Beginner Film Photography

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Deleted member 92491

Guest
Hello!

I've been eager to shoot largely focused on minimalism and ambiguous compositions for quite some time. A 35mm point and shoot would be preferable and I've been eyeing up the Olympus OM10 and Canon AE1 - I know it's entirely an individual choice, and down to perspective.. But, if anyone has any first-hand experience shooting landscapes (even architectural rather than portraits) with these, or similar SLR film cameras, would you mind sharing some advantages or downsides you've personally found? E.g. practicality or ease of handling/shooting etc.

Thank you in advance.
 
Don't bother with an OM10 - I think they were horrible. See if you can pick up and OM1n or for a little more money an OM2 or OM4 (although they're more than a point and shoot) - all can be had pretty cheap and are good cameras. I still have all mine and will never part with them.
 
Thank you for your reply. May I ask why you disliked the OM10? I'll have a browse over OM2/OM4 specs - thanks for the advice!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sky
I just found it had a 'cheap & tacky' feel compared with all the other models. I also didn't like the fact that you had to buy an adapter to use it in manual. The OM1n is fully manual BTW.
 
I just found it had a 'cheap & tacky' feel compared with all the other models. I also didn't like the fact that you had to buy an adapter to use it in manual. The OM1n is fully manual BTW.

Ah yes, upon your reply I've discovered the OM10 has more plastic-built components compared to the OM1 for example. I also found the OM2 is almost a hybrid as it can shoot in auto.. which is very appealing. Very helpful, thank you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sky
The OM-10 has its fans, but requiring a manual adapter to do something that ought to be built in looks a bit odd 40 years later. The OM-20 fixed this. The OM-1 & 2 etc. are higher quality cameras. The OM-2 is semi-auto or full manual, the OM-1 is manual only. The AE1 is a solid choice. But none of these are really point and shoot cameras. How about an autofocus SLR? These are less fashionable than the classic SLRs from a couple of decades earlier, and therefore relatively cheap for what they are, and have full auto modes if you need them. The later ones work in much the same way as current dSLRs, and can often take the same lenses. Can't really go wrong with a Nikon F80 or F100, or equivalent Canon EOS models.
 
The OM-10 has its fans, but requiring a manual adapter to do something that ought to be built in looks a bit odd 40 years later. The OM-20 fixed this. The OM-1 & 2 etc. are higher quality cameras. The OM-2 is semi-auto or full manual, the OM-1 is manual only. The AE1 is a solid choice. But none of these are really point and shoot cameras. How about an autofocus SLR? These are less fashionable than the classic SLRs from a couple of decades earlier, and therefore relatively cheap for what they are, and have full auto modes if you need them. The later ones work in much the same way as current dSLRs, and can often take the same lenses. Can't really go wrong with a Nikon F80 or F100, or equivalent Canon EOS models.

Thank you for your reply, great advice indeed. I did have a look at some older, classic SLRs, however I didn't have much look finding any online so I reverted back to the ones more commonly found. Also surprised to hear the Olympus/Canon aren't point and shoot - my mistake!
 
Surely, a 'point and shoot' type cam is a small, basic automatic cam, rather than an SLR? IE; a camera that has a fixed (rather than interchangeable) lens, automatic exposure and probably autofocus. A camera where you literally just point, and shoot.

You can pick up a decent zoom PnS cam on Ebay etc, from about ten pounds. The fixed focal length type cams, such as the Olympus Mju, Nikon AF28/35, Contax T series etc, with often 28 or 35mm f2.8 lenses, go for a lot more, as such cameras often had really good quality lenses, and with a bit of luck and good judgment, can produce images every bit as good as the best 'pro' SLRs.

Not entirely sure why you'd want such a cam, unless you really want to shoot film; the average smart 'phone is probably a better bet, as a PnS cam these days.
 
'Point and shoot' generally means everything is automatic - shutter speed, aperture, focus and film winding. There are lots of cameras that can work this way, including many compact cameras (often simply called point and shoot cameras) as well as most recent SLRs. With the SLRs, you can usually also take manual control of shutter speed, aperture and focus. The earlier SLRs you list don't have autofocus, and use manual film winding. The OM-1 only works in full manual mode. The OM-2 can set the shutter speed automatically when you set the aperture. The AE1 works the other way around - it can set the aperture automatically if you set the shutter speed. Both also allow full manual control. A later camera, the AE1-Program, can set both shutter speed and aperture automatically.

More recent cameras like the Nikon and EOS SLRs I mentioned above have autofocus and autowind, and can set aperture, shutter speed, neither, or both automatically, depending on the settings you choose. So it really comes down to what level of automation you want. If you are mostly interested in landscapes, you probably don't need much speed, so even a fully manual camera like the OM-1 could work for you (it has an exposure meter to guide your choice of settings). On the other hand, if you want to concentrate purely on the composition, automation can still be useful. A lot of us tend to shoot in a semi-auto mode that allows us to choose between several combinations of shutter speed and aperture that will all give a correct exposure, but have different effects on (e.g.) how much of the scene appears to be in focus, or how sharply the action is frozen.
 
