[Closed] Film Cameras! (deeply uncool old school camera content!)

Is that an M42?

yep, sure is 🙂

Top tip... try not to spend £1000 on lens because they're only £10 each 😉

the camera & helios-44m lens with strap & 3x films (2x B&W 1x Colour) cost me £30.00 and the shop gives 3 month warranty! the Hanimex cost me about £20.00 but I wanted to add a lens that would add little more versatility to the package 🙂

Blimey, I've got an old Pentax K1000 (The Honda moped of the camera world?) somewhere. Nikons FM2, 801s, and F5.

Haven't used any for a while, now. Keep meaning to buy some film, and take some 'proper' pics.

Still can't beat the magic of film, even if dijical has taken over.

36 shots a roll, about £6-10 a roll inc. processing, will help you be very selective about what you shoot.

I am so glad I learned 'proper' tography.

Nother Top Tip: Do not drop that Zenit on your foot. If you do, you won't do it again...

and its the £10.00 lenses and he fact that there's loads of this kit knocking around really cheap that made me take a punt on it, I'm having a load of fun with it now, it took a while for me to suss out all the dials but I think I've got that all sorted now and I'm eagerly awaiting the arrival of the first load of photos! (remember the 'pleasure' in waiting?)

If I dropped it on my foot I'd probably loose three toes!!

I can still remember the heady leathery smell of my first Zenit-B SLR camera (1973), and all that darkroom jazz has tremendous nostalgia, but I find it hard to imagine being tempted to use any of that stone-age arcana again :o)

I have a practika tl1000(???) somewhere - the Lada of the camera world? I once dropped it down a 30 ft cliff - and it still works despite a dented case.

(remember the 'pleasure' in waiting?)

No, I remember hating it!

patience is a....

ah pentax k1000,
art college classic,
still have one in the loft,
film is real!!!
digital prints/camera still hasnt come close to the feel and depth of film,

note to self, "2009, I will use my film cameras",
will get my k1000 out and 50mm lense, back to the basics

a virtue.

I still use film now and again. 35mm and 120 roll film in various cameras inc this early kodak box.
[img]//images.fotopic.net/?iid=yeznrs&outx=567&quality=70[/img]

Nice one mr nutt, nowt wrong with film, its still tops, I was in Japan over christmas and saw plenty of people still using film cameras like nikon FE / FM's, I've got my eyes on ebay but also thinking of buying a new F6.

well if you go back about in the week or so in the classifieds i am trying to find a good home to a Durst enlarger, if you fancy the full experience....

My ex still shoots on film , using an old Nikon F5(?)and then scans in to the PC. Her shots are consistently excellent and I assumed she was using a dedicated film scanner but apparently she uses a cheapo flat bed scanner! Thinking of picking up a cheap top of the range Nikon film camera myself.

Yep the lens are a m42 thread, loads of lens about cheap that fit.

Used to get these in the shop I worked in, with the mirror locked up, a swift bash to the base plate used to unlock them 😉

Worth checking the slower shutter speed are not dragging MrNutt as it was a common problem if the camera had not been used for a while.

The Helli lens is not that bad a performer either if you stop it down a few stops (f5.6 - f8) just watch out for the dreaded fungus on the inner lens elements.

Just thrown a load of old darkroom kit out that you could have had, darn!

Some of my favourite pictures I ever took were with a Zenith TTL with a Hell lens 😉

Nice camera. Really wishing I hadn't sold my medium format camera now. Still saving for a D300 but got given a [url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/ginja_andy/3134140630/ ]Holga[/url] for Christmas. Love the slightly odd focus and poor quality of it all plus the fact you only have twelve shots to take.
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/ginja_andy/3176204447/in/set-72157612232150729/ ]First results here[/url]

Thinking of getting a Nikon film camera too as I have a 50mm and 28mm prime that will work on the older bodies.

it almost makes my cry to see the beautiful film cameras kicking around in the second hand shops here. nikon F's, early M-series leica, bronica s2's, minolta's... it's as though every camera i ever wanted in my youth is trying to haunt me, but i really can't walk away from digital - it's just too good. take a hundred shots, keep the one decent pic and print it. photography doesn't get any more cost effective than that 🙂

Yeah, my Dad has a load of Olympus kit with some nice lenses and apparently it's worth £50 ish for the lot!

