camera

[vorticon]

right, crazy photographically inclined people of a legal sense...i need a camera, a reasonably good, yet reasonably cheap 35mm SLR (under 400 bucks- thats canadian) i dont care much about fancy features, though a automatic mode for quick once in a lifetime shots would be good.


or should i just use my dads old camera, and buy a light meter?

[Pooh21]

Originally posted by vorticon
right, crazy photographically inclined people.......... i dont care much about fancy features, though a automatic mode for quick once in a lifetime shots would be good.

Vorticon you could get arrested doing what you are planning on doing:rofl

[Sandman]

Film or digital?

[Geary420]

Although I haven't looked at new cameras in a while I would think an SLR for less than 400 Canadian would take digital out of the equation.  I still love my Minolta XG1, it's 25 years old and still takes great pics, I will not replace it until it dies.  And for 400 bucks you could get a used body and a butload of lenses to go with it.  It does have an automatic feature, but its probably not as nice or precise as a newer model though.  If you like I could upload a few pics for ya so you can see what it does.  (Disclaimer: I am nowhere near a good photog )

[Leslie]

Imo the older SLRs are superior cameras.  I am not keen on auto focus SLRs because there's not much control with them.  They have their uses, but are not for serious creative photography.  

Here's an inexpensive, simple to use and reliable Yashica TL Electro for example.  It uses screw mount lenses which are sturdier than bayonet mount.  Pentax Asahi makes lenses that fit this camera, so you can readily fit a macro zoom or micro lense on the camera body.

The micro lense is good for normal shots as well as close ups for detail.  I use mine to photograph documents, artwork and such using a copy stand and cable release.

It's rugged enough for field work outdoors and doesn't need to be babied.  Try looking in a camera store that sells used cameras for this and other older, inexpensive, simple and reliable SLRs.


Yashica TL Electro




Les

[jigsaw]

What are you going to be shooting?

[SaburoS]

Originally posted by Leslie
Imo the older SLRs are superior cameras.  I am not keen on auto focus SLRs because there's not much control with them.  They have their uses, but are not for serious creative photography.  

Here's an inexpensive, simple to use and reliable Yashica TL Electro for example.  It uses screw mount lenses which are sturdier than bayonet mount.  Pentax Asahi makes lenses that fit this camera, so you can readily fit a macro zoom or micro lense on the camera body.

The micro lense is good for normal shots as well as close ups for detail.  I use mine to photograph documents, artwork and such using a copy stand and cable release.

It's rugged enough for field work outdoors and doesn't need to be babied.  Try looking in a camera store that sells used cameras for this and other older, inexpensive, simple and reliable SLRs.


Yashica TL Electro




Les

There are manual over-rides for full manual control, AV, TV as well for both 35mm SLR's and DSLRs.

If one is willing to study and practice photography, great deals can be had for good 35mm SLRs.
If price is no object, the newest generation DSLRs are now surpassing 35mm film in detail/resolution.

As to creativity, there are things that can be done with digital that are just very hard or impossible to do with film.

The only edge that film holds over digital is dynamic range for the action shot. For static shots, digital output from 2-3 frames will result in a superior dynamic range over film.

In due time, digital will surpass film in every way. It's almost at that point now.

[Dinger]

Heh, 2-3 shots: well, yeah, but you need to lock it down on a tripod then blend the images later.  You could do the same thing I suppowe with film and a scanner.

I guess I'm saying that the DR trick is neat -- I've done it myself from time to tiime, but it's not very practical.

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by Sandman
Film or digital?

Originally posted by vorticon
i need a camera, a reasonably good, yet reasonably cheap 35mm SLR (under 400 bucks- thats canadian)

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by SaburoS
There are manual over-rides for full manual control, AV, TV as well for both 35mm SLR's and DSLRs.

If one is willing to study and practice photography, great deals can be had for good 35mm SLRs.
If price is no object, the newest generation DSLRs are now surpassing 35mm film in detail/resolution.

As to creativity, there are things that can be done with digital that are just very hard or impossible to do with film.

The only edge that film holds over digital is dynamic range for the action shot. For static shots, digital output from 2-3 frames will result in a superior dynamic range over film.

In due time, digital will surpass film in every way. It's almost at that point now.

Agree with your post. I was hardcore 35mm for a good 25 years...then about 4 years ago I bought my first elcheapo digital camera (Canon S40). Now I have a Nikon D70s that can do MUCH more than my Pentax 35mm ever could, and I'll never buy another 35mm camera again.

One example of the benefits is that I took over 600 pictures of two sporting events last Saturday. Thats the equivelent of roughly 18 rolls of films in the older 35mm camera. I ended up keeping the best 40 of the bunch.

[vorticon]

leslie, and geary, good ideas, and basicly what i was thinking of in the first place- good solid older camera.

"    What are you going to be shooting?"

general pictures, nothing hardcore really, heck probably nothing that would warrant more than a el cheapo digital or fully automatic 35mm...thing is though, i want the ability to do more, if i want to, the ability to change lenses (the only thing that really matters is the lense, and if i cant change it whats the point?) and frankly i like good solid clunk, from a good solid camera.

[jigsaw]

Would be hard to step into a decent digital slr at that price point unless you got one off Ebay. Then you'd be rolling the dice with defects.

I'd say get a film slr to start with. Then if you go digital later, that would also give you a backup body.

Stick with either Nikon or Canon as you'll be able to find more add ons for them easily. Don't get caught up in Nikon vs Canon. They both make great products.

Bottom end;
Nikon N75
Canon EOS Rebel T2

Entry level;
Nikon N80
Canon EOS Elan 7

Bottom end digi;
Nikon D50

Get a body that has the option of shooting fully manual. Start off with a simple lens. Something like a 50mm 1.8.
If you invest further, buy good lenses before you buy another body.

Check around your area for classes on beginning photography, and for places that might rent gear to you. That gives you the option to play with things to see how you like them before plunking cash down.

[vorticon]

thanks jigsaw-probably say what i decided on next week once ive physically manhandled them.

[APDrone]

I can recommend a Minolta SI 400  which is, I think, a precursor to this one..

Open the link in the forum.  For whatever reason, the link to ebay won't work from this forum.

Minolta SI430 RZ
http://www.airmageddon.com/FORUM/viewtopic.php?t=127

ebay is just an example, I'm not recommending this particular auction item.

It has a very comfortable grip.  Solid, Auto Focus ( manually switchable ), good selection of features.

Should be well within your price range.

Get the 28 - 80 mm lens. Provides a nice flexibility.  

Have always loved the pictures mine took.

I still use it when I need interior action shots where flash isn't allowed ( gymnastics meets ).  Drop in some 800 film and we're good to go.

For normal, everyday, usage I have the Canon A70 digital.

Happy hunting