Surely, a 'point and shoot' type cam is a small, basic automatic cam, rather than an SLR? IE; a camera that has a fixed (rather than interchangeable) lens, automatic exposure and probably autofocus. A camera where you literally just point, and shoot.

You can pick up a decent zoom PnS cam on Ebay etc, from about ten pounds. The fixed focal length type cams, such as the Olympus Mju, Nikon AF28/35, Contax T series etc, with often 28 or 35mm f2.8 lenses, go for a lot more, as such cameras often had really good quality lenses, and with a bit of luck and good judgment, can produce images every bit as good as the best 'pro' SLRs.

Not entirely sure why you'd want such a cam, unless you really want to shoot film; the average smart 'phone is probably a better bet, as a PnS cam these days.

I do wish to shoot using film, over my phone, for the project I'm working on!
 
'Point and shoot' generally means everything is automatic - shutter speed, aperture, focus and film winding. There are lots of cameras that can work this way, including many compact cameras (often simply called point and shoot cameras) as well as most recent SLRs. With the SLRs, you can usually also take manual control of shutter speed, aperture and focus. The earlier SLRs you list don't have autofocus, and use manual film winding. The OM-1 only works in full manual mode. The OM-2 can set the shutter speed automatically when you set the aperture. The AE1 works the other way around - it can set the aperture automatically if you set the shutter speed. Both also allow full manual control. A later camera, the AE1-Program, can set both shutter speed and aperture automatically.

More recent cameras like the Nikon and EOS SLRs I mentioned above have autofocus and autowind, and can set aperture, shutter speed, neither, or both automatically, depending on the settings you choose. So it really comes down to what level of automation you want. If you are mostly interested in landscapes, you probably don't need much speed, so even a fully manual camera like the OM-1 could work for you (it has an exposure meter to guide your choice of settings). On the other hand, if you want to concentrate purely on the composition, automation can still be useful. A lot of us tend to shoot in a semi-auto mode that allows us to choose between several combinations of shutter speed and aperture that will all give a correct exposure, but have different effects on (e.g.) how much of the scene appears to be in focus, or how sharply the action is frozen.

A lot of useful information here, thank you. So, would you recommend the OM-2 for composition-focused work? Or the Nikon SLRs? I'm a super novice and just trying to weigh up options and gather as much info as possible - big thanks.
 
OK, as others have said, a 'point and shoot' film camera is usually the name given to one of the compact autofocus and auto exposure type 35mm film cameras with built in flash, such as this one, the Canon Sureshot Supreme:



Last time I looked, this model camera was still quite good value for money (around £20 upwards for one in good working order) and have a good, sharp lens on them, if you can put up with the retro plastic and slightly banana-shaped looks, and there's no way to focus manually or set the shutter speed or aperture manually either.

However, I think what you are referring to might be an auto exposure, manual focus, 35mm SLR? If so, neither the OM10 or AE1 are truly full auto exposure... each require either the shutter speed or the aperture to be set by the photographer, and the camera then choses the other setting according to what the camera's light meter tells it.

The Canon A1 does give full auto exposure (Programme),choosing both the shutter speed and aperture automatically. It also offers full manual, as well as setting the shutter speed or aperture automatically, while the photographer sets the other. It was the first 35mm SLR camera to offer the now familiar PASM exposure settings that virtually all DSLRs still have to this day.

Unless prices have changed since last time I looked, the Canon A1 tends to sell for a bit less than the AE1 and AE1 programme, although the A1 is a much higher specification camera! I think this is because the other two are silver and black and look more retro. So if you want the camera for photography rather than posing, the A1 wins hands down for specification and value for money.

However, the Canon A series cameras are manual focus only, and use the old Canon FD fit lenses (modern Canon EOS EF and EF-S fit lenses wont fit or work on them). If you want a more modern auto-focus 35mm SLR (that you can just point at the subject and press the shutter) then perhaps have a look at a Canon EOS 30 (not the 30D, as that's a digital camera!). This was one of the last of the 35mm film cameras and is quite high spec but still sells for reasonable money. It will work fully with all Canon EF lenses (not the EF-S fit lenses though!) and current and recent Canon Speedlite flash guns too (such as the EX 430 and EX 430II, etc.).



So it depends what you want, but I doubt you can go far wrong with either the A1 or EOS 30 providing you get a fully working one with a warranty from a reputable shop/dealership. Buying privately from an internet auction site can be a bit more of a lottery and camera repairs aren't cheap if it does go wrong.