Agree with the sentiment about digital. My learning has increased massively since using a D70 for a year. Easier to progress and see where you're going wrong. Having EXIF data is also a huge advantage.

TJ; I bet the cliff was more damaged! I'd like to see a modern plastic camera survive more than a 2ft drop onto anything.

Dijical is here to stay, no question. But I hope there will always be a place for film.

Great 'Photographers' used film. Cartier-Bresson, Ansel Adams, Man Ray, Robert Capa, Edward Weston, etc.

People who use photographs as the basis for dijically-manipulated images are Photoshoppers.

Freezie- don't get an F6. Waste of money. That camera was only developed to test technology Nikon wanted to put into their dijical cams. Get an F5 instead. Much better cam, better vfm.

[i](remember the 'pleasure' in waiting?)[/i]
No, I remember hating it!

Great things come to those who wait.

I see 'photography' students work these days, and it's all 'conceptual' bollocks. Very few seem to have actually mastered the skill of Painting With Light. It seems to be all about depicting an idea, rather than a scene, in art colleges these days. Hence, lots of quite poor photos (bad exposure, poor shutter/aperture control, weak composition), 'corrected' in Photoshop.

As for dijical allowing you to take loads of pics, and correct as you go; quantity does not relate to quality. The discipline of having limited film resources helps sharpen up your critical mind, and enables you to become more selective. Not to say that shooting only dijical won't lead to a person becoming a good photographer, but the 'machine gun' approach will never compensate for talent.

I loved my Olympus OM2 for twenty years (and still do), but I wouldn't be without my E500. Still want to run the odd roll of film through the OM2 though.

[b]Great 'Photographers' used film. Cartier-Bresson, Ansel Adams, Man Ray, Robert Capa, Edward Weston, etc.[/b]

Who is to say any of the above would not have used digital media if it was available back then?

Well, they didn't, did they? So, who knows?

Although from a technical point of view, I am glad I learned the mechanics of photographic materials. Seems that many people these days, just rely on the camera to do the job for them. Hence, lack of real understanding of photographic techniques, such as use of shutter speed, or aperture, etc.

I have been thinking for a few weeks about bringing out film again even to the point of buying dark room equipment.
Seeing the Zenit reminds me of the first slr camera I used, then OM10, and now Canons.
With ref to Rudeboy's comments, when does photography finish and photoshoppery begin?
I consider myself a photograher and as such only have a rudementary knowledge of Photoshop, and that's how I like it...

MrNutt, Great choice of SLR for learning on. The helios 44 lens is a well respected lens (for the price), great for portraits. My boss gave me 4 old films last year and I took out my Zenit to one of the Gorrick Races - raced in the morning and shot in the afternoon. Had great fun just shooting like crazy.

Got the films developed and put straight onto CD at Asda for £6.95... No prints but absolute bargain. Will post a few of the shots once I work out how.

I just bought a D40 in the sale at jessops and got an adaptor to let me put the helios lens on it. Takes lovely shots. Although I cannot focus to infinity with the lens on the D40 body.

30+yr old Pratika LTL and Cannon EOS film cameras used regularly and one of those Lomo things for fun.

Just ran over my compact Cannon so will be using the old film ones more!!!!

The discipline of having limited film resources helps sharpen up your critical mind

I think this has no basis in fact. The reverse might just as well be true

Hence, lack of real understanding of photographic techniques, such as use of shutter speed, or aperture, etc.

these are, for the most part, matters of craft rather than art, to do with compensating for the defects of the photographic process

these are, for the most part, matters of craft rather than art, to do with compensating for the defects of the photographic process

isn't true art the inspired result of a perfectly executed craft?

