owned several film slr's ... (show quote)
I still use my Canon F-1 on occasion. You can pick one up for a song, plus a slew of FD lenses.the Whole package can be had for under $300 or 400
Nov 11, 2015 10:41:48 #
I have 2 Pentax ZX-5n's, that I shoot a roll or two of b/w through a month. I have several older autofocus lens that work on them. The newer lenses I have are mostly for crop sensor and give some vignetting. In any case it works well. I, also, have a bunch of old manual focus lenses, but me and manual focus don't get along.
Nov 11, 2015 10:52:04 #
RWR
Loc: La Mesa, CA
ssymeono wrote:
Why not experience the best film camera? Ironicall... (show quote)
The F6 wasn't even designed for or marketed to professionals. It is a fine camera, smooth and quiet, but for speed and rugged construction it cannot hold a candle to the F5. I bought an F5 new in 1997, then rented an F6 for a week in 2006. Then I read the reviews, which confirmed the low opinion I had formed of it. I still have and use my F5.
Nov 11, 2015 11:12:14 #
Bike guy wrote:
Many (many) years ago I owned several film slr's ... (show quote)
+++++++++++++
35mm and 120 roll film... ?
That is a more convenient size. And less costly than - say - a 4X5 or larger.
However IF you have a view camera - That is what trips my "trigger"... :-)
Nov 11, 2015 11:23:22 #
James R wrote:
+++++++++++++
35mm and 120 roll film... ?
That is a more convenient size. And less costly than - say - a 4X5 or larger.
However IF you have a view camera - That is what trips my "trigger"... :-)
35mm and 120 roll film... ?
That is a more convenient size. And less costly than - say - a 4X5 or larger.
However IF you have a view camera - That is what trips my "trigger"... :-)
That thing is cool!
Nov 11, 2015 11:53:54 #
I recently started shooting film again also. One thought on an approach for you is to first just dip your toe in the film pool again -- by getting a less expensive but good -- film camera before jumping all in. Just to ensure that the reality of dealing with film matches the hopes and pleasant memories.
Having said that, if you have some existing Nikon lenses, you might check out the very good Nikon F100 -- often available from reputable stores like B&H, Adorama, and KEH. Another more classic alternative is the Nikon FM3a -- manual focus only and can operate fully manual without batteries; or, with TTL metering and Aperture priority with batteries. I have and use both. Very enjoyable to go fully retro with the FM, a manual lens, and a roll of TriX.
Having said that, if you have some existing Nikon lenses, you might check out the very good Nikon F100 -- often available from reputable stores like B&H, Adorama, and KEH. Another more classic alternative is the Nikon FM3a -- manual focus only and can operate fully manual without batteries; or, with TTL metering and Aperture priority with batteries. I have and use both. Very enjoyable to go fully retro with the FM, a manual lens, and a roll of TriX.
Nov 11, 2015 11:54:25 #
Ishootcanon wrote:
That thing is cool!
That thing is really cool. :thumbup:
Nov 11, 2015 12:03:54 #
Kmgw9v wrote:
That thing is really cool. :thumbup:
How would I go about getting one?
Nov 11, 2015 12:54:58 #
imagemeister wrote:
If money is no object, according to K. Rockwell, the Mamiya 6 and Mamiya 7 rangefinders are the best cameras on the planet.
I also like and use the Fuji RF's in both 645 and 6X9.
I also like and use the Fuji RF's in both 645 and 6X9.
And as a result, the Mamiyas are the most expensive, particularly if you go crazy on the lenses. A two lens Mamiya 7 kit will put you well over $2000, but yes, a good camera.
I switched to the Fixed lens with the rangefinder MF Fujifilm GSW690II with a bigger format (6x9 CM) and equally as good IQ as the Mamiya. Cost... less than one half of a Mamiya with one lens... Actually about the cost for the Fujifilm body and lens that you would pay for a body only on the Mamiya.
Since I started shooting 6X9, I have rarely shot any smaller format.
Another trick for 6X9... shoot 2 or 3 pictures with overlap, have them scanned, and stitch them for a panorama equal to 6x17 (and up) for about 1/3 the equipment price for 6X17 film gear.
BTW, I have been buying and selling film gear for over 15 years on eBay part time. For truly good film gear that cost an arm and a leg when they were new, prices are good. However, sales are rising for good well kept film gear, and prices are going up.
New film emulsions and production are also rising. Many have had it with digital. one of the best markets right now in the hobby market is people who never shot film before. One good film camera for fun, and one good cell phone for quick and good.
I'm still shooting my 45 year old Olympus OM-1 plus a lot of medium format with my Fuji GSW690II. Also in the mail to me, my two new TravelWide 4X5 large format. The Kickstarter program sold 1500 of those now in delivery phase.
4X5 is 13 times larger than Full Frame digital. It'll be a while before digital (consumer level) catches up with the IQ of film.
Nov 11, 2015 13:22:32 #
Nov 11, 2015 13:55:26 #
Bike guy wrote:
Many (many) years ago I owned several film slr's ... (show quote)
I sold a Nikon N80 on ebay a year ago. Before selling it I ran through a few rolls of film for old times sake. At the time I had a D60 and a D5100. The lenses I bought for those two worked just fine on the N80 *(allowing for the difference in APC-C image size). The actual shooting experience of the N80 was considerably nicer than the two DLSRs. It was just the film processing, etc, I wasn't willing to deal with any more. So If you don't mind processing the film and like your D3300, I think you will like a D80 (or one of the others in that general series).
PS: Some Dx lenses will cover 35mm / full frame within certain limitations. Example- the 10-24mm will cover 35mm film from 18mm upwards. You have to experiment with each lens as I know of no place where anyone has cataloged this. Coverage can depend on aperture- so as I said you have to experiment for yourself.
Nov 11, 2015 14:30:44 #
James Slick
Loc: Pittsburgh,PA
imagemeister wrote:
My philosophy is , if you are going to the expense and time of "dabbling" in film, make it worth your while and at least use 120 film based camera. My recommendation would be the Pentax 645 SLR - which is quite cheap these days ( and so are some of the lenses).
+1 for Pentax 645!
Nov 11, 2015 15:48:45 #
jrh1354
Loc: Dayton, Ohio
William Royer wrote:
I recently started shooting film again also. One ... (show quote)
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
Nov 11, 2015 16:25:15 #
I too have a collection of old roll films cameras including a Speed Graphic with a roll film back. But the very best of them all is my old Rolleiflex. Solid, reliable, great lens, quick and easy to use. But the best thing was the ability to shoot from the chest rather than holding it your eye. I wish somebody would come up with a digital equivalent.
Nov 11, 2015 16:44:44 #
rps wrote:
I too have a collection of old roll films cameras including a Speed Graphic with a roll film back. But the very best of them all is my old Rolleiflex. Solid, reliable, great lens, quick and easy to use. But the best thing was the ability to shoot from the chest rather than holding it your eye. I wish somebody would come up with a digital equivalent.
Many digital cameras have articulating LCD screens ...
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.