Above all, don't rush into buying, there are loads of cameras out there, so make sure you are going to buy the right one for you! Hope this is useful.

Have a look at the 'Film and Conventional' forum section of Talk Photography too, lots of experienced folk in there, together with info on film and where to get your film developed and scanned too. Nice friendly people as well. (y)
 
Last edited:
OK, as others have said, a 'point and shoot' film camera is usually the name given to one of the compact autofocus and auto exposure type 35mm film cameras with built in flash, such as this one, the Canon Sureshot Supreme:



Last time I looked, this model camera was still quite good value for money (around £20 upwards for one in good working order) and have a good, sharp lens on them, if you can put up with the retro plastic and slightly banana-shaped looks, and there's no way to focus manually or set the shutter speed or aperture manually either.

However, I think what you are referring to might be an auto exposure, manual focus, 35mm SLR? If so, neither the OM10 or AE1 are truly full auto exposure... each require either the shutter speed or the aperture to be set by the photographer, and the camera then choses the other setting according to what the camera's light meter tells it.

The Canon A1 does give full auto exposure (Programme),choosing both the shutter speed and aperture automatically. It also offers full manual, as well as setting the shutter speed or aperture automatically, while the photographer sets the other. It was the first 35mm SLR camera to offer the now familiar PASM exposure settings that virtually all DSLRs still have to this day.

Unless prices have changed since last time I looked, the Canon A1 tends to sell for a bit less than the AE1 and AE1 programme, although the A1 is a much higher specification camera! I think this is because the other two are silver and black and look more retro. So if you want the camera for photography rather than posing, the A1 wins hands down for specification and value for money.

However, the Canon A series cameras are manual focus only, and use the old Canon FD fit lenses (modern Canon EOS EF and EF-S fit lenses wont fit or work on them). If you want a more modern auto-focus 35mm SLR (that you can just point at the subject and press the shutter) then perhaps have a look at a Canon EOS 30. This was one of the last of the 35mm film cameras and is quite high spec but still sells for reasonable money. It will work fully with all Canon EF lenses (not the EF-S fit lenses though!) and current and recent Canon Speedlite flash guns too (EX 430 and EX 430II).



So it depends what you want, but I doubt you can go far wrong with either the A1 or EOS 30 providing you get a fully working one with a warranty from a reputable shop/dealership. Buying privately from an internet auction site can be a bit more of a lottery and camera repairs aren't cheap if it does go wrong.

Above all, don't rush into buying, there are loads of cameras out there, so make sure you are going to buy the right one for you! Hope this is useful.

Have a look at the 'Film and Conventional' forum section of Talk Photography too, lots of experienced folk in there, together with info on film and where to get your film developed and scanned too. Nice friendly people too. (y)

Wow, this is so, so helpful - thank you!
 
Wow, this is so, so helpful - thank you!
No problem. As I said, don't rush in, take your time to find out what you actually need, rather than think you might want. Now we've talked a bit about cameras, what sort of photography were you looking to do? If you can tell us a bit about your project this might help people tailor any suggestions to your needs, rather than us just randomly suggesting good quality cameras. (y)
 
Last edited:
No problem. As I said, don't rush in, take your time to find out what you actually need, rather than think you might want. Now we've talked a bit about cameras, what sort of photography were you looking to do? If you can tell us a bit about your project this might help people tailor any suggestions to your needs, rather than us just randomly suggesting good quality cameras. (y)

Film cameras seem very apt for capturing organic, muted tones - which I find work great with minimalism. I'm building an artist-development project and I'd just like to do some experimenting for my personal reference. The shots must compliment the music; work hand-in-hand. However, I would like the camera to be something I can bring along on travels when touring - so something durable (not that I wouldn't take care of it of course). I guess the bottom line is: I do like the idea of being able to fine tune and have some control when shooting, but there's an element of risk anyway when using film, because you can't see the shots as you take them. Images from the OM-10, albeit a lower-graded camera ranked next to all the others, do actually appeal to me. Sorry if this is in no way helpful.. and thanks for your time
 
Film cameras seem very apt for capturing organic, muted tones - which I find work great with minimalism. I'm building an artist-development project and I'd just like to do some experimenting for my personal reference. The shots must compliment the music; work hand-in-hand. However, I would like the camera to be something I can bring along on travels when touring - so something durable (not that I wouldn't take care of it of course). I guess the bottom line is: I do like the idea of being able to fine tune and have some control when shooting, but there's an element of risk anyway when using film, because you can't see the shots as you take them. Images from the OM-10, albeit a lower-graded camera ranked next to all the others, do actually appeal to me. Sorry if this is in no way helpful.. and thanks for your time

With film cameras, once you get into good quality SLRs from the 'big three' of Canon, Nikon & Olympus of the 80s and 90s, apart from any slight difference in exposure, they should all produce pretty similar looking results. It's the make and type of film you use in them that will make the most obvious difference in tones, grain and colour saturation.