I suppose the same argument could also apply to modern & classical art.

isn't true art the inspired result of a perfectly executed craft?

indeed, but the craftsperson and the artist need not be the same individual, and for instance, a great composer may not be able to play a single instrument :o) Similarly, a perfect craftsperson may have no artistic ability whatever.

I regularly used a Mamiya 645 Medium format film camera made in 1975. Got some stunningly sharp and high detail shots. Still got a Mamiya RB67 body sat on my desk, waiting for the day when i got some spare cash to get some lenses and a film back. These days I shoot with a Canon 5D, still love the look and feel of film shots though.

Hence, lack of real understanding of photographic techniques, such as use of shutter speed, or aperture, etc.

Its not exactly rocket science though is it? 🙄

The hardest part of taking decent images is being in the right place for suitable subject material and having the ability to compose the image in an interesting way - I can sometimes manage the former but usually fail miserably with the latter 🙁

Makes **** all difference if you use a dark room or light room in that respect...and given the relatively low price of decent DSLRs today even cheap film cameras soon become more expensive once you've paid to put a few films through them.

"dijical"

rr you a bit sluw or something loike thaat.

"dijical"

I believe it's Fred and he does it on purpose to annoy (and very effectively)

Never understood why a film camera makes you learn how to be a better photographer. You become a better photographer if you USE the camera. The more you use it the better you become. If you have to wait till the films ended and then developed before you find out just how crap that picture you took was it will take you longer to learn how not to take crap pictures.

Excellent decision. I take most of my photos with a digital camera, but bought myself an old Pentax LX last year - I'd always wanted one and could finally afford one - and it's brilliant. I've also got into medium format - in fact I'm selling a load of Bronica kit on eBay this evening, but only because I replaced it with a second hand Hasselblad that I slightly prefer.

I tend to send my 35mm film off for process and print by Ilford, but I develop the medium format stuff myself and scan it in. I ended up buying a decent Canon scanner as my previous one couldn't cope with the medium format negatives. It's clearly much more hassle than digital, and I can't see myself using film for the photo a day project I'm doing, but I enjoy the challenge of thinking much harder about my pictures, and taking longer over them

In fact you've inspired me - I've got a couple of 120 films that I need to process - perhaps I'll do it tonight...

Film slows you down, makes you think as each click costs.

Digital is way too easy so you simply snap away without regard for what the camera is up to. (in general)

This is why film is better to learn with. Like learing to drive a manual car as opposed to an auto

I have a D300 that I use for weddings but whenever I want to do some proper photography, out comes the Contax g2 and 45mm lens and a roll of Tri-X.

[img] ?v=0[/img]

Film cameras do not make you a better photographer on their own, but not being able to reel off dozens of shots with auto bracketing and autofocus can help you learn. Quite simply with film if you learn nothing you get very few good shots whereas with digital it easier to get good shots, technically rather than aesthetically, because of the multiburst options and because you can take almost an infinite number of shots while checking to see whether your getting the right result.In some ways this is a disincentive to learn technique. For me the real problem with learning using a digital camera is that all the ones I have tried are awkward and slow to use in manual mode where you have to set the aperture shutter speed and focus and where you consequently learn far more. I still have my first OM1n and an FM2, both entirely manual and mechanical the only thing in them that uses a battery being the light meter and there are plenty of old school photographers who will tell you that even having that is pushing technology too far. However now I no longer have a darkroom they don't get used. For me once you have done your own developing and printing then going back to using film but not being able to finish the job in the darkroom sadly holds no attraction. The first time you see a print appear before your eyes as you rock the developing dish from side to side under the glow of a safelight is magical and what's more it's still just as magical when it's the 10,000 time. Making funny shapes with your hands under the enlarger to burn in an area or dodge another, rubbing your finger on the developing print to warm the developer in that particular spot, bringing the dead back to life.

