Film SLR Body for Learning- which brand, which model?

[Tippster]

I think he's a maggot, CS - at least I somehow have a Sepia-toned Bookends shot of his as my Wallpaper....

[k trials]

Thought I would jump in on the topic since I was earlier referenced (thanks CS). Glad to see you are enjoying the bookends shot Tippster!:

Check out this guys work. He started shooting with a 20d and learned everything shooting digital.
http://winzeler.smugmug.com/Limited%20Edition%20Prints

I think he's a maggot, CS - at least I somehow have a Sepia-toned Bookends shot of his as my Wallpaper....

But mostly I wanted to comment on the following opinion:

Think of it this way: every great photographer that has ever lived, and every professional news, commercial, sports, wildlife, wedding, portrait, whatever type photographer that is selling, publishing, or presenting their work in a professional setting today, learned how to shoot on film.

As CS mentioned my photography experience has been exclusively on the digital medium (Canon S60 -P&S, 20D, 5D) and I have been fortunate enough to shoot 'professional news, commercial, events and sports' as well as sell large fine art prints in a consumer setting. I would expect many other photographers are in the same category, including those doing this as a profession in any of the above chosen fields. 'Great' is always debatable I guess, but that is a pretty blanket statement made that I have to disagree with.

It never hurts to use all the tools available to refine your skills including film in any format (35mm, medium, large, etc.), but the distinction is refining vs. learning, at least to me. As others have pointed out the feedback available through digital technology is simply awesome for those learning. You can close the loop on whether or not a certain technique or idea produced the expected result so quickly that it just begs for you to A)experiment endlessly and B)be creative. Two reasons I love to shoot!

Conversely, we live in a day of the 'instant image' and I'm as guilty as the next guy of ripping the shutter on my DSLR for 400 frames only to spend 3 hours looking through them and finding nothing of real value OR of critiquing a photo after looking at it for only fractions of a second. My point being that no matter when you pick up a camera or what type it is, there's always refining times when it's good to 'slow down' the entire process of photography. In fact, I've been meaning to undertake a simple exercise in this regard. Choose one prime lens and a small recording device (32mb card OR 24 exposure film roll) and pick an assignment or type of photography for a day and limit yourself to the set number of exposures. I imagine most people would completely slow down the process of composing, lighting, focusing, etc. until they were convinced pressing the shutter button would deliver a shot worth publishing (web, print, etc.). Again, an exercise in refinement, but definitely not the way I would have tackled the first 80% of the photography learning curve given that other options were and are available.

So, will some people never get past auto mode on their fancy new $2,000 DSLR?...sure. Will some people never understand that light and composition are 100 times more important than what brand or type of equipment you are using (including film v. digital debates)?...sure. Tools are tools...period! Whatever you can use to practice, practice, and practice some more to improve your understanding and skill is where I would put my money and time.

Regards,
Kevin

[hemas]

I'll state this again...

Get a reasonable dSLR and start shooting with it, much cheaper to shoot and then try to get the pics perfect without post prosessing in Photoshop/Lightroom/Etc.

And if you really want a film SLR, get a fully manual one (Practica, old Olympos OM's).

[SKISC]

One of the best buys out there is the Minolta x700. You can get a refurbished body for around $100, or a whole package for a couple hundred on ebay. My dad still shoots this and mine just died after 20 years of faithful service. I would be happy to part with my various lenses should you go this way, for a reasonable charge (ie a discount off what is happening on ebay).

National Camera in MN has the refurbished bodies for $100 and I believe you can give them a call and they'll ship it out same day.

Jay

+1 on this. I learned on a 700. I still have it and use it for all my black and white film. The rest of my cameras are Nilon though. N 70, N 80, D 70.

If you are wanting womething to learn on check out the 700. It is a very simple, straight forward SLR that takes great pics.

[MeatPuppet]

Think of it this way: every great photographer that has ever lived, and every professional news, commercial, sports, wildlife, wedding, portrait, whatever type photographer that is selling, publishing, or presenting their work in a professional setting today, learned how to shoot on film.

Every great skier alive today learned on straight skis. If you have a friend who wants to learn how to ski, are you going to stick him on straight skis?

[hhski]

One of the best buys out there is the Minolta x700. You can get a refurbished body for around $100, or a whole package for a couple hundred on ebay. My dad still shoots this and mine just died after 20 years of faithful service. I would be happy to part with my various lenses should you go this way, for a reasonable charge (ie a discount off what is happening on ebay).

National Camera in MN has the refurbished bodies for $100 and I believe you can give them a call and they'll ship it out same day.

Jay

I had this very discussion with my 15 yo a year ago. At $5 a pop it doesnt take long to rack up film costs that get you to the dslr price range. Plus who writes down aperture and shutterspeed. It will take a long time to get the feedback neccessary to really learn. I got my older son a D50 for 450 with a lens from BH. I personally like canon but this is a great setup. BTW the younger on is shooting with his sony using aperture and shutter priority. Took to long to get film back and remember what he did.

[MrDirt]

Every great skier alive today learned on straight skis. If you have a friend who wants to learn how to ski, are you going to stick him on straight skis?

I see where you're going with that one, but the analogy is a little weak. Shaped skis have upped the ante on ski performance. The same is not true with the current progression of still cameras. 35mm film cameras are still capable of producing higher quality images than the majority of digital cameras. Some of the high dollar, high MP DSLR's are capable of similar images, but you're paying a premium to have that quality outputted to a digital format. The cheapest canon 35mm SLR body with decent glass is more than capable of rivaling 16mp digital images. Not until you get into the medium format digital cameras will you be able to produce higher quality images, which makes absolute perfect sense considering the size of the sensor. Digital photography is about convenience and cost effectiveness when paired with the home computer. If it weren't for those two factors, film cameras would still be in the lead.

[MeatPuppet]

Shaped skis have upped the ante on ski performance. The same is not true with the current progression of still cameras.

Very true. I have had a DSLR for the last four years, and "prosumer" digicams for a couple of years before that. Lately I have toyed with the idea of buying a film body again. I find that I miss shooting film, for the reasons you mentioned. That being said, if I had to learn from scratch, I would go with a DSLR without hesitation. The cheap cost of shooting, instant feedback, and ability to change iso on the fly would make the learning process 10x faster IMO.

[Tippster]

Mr.Dirt - resolution has nothing to do with learning what it takes to take a picture and the factors involved. That argument is like comparing high dollar chrome film & prints to cheap SeattleFilmWorks crap. As long as they're both the same ASA neither has any effect on the mechanics of photography.

[MrDirt]

Mr.Dirt - resolution has nothing to do with learning what it takes to take a picture and the factors involved. That argument is like comparing high dollar chrome film & prints to cheap SeattleFilmWorks crap. As long as they're both the same ASA neither has any effect on the mechanics of photography.

My previous post had nothing to do with the point I was trying to make on the first page. I was simply countering the comparison to ski technology.

I'm not trying to completely hate on digital technology. When I get a new camera, it will be digital for the simple reason that I don't have the space or money to put a darkroom together. I plan on buying a video camera this summer as well. It will be digital also, but I think the argument for going digital vs. 16mm for video is WAY more pronounced than it is for going DSLR vs. 35mm.

[Tippster]

Why? It's the same thing.