That's where the Film and Conventional section might come in handy, both in terms of suggestions of film to try, and examples people have taken. From what you've described, a starting point might be Kodak Portra 400, for more muted colours and tones? But see what the others in the F&C section say first before buying any!

Beyond that, to compare any very subtle differences there might be between different camera lenses then you'd have to use the same film (from the same batch), shoot the same subject in the same light, then develop all the films in the same batch using the same chemicals, then use the same make and model of scanner on the same settings to produce comparable results... and even then it might not be truly comparable, as you'd be comparing how the film scanned as well as what the camera produced.

So I wouldn't get too hung up about choosing a make or model of 80s or 90s 35mm SLR camera because of the 'look' you think it gives, it's far more likely to be the film used, and the light its been shot in, that doing it.

The lenses on older film cameras (pre 80s) did give more individual character, but by the 80s onwards the manufactures were keen to avoid things like chromatic aberration, softness, etc., so with the exception of 'bokeh' (which still varies between different makes and model of lens to this day!) I doubt you'd see much difference between a 50mm f/1.8 Canon, Nikon or Olympus lens of the 80s/90s era in terms of obvious individual 'character'.

Unlike modern day DSLRs, which do tend to vary in look/character between different makes when using the same lens, particularly if shooting in JPEG, but that's down to the sensor, processor and software, not the lens. :)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Sky
Wow, I cannot express how much i appreciate your time and help. Interesting you should say that, I was planning on using Portra 400 film to begin the first batch of experimentations.. although I will have a browse within the section you recommended for some suggestions on where to buy film (preferable to support indie businesses, but I understand this isn’t always possible with these kinds of purchases).

It definitely makes sense that the lighting/any lens filters/film itself has the biggest impact - I’ll focus on these factors and selective choices.

Thanks ever so much
 
Wow, I cannot express how much i appreciate your time and help. Interesting you should say that, I was planning on using Portra 400 film to begin the first batch of experimentations.. although I will have a browse within the section you recommended for some suggestions on where to buy film (preferable to support indie businesses, but I understand this isn’t always possible with these kinds of purchases).

It definitely makes sense that the lighting/any lens filters/film itself has the biggest impact - I’ll focus on these factors and selective choices.

Thanks ever so much
Just thinking out loud... I have a distant memory that some Olympus OM10 cameras tended to overexpose when using colour print film, so this might be what you've seen - a light, rather washed out effect? I'd have to see the results you've seen to tell though!

If this is the case, then it's easy to replicate. Most high-spec 35mm SLRs from the 80s and 90s have + and - exposure compensation, which you can use to consistently over or under expose your photos while using the camera's auto exposure in 'point and shoot' full auto mode as normal. You just have to remember to turn it back to normal (0) when you've finished using it!
 
Last edited:
Just thinking out loud... I have a distant memory that some Olympus OM10 cameras tended to overexpose when using colour print film, so this might be what you've seen - a light, rather washed out effect? I'd have to see the results you've seen to tell though!

If this is the case, then it's easy to replicate. Most high-spec 35mm SLRs from the 80s and 90s have + and - exposure compensation, which you can use to consistently over or under expose your photos while using the camera's auto exposure in 'point and shoot' full auto mode as normal. You just have to remember to turn it back to normal (0) when you've finished using it!

Yes, that's primarily why I liked the aesthetic of the images, but now that I know I can control this manually it would offer a variety of results - wonderful. A very valid point.. I did read about exposure-compensation but wasn't sure how many SLR cameras offer this feature. I'm leaning towards purchasing the OM-1N camera as a base model but will continue to do some more research beforehand for sure.
 
Do check if the OM-1N needs a battery if it's got a meter, and whether that type of battery is still available. Some of the OM models (not the OM10) used a mercury type battery that's no longer available (due to mercury damaging the environment) and modern silver oxide batteries aren't available in the same voltage. This voltage difference can mean that the meter will be inaccurate, requiring an adaptor or a modification to the camera. Canon A-series cameras (and newer) use alkali or silver oxide type batteries, which are still widely available (Amazon, eBay, etc.).

Not sure what Nikon used... possibly coal? ;) Only joking there Nikon fans! :exit:

(There is sometimes a bit of banter between Nikon and Canon users)
 
Last edited:
It does need a battery, but I managed to find a 1.35v replacement on Ebay and it offers stability for the meter, unlike the alkaline ones, to replace the original PX625
 
It does need a battery, but I managed to find a 1.35v replacement on Ebay and it offers stability for the meter, unlike the alkaline ones, to replace the original PX625 :)
If it's an air cell type one, unless things have changed, they're quite expensive and only last a few (3 or 4?) months once they've been activated. A conversion to the camera or an adaptor (so it can use silver oxide batteries) are the most cost-effective route if you're going to use the camera regularly and intend to keep it.
 