Sorry where was I, I seem to have wandered off. Now I only use digital although I haven't yet gone to an SLR as I have yet to find one that will do what I want which is basically to be an OM1 or FM2 with a digital back. I'm quite happy to have all the bells and whistles as well but I'd like them to be secondary.
When I started work as a photographer for the MOD I was told to order my own personal 35mm camera and I bought the Nikon F4 which had just been released and was probably the most technologically advanced camera available. Within 6 months it was gathering dust on a shelf as I'd picked up a spare FM2 and started using that, quite simply it was just more enjoyable to use could do everything required of it in that job.
I suppose my point is that if you were a farmer with a rabbit problem you'd buy a shotgun, might not make you that good a shot but if it gets rid of the rabbits then it's done what you want. On the other hand if you a farmer with a rabbit problem and a bit of a Sniper 1 fantasy you buy a 22 rifle and scope and become a marksman.
Your still no sniper though just as those who put their excellent photos on here are not professional photographers. And that's the way to keep it. I would guess that the reality of blowing another persons head of is really not so great after all and once you have spent a few years earning your living as a photographer you end up only really taking pictures if someone is paying for them. Not that it isn't enjoyable if it's work, it is, very much so but with the exception of taking pictures of the kids not much else is very rewarding, your always aware that what you are trying to produce is something that looks like something you have already seen. I think perhaps the exception to this is portraiture which when it's good has some real meaning even if it's only for just a few people and which uses photography's greatest asset and unique ability to capture a moment in time forever.

Oh and the Zenit E great camera though doesn't it have a very dark viewfinder unless you open the aperture manually and then close it down after focussing?
Still if you ever need to send a body to the bottom of a lake you won't have to search around for any bricks.
Well sorry for taking so much of your time for anyone whose actually bothered to read this rubbish but I do feel so much better for having put it all down

Digital is way too easy so you simply snap away without regard for what the camera is up to. (in general)

I don't accept for a second that that is true, but even if it were, if the hardware can disappear itself from the process that is a good thing. The best camera (most of the time) is the eye, which has no manual controls whatever, and just works.

great post avdave2!

there's a switch on the Helios Lens that seems to enable you to choose if you want the aperture setting to affect the view finder or just kick in when you fire off a shot? the view through telephoto I have darkens & lightens as you change the aperture but with no option to have the view unaffected by aperture, its all dark arts to be what goes on in them there lenses at the moment!! 😀

(but I'm learning!)

Yep, you can choose auto or manual aperture control.

Normally you'd shoot in auto so you can see what you're doing and when you release the shutter the camera sets the aperture as it shoots. But.. if you swap to manual you effectively get a depth-of-field preview so you can see what's in and out of focus at that aperture setting.

oh I didn't realise that the automatic did that, I've been exclusively using the manual setting and I love it! 🙂

Ah, wondered when SFB would be along to argue! 😀

I enjoy this sort of debate, I must say. I have come to accept dijical's place in photography, and see the advantage of being able to see 'instant' results.

However...

Binning all your 'mistakes' is not necessarily a good thing. You then have nothing to compare with the 'good' shots. In fact, sometimes, 'mistakes' can actually turn out to be better than a 'perfect' shot.

As a student on limited resources, I found myself thinking a lot more, about the shot I was about to take, as each one was costing me money. Had I been shooting dijical, with a large capacity memory card, I've no doubt I would have just blasted away, thinking that loads of shots would equal at least one good one.

Having the time to sit and critically analyse my 'mistakes', taught me to be a better photographer.

Anyway, a chisel, in the hand of one with talent, is a wonderful tool, capable of helping to create works of art; in the hand of one without, it is just a chisel.

SFB, I mean no disrespect, but based on the photos of yours I have seen, I consider you a competent photographer. But I don't find your work particularly great, on an artistic level. They illustrate an event very well, and are often interesting, but seldom what I'd call 'stunning'.

Of all the tographers who post on here, I find Sheldona's work to be the visually most arresting. He is obviously someone blessed with real photographic talent. I don't know whether he started out on film, or has only used dijical, but he has a mastery of the craft, combined with a talent for creating something a bit special.

Please, don't take this as a slur on your character, just an honest opinion based on what I've seen so far.

Therefore, I shall take your opinions as those from a skilled operator, rather than an artist.

I think one or two people above, have elaborated further, my own observations and opinions.

But it's all good, so keep up the good work!