Canon Eos film SLR question

Scarecrow

Scarecrow

Messages
1,662
Name
Derek
Edit My Images
Yes
I started my photography with Canon in the pre autofocus days, so am quite familiar with the FD fit range of camera bodies. My top camera then was a T90. I never got involved with the Eos range of film cameras so don't know anything about them.

Having expanded in to digital, acquiring some nice lenses along the way that I could never afford in my film days, I was wondering about purchasing an Eos film body to play with.

My question is what Eos film body would be considered as the equivalent of something in the xxD range in it's day, i.e. not a beginner's camera, but not something at the professional end either?
 
EOS-5, or if you can stretch to it a EOS-3 (though the 3 is probably nearer the 5D than 50D...)
 
Eos10 or 100 failing that
 
Yep, I've got an EOS 100 which feels a little akin to a 40D in handling and was an above entry level body. Sadly the shutter is dying so look out for sticky shutter blades on a second hand body [mine only cost a fiver, so no great loss].
 
I expect you will get several replies pointing towards the EOS 3, which is an excellent camera, I have the EOS 5 which is the preceding model and has most of the features of the EOS 3, but more important to me it is whisper quiet in use.

The T90 is still my favourite camera, it goes with me everywhere, the EOS 5 is used when I want to get close to birds, so quiet, it does not disturb them.

John:)
 
j37r said:
I expect you will get several replies pointing towards the EOS 3, which is an excellent camera, I have the EOS 5 which is the preceding model and has most of the features of the EOS 3, but more important to me it is whisper quiet in use.

The T90 is still my favourite camera, it goes with me everywhere, the EOS 5 is used when I want to get close to birds, so quiet, it does not disturb them.

John:)
Click to expand...

The EOS-3 definitely couldn't be described as quiet - the shutter slap noise is absolutely immense. As I mainly shoot landscapes, I don't give a stuff... i've never heard of a case where a mountain got spooked by the noise of a camera :LOL:
 
If I can find one, I think I will probably try an EOS 3. I still use my T90, but now that I have a few L series EF lenses, it would be nice to have a film camera that I can use them on too.

Thanks for all the suggestions guys.
 
No problem Derek, I've been thinking of getting an EOS film camera again recently too. If I got one I'd probably get the EOS 30 again because that little thing served me well.
 
30, 50e or Elan IIe as well if you like the 3 and fall over at the prices!
 
footman said:
Where does the EOS1 come in the pecking order?
Click to expand...
Pretty much where the EOS-1D's do in canon's current lineup.

There's the first EOS-1 - top of line when released 1989
then the EOS-1N Family...

EOS-1N - top of line 1994
EOS-1N HS - high speed with booster pack
EOS-1N DP - dual battery pack version
EOS-1N RS - extreme high speed version - fixed mirror, 10fps

then theres the EOS-1 V - last of the line, top of range 2000

EOS-3 was released 1998 and is arguably a match for the -1 and unadorned -1N
 
I have a EOS 100 lying around in the cupboard - a friend of mine gave it to me once. Didn't come with the lens, so i have never used it. Hows the camera? is it worth buying a 50mm lens for the camera?
 
ujjwaldey8165 said:
I have a EOS 100 lying around in the cupboard - a friend of mine gave it to me once. Didn't come with the lens, so i have never used it. Hows the camera? is it worth buying a 50mm lens for the camera?
Click to expand...

I stuck my 24-105L on an EOS1 and came up with this




so I think it's worth playing around with a decent lens. I'm not suggesting it's a marvellous shot but I found it encouraging to do more with a film camera and a modern lens.
 
footman said:
I stuck my 24-105L on an EOS1 and came up with this




so I think it's worth playing around with a decent lens. I'm not suggesting it's a marvellous shot but I found it encouraging.
Click to expand...

The EOS film camera's really come alive when used with L lenses (y)
 
daugirdas said:
EOS5. The only issue is a missing 'D'.
Click to expand...

And missing the point completely... seeing as the OP already has a 5Dii and was explicitly asking about a FILM body...

Suggest you

a) read the thread properly before posting OR

b) stop Trolling...
 
If I ever get the time, this thread has inspired me to take some pics on my 5Dmk2 and compare them with like for like pics on an old EOS1 i have. If I ever get round to it, I will post the results on here. Anyone done anything similar?
 
Not really like for like is it? Poor old 5D not got chance :LOL:

But really, it's like comparing chalk and cheese is it not? One you can hold, one you can't. Yes, you can print a digital, but it's not a photgraph in the original sense. May well be technically better but...
 
No, but lend me you're 5Dii for a week and I will :LOL:

I do occasionally take the digital out with me, as well as the EOS-3, but I tend to use the digital to take colour shots when I'm loaded with BnW in the film camera, more to complement the film ones, rather than replicate them. Of course it's also harder, in that the digital is a crop-sensor, so I can't throw the same lenses on and get the same shot :shrug:
 
NigelPaul said:
If I ever get the time, this thread has inspired me to take some pics on my 5Dmk2 and compare them with like for like pics on an old EOS1 i have. If I ever get round to it, I will post the results on here. Anyone done anything similar?
Click to expand...

Do you mean take a colour digital shot or a monochrome digital to compare with the mono I took on the EOS1?
 
ujjwaldey8165 said:
I have a EOS 100 lying around in the cupboard - a friend of mine gave it to me once. Didn't come with the lens, so i have never used it. Hows the camera? is it worth buying a 50mm lens for the camera?
Click to expand...

Certainly worth a punt. It only has the one central AF point for what it's worth, but AF accuracy is excellent and it will gain focus in near dark, I kid you not.
 
ujjwaldey8165 said:
Oh no, not again.Why, just why?
Click to expand...
:shrug:
I haven't used my film camera for ages, (years in fact). I have been intending to do some Macro shots with it, as I got hold of an old ring flash, which doesn't work with digital.

I' ve read threads in this section, and am inspired by the enthuisasm that people here have for film. Takes me back when I first started. I would just like to compare my two cameras and see the results. Just for fun and curiosity and not to say which is better and which is worse.

I intend to get the 35mm pics digitised as well as printed, and the digital images printed too, and see what I get from both.

I have a load of Agfa 200iso (consumer) film at the moment and am curious to see the results I get from that.

When I say like-for-like I meant the same exposure (assuming the light stays the same while I'm swapping camera and lens)
 
i may be wrong , but i dont think the ( why just why ) bit was meant for you Nigel
 
Apologies Nigel, indeed it wasn't referring to your post at all

I was just afraid that, once again, we are all down the slippery slope of a very useless debate; which will again result in some of us getting needlessly uspset.
 
Sorry I mis-understood :puke:

I enjoy digital and hoping to get back into film too. Both are great and don't believe in those silly debates. (y)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top