Last edited:
If it's an air cell type one, unless things have changed, they're quite expensive and only last a few (3 or 4?) months once they've been activated. A conversion to the camera or an adaptor (so it can use silver oxide batteries) are the most cost-effective route if you're going to use the camera regularly and intend to keep it.

It's zinc/air designed and costs just over £5 (which is the same price for x2 alkaline batteries for the om-10, so doesn't seem too pricey), and claims to last a year under normal use, although this is very relative.,. Do the alkaline batteries last longer than this when using an adapter?
 
It's zinc/air designed and costs just over £5 (which is the same price for x2 alkaline batteries for the om-10, so doesn't seem too pricey), and claims to last a year under normal use, although this is very relative.,. Do the alkaline batteries last longer than this when using an adapter?
The silver oxide batteries in my Dad's old (but lightly used) OM10 were still working and, to the best of my knowledge, had never been replaced since he bought the camera new 30 years previously! I changed them as a precaution prior to selling the camera though. So yes, a good quality silver oxide battery should last good while (depending on whether you use the camera daily, weekly, monthly, etc.), so a battery adaptor or 'built in' modification to the camera should pay for itself if you intend to keep the camera, as air cells will run down once activated, regardless of whether or not they're being used.

I wouldn't bother with alkali batteries if using a converter to replace a mercury battery (unless it's specifically recommended), as the power discharge curve is different, which may throw the meter wrong when the alkali batteries begin to run down. I have, however, read an account from someone who maintained that a standard 1.5v silver oxide battery worked fine in their OM1n without any modification/adaptors... but then again, could the camera they bought have already been converted?

The OM1n isn't a camera I know well, so I can't offer any specific advice on what to look for when buying, other than check up on the battery issue, and that the light seals round the camera back/film door have been replaced and are OK (and the mirror buffer foam has also been renewed, if this camera has a mirror buffer, or damage could occur). The light seals on my Dad's old OM10 had turned to sticky putty and had to be replaced before I sold the camera. I've also had the seals on my Canon A1 redone, so it's a fairly common issue on late 70s and 80s cameras. Once done, they should hopefully be good for another 20 or 30 years though! :)
 
Last edited:
I did some digging and found "smallbattery.company.org.uk" offer the MR-9 adapter and 386 silver oxide cell, so might be worth the investment in that case..

Also, quick question: do you have any tips/red flags to look out for when viewing cameras? I.e. check for haziness in the viewfinder, the condition of the seals, the foam etc. :)
 
I did some digging and found "smallbattery.company.org.uk" offer the MR-9 adapter and 386 silver oxide cell, so might be worth the investment in that case..

Also, quick question: do you have any tips/red flags to look out for when viewing cameras? I.e. check for haziness in the viewfinder, the condition of the seals, the foam etc. :)
With a film camera, apart from the obvious "is it working", door seals are the most likely things to fail, unless they've been replaced (normally a relatively simple job). I wouldn't worry over-much about the condition of the viewfinder as long as you can see through it - it won't affect the image quality. It might be worth looking at a reputable film-camera dealer's stock such as WY Cameras in Leeds (www.wycameras.co.uk) and phoning them for honest advice.
 
T
With a film camera, apart from the obvious "is it working", door seals are the most likely things to fail, unless they've been replaced (normally a relatively simple job). I wouldn't worry over-much about the condition of the viewfinder as long as you can see through it - it won't affect the image quality. It might be worth looking at a reputable film-camera dealer's stock such as WY Cameras in Leeds (www.wycameras.co.uk) and phoning them for honest advice.

Thank you, and thanks for the recommendation!
 
In addition to WYC, there's also FFordes https://www.ffordes.com/ who are well established and have a good reputation. However, you'll probably find there's not much stock about at the moment owing to the recent lockdown. So take your time, and don't let impatience/enthusiasm lead you into buying something with known faults, or a tatty example for top money! Wait until stock levels get back to normal.

If a deal sounds too good to be true, then it usually is! Also, you're buying a mechanical object that's around 40 years old, so with the best will in the world, things can go wrong or break. Buying from a reputable dealership should mean that they'll stand by a repair, replacement or refund if it's still in the warranty period. Expect between 3 and 12 months warranty, depending who you buy from.

Also, do perhaps give the Canon A1 some consideration, as it offers full auto exposure and a lot more features than the OM1n. And, as my grandma used to say, what will do a lot will also do a little, but not the other way round! :) The A1, (although costing around £230 with 50mm lens back in 1980) was a good seller, so it's likely there will be more A1s around to choose from than OM1Ns, so you might get fixed up quicker? Plus, there will be more Canon FD fit lenses around to choose from too, as Canon A-series cameras were very popular back in their day.

If considering an A1 then make sure the light seals are OK, or budget for getting them done (around £40 to £50 last time I looked) and for 'Canon squeak/cough', which is a sort of squeak sound when the shutter fires. It sounds dramatic, but it's only the mirror return mechanism parts that needing oiling, so it's a fairly cheap fix (as far as camera repairs go!), but probably best to get a full 'clean, lubricate and adjust' service done at the same time if it's got to go in.

If needs be, ask in the F&C section for recommended camera repairers, as quite a few of us collect cameras and tend to know who to go to for good value for money.

As far as lenses go, in addition to checking for scratches and clarity, check the aperture opens and closes properly (this often has to be done on the camera) and watch out for lens fungus (a google search will no doubt produce some examples and some horror stories!). Quite a few old lenses have suffered from fungal growth on the coating of the glass elements (which can etch itself permanently into the glass) due to storage in warm, damp conditions such as an attic, garage, or the back of a musty old wardrobe or draw. Hope this is useful and best of luck finding something nice. (y)
 
Last edited:
In addition to WYC, there's also FFordes https://www.ffordes.com/ who are well established and have a good reputation. However, you'll probably find there's not much stock about at the moment owing to the recent lockdown. So take your time, and don't let impatience/enthusiasm lead you into buying something with known faults, or a tatty example for top money! Wait until stock levels get back to normal.

If a deal sounds too good to be true, then it usually is! Also, you're buying a mechanical object that's around 40 years old, so with the best will in the world, things can go wrong or break. Buying from a reputable dealership should mean that they'll stand by a repair, replacement or refund if it's still in the warranty period. Expect between 3 and 12 months warranty, depending who you buy from.

Also, do perhaps give the Canon A1 some consideration, as it offers full auto exposure and a lot more features than the OM1n. And, as my grandma used to say, what will do a lot will also do a little, but not the other way round! :) The A1, (although costing around £230 with 50mm lens back in 1980) was a good seller, so it's likely there will be more A1s around to choose from than OM1Ns, so you might get fixed up quicker? Plus, there will be more Canon FD fit lenses around to choose from too, as Canon A-series cameras were very popular back in their day.

If considering an A1 then make sure the light seals are OK, or budget for getting them done (around £40 to £50 last time I looked) and for 'Canon squeak/cough', which is a sort of squeak sound when the shutter fires. It sounds dramatic, but it's only the mirror return mechanism parts that needing oiling, so it's a fairly cheap fix (as far as camera repairs go!), but probably best to get a full 'clean, lubricate and adjust' service done at the same time if it's got to go in.

If needs be, ask in the F&C section for recommended camera repairers, as quite a few of us collect cameras and tend to know who to go to for good value for money.

As far as lenses go, in addition to checking for scratches and clarity, check the aperture opens and closes properly (this often has to be done on the camera) and watch out for lens fungus (a google search will no doubt produce some examples and some horror stories!). Quite a few old lenses have suffered from fungal growth on the coating of the glass elements (which can etch itself permanently into the glass) due to storage in warm, damp conditions such as an attic, garage, or the back of a musty old wardrobe or draw. Hope this is useful and best of luck finding something nice. (y)

Of course, I'm counting on the honesty of sellers (paired with intuition & eye for obvious damage ), as I'm not 100% sure I'll be able to notice any hidden pointers that would make the camera unusable... :oops: :$ As for dealerships: I have e-mailed a bulk but not heard back, and I'd prefer not to go hunting around dealerships in London just yet.

I did consider the Canon A1 during the early stages of my search and there were a few advantages I liked, but it seemed a lot more technically advanced compared to the OM1 or 1N, so perhaps once I become comfortable shooting with simple mechanics it could be a future idea. Interesting re: the lens options, however the zuiko's don't appear to be too limited and I reckon the primes will fair pretty well for experimenting! I shall be sure to check the aperture on the lenses - thank you.
Thanks again for all of your help and time, I really do appreciate it :ty:
 
Of course, I'm counting on the honesty of sellers (paired with intuition & eye for obvious damage ), as I'm not 100% sure I'll be able to notice any hidden pointers that would make the camera unusable... :oops: :$ As for dealerships: I have e-mailed a bulk but not heard back, and I'd prefer not to go hunting around dealerships in London just yet.

I did consider the Canon A1 during the early stages of my search and there were a few advantages I liked, but it seemed a lot more technically advanced compared to the OM1 or 1N, so perhaps once I become comfortable shooting with simple mechanics it could be a future idea. Interesting re: the lens options, however the zuiko's don't appear to be too limited and I reckon the primes will fair pretty well for experimenting! I shall be sure to check the aperture on the lenses - thank you.
Thanks again for all of your help and time, I really do appreciate it :ty:

No problem. Don't be put off by the seemingly technically advanced A1; the camera might have been cutting edge for its time, but it's the advanced 'auto exposure' feature that makes it so easy to use. The other features are there if you need them, or to explore as your knowledge and ability grows.

You can just bung the camera in full auto and all you have to do is point it at the subject, focus, press the shutter release button and wind on. The shutter speed and aperture info is also clearly displayed in digital form at the bottom of the viewfinder, so it's easy to see and understand. For instance: 250 5.6 which means it's set to 1/250th of a second at f/5.6. So there's no old-fashioned needle pointing at the aperture or shutter speed number at the side of the viewfinder, with no indication of the other setting without looking at what the dial on top the camera is set to, which is the set-up that most other 35mm SLR cameras of the era had (including the OM1n).

Once you get more advanced, you can set the aperture and let the camera set the shutter speed, or vice versa - and, once again, the A1 will clearly show what the settings are in the viewfinder display. Or you can put the camera in full manual and set both the shutter speed and aperture yourself (like you'd have to do all the time with an OM1n), in which case the A1 will add an 'M' to the viewfinder display to remind you it's in manual, and tell you what its light meter is suggesting as an aperture for the shutter speed you've selected. You can ignore the display and just press the shutter release button to take a photo using your chosen settings, or have a think about the settings you've chosen to decide if they're right or not.

It sounds complicated, but by today's standards it's quite simple stuff. If I didn't think this camera was suitable for a 'beginner' then I wouldn't have suggested it. It's a case of technology making the job easier (by giving the full auto exposure option), but giving partial or full manual control if the user wants it. The OM1n was a well regarded camera in its time, but it's a fully manual camera, which means you have to set the shutter speed and the aperture yourself each time you want or need to change them. There's a meter needle in the viewfinder, but all this does is say what the camera thinks the aperture should be set to once you've set the shutter speed, the OM1n won't change any settings itself, it doesn't have that option.

I was mindful of you saying you wanted a 'walk about' type camera to take when travelling. In which case it's probably nice to have that full auto exposure option, so all you need to do is focus and take the photo, so you can grab a shot quickly if needed. On the other hand, I use fully manual cameras myself and enjoy them, but they can slow you down, particularly in changing light (patchy cloud with the sun going in and out every minute or so, for instance).

So don't rush in and do have a good think. I find YouTube quite handy for seeing what cameras are like to use... but you do get some people on there that clearly don't know what they're doing or talking about, so do cross reference and shop around if you decide to watch some vids! Best of luck. (y)
 
Last edited:
Of course, I'm counting on the honesty of sellers (paired with intuition & eye for obvious damage ), as I'm not 100% sure I'll be able to notice any hidden pointers that would make the camera unusable... :oops: :$ As for dealerships: I have e-mailed a bulk but not heard back, and I'd prefer not to go hunting around dealerships in London just yet.

I did consider the Canon A1 during the early stages of my search and there were a few advantages I liked, but it seemed a lot more technically advanced compared to the OM1 or 1N, so perhaps once I become comfortable shooting with simple mechanics it could be a future idea. Interesting re: the lens options, however the zuiko's don't appear to be too limited and I reckon the primes will fair pretty well for experimenting! I shall be sure to check the aperture on the lenses - thank you.
Thanks again for all of your help and time, I really do appreciate it :ty:

If it helps, I've bought from both Ffordes and WYCameras too, and they've always been good with items matching descriptions and at a fair price.

It's worth saying that none of these cameras are technically advanced now, and although they offer varying degrees of automation, they're all quite simple to operate. As Mr. Badger said, a manual camera requires you to do everything, and the learning curve can be quite steep, especially when you may not see the pictures you've taken until a couple of weeks later & then have to play detective to figure why they look as they do. Manual focussing accurately was enough of a challenge for a lot of users 'back in the day'. ;)

Something else worth mentioning is that all photographs, whether film or digital, require processing, and that has a profound effect on the appearance of the image. Relatively few iconic images ever came that way straight out of the camera, and there used to be a printing industry of skilled individuals who would print images either following the photographers direction or were given a free hand to get the best from an image. When your film is processed and scanned or printed, the images will come back with a default look to them based on the exposure made originally, the film type, the settings built into the machines etc etc. If they don't live up to expectations then you may wish to consider learning how to process, either digitally (with scans) or in a darkroom (with negs). This side of things is the other half of photography as a creative skill, though little talked about because it's much less kit-oriented, and much more down to an individuals imaginative abilities.
 
No problem. Don't be put off by the seemingly technically advanced A1; the camera might have been cutting edge for its time, but it's the advanced 'auto exposure' feature that makes it so easy to use. The other features are there if you need them, or to explore as your knowledge and ability grows.

You can just bung the camera in full auto and all you have to do is point it at the subject, focus, press the shutter release button and wind on. The shutter speed and aperture info is also clearly displayed in digital form at the bottom of the viewfinder, so it's easy to see and understand. For instance: 250 5.6 which means it's set to 1/250th of a second at f/5.6. So there's no old-fashioned needle pointing at the aperture or shutter speed number at the side of the viewfinder, with no indication of the other setting without looking at what the dial on top the camera is set to, which is the set-up that most other 35mm SLR cameras of the era had (including the OM1n).

Once you get more advanced, you can set the aperture and let the camera set the shutter speed, or vice versa - and, once again, the A1 will clearly show what the settings are in the viewfinder display. Or you can put the camera in full manual and set both the shutter speed and aperture yourself (like you'd have to do all the time with an OM1n), in which case the A1 will add an 'M' to the viewfinder display to remind you it's in manual, and tell you what its light meter is suggesting as an aperture for the shutter speed you've selected. You can ignore the display and just press the shutter release button to take a photo using your chosen settings, or have a think about the settings you've chosen to decide if they're right or not.

It sounds complicated, but by today's standards it's quite simple stuff. If I didn't think this camera was suitable for a 'beginner' then I wouldn't have suggested it. It's a case of technology making the job easier (by giving the full auto exposure option), but giving partial or full manual control if the user wants it. The OM1n was a well regarded camera in its time, but it's a fully manual camera, which means you have to set the shutter speed and the aperture yourself each time you want or need to change them. There's a meter needle in the viewfinder, but all this does is say what the camera thinks the aperture should be set to once you've set the shutter speed, the OM1n won't change any settings itself, it doesn't have that option.

I was mindful of you saying you wanted a 'walk about' type camera to take when travelling. In which case it's probably nice to have that full auto exposure option, so all you need to do is focus and take the photo, so you can grab a shot quickly if needed. On the other hand, I use fully manual cameras myself and enjoy them, but they can slow you down, particularly in changing light (patchy cloud with the sun going in and out every minute or so, for instance).

So don't rush in and do have a good think. I find YouTube quite handy for seeing what cameras are like to use... but you do get some people on there that clearly don't know what they're doing or talking about, so do cross reference and shop around if you decide to watch some vids! Best of luck. (y)

Well I have to say - I'm very thankful to have made this post! I'm constantly watching videos, researching blogs and looking through forums on here too, but I guess it's all user-experience and some info might not be accurate anyway; although I've correlated the main info against enough references to get more of an 'accurate' picture (pun not intended).

Yeah - when on tour I'd be wanting something I can whip out and shoot in the moment without having to fumble with manual settings, although I am still swaying to the OM1n from all the positive reasons I've seen so far... :pompous: Oh no.. I can already tell my film camera enthusiasm will become similar to that of my guitars!
 
If it helps, I've bought from both Ffordes and WYCameras too, and they've always been good with items matching descriptions and at a fair price.

It's worth saying that none of these cameras are technically advanced now, and although they offer varying degrees of automation, they're all quite simple to operate. As Mr. Badger said, a manual camera requires you to do everything, and the learning curve can be quite steep, especially when you may not see the pictures you've taken until a couple of weeks later & then have to play detective to figure why they look as they do. Manual focussing accurately was enough of a challenge for a lot of users 'back in the day'. ;)

Something else worth mentioning is that all photographs, whether film or digital, require processing, and that has a profound effect on the appearance of the image. Relatively few iconic images ever came that way straight out of the camera, and there used to be a printing industry of skilled individuals who would print images either following the photographers direction or were given a free hand to get the best from an image. When your film is processed and scanned or printed, the images will come back with a default look to them based on the exposure made originally, the film type, the settings built into the machines etc etc. If they don't live up to expectations then you may wish to consider learning how to process, either digitally (with scans) or in a darkroom (with negs). This side of things is the other half of photography as a creative skill, though little talked about because it's much less kit-oriented, and much more down to an individuals imaginative abilities.

I was considering jotting down the settings I used on the first roll of film (yes, I have a lot of spare time on my hands o_O) and matching it to each photo to see what worked and then figuring out trial and errors from there. I've also been looking at the scanning process too; understanding that a lot of scanners tend to "bring down" the levels of exposure to imitate a "standardised" look. I'll do a hunt around for developers too once I've got my main boxes ticked off! It's all incredibly fascinating and, like you said, imagination is key.
 
Snip:
Oh no.. I can already tell my film camera enthusiasm will become similar to that of my guitars!
To use a guitar analogy, using a fully manual film camera is the equivalent of having to change the tone and volume settings after each number to get the sound you need. Using a multi-mode camera with full auto, such as the A1, is the equivalent of being able to play the full set by just changing the 5 position pickup switch... but with the option of leaving it on the same pickup and changing the vol and tone if you want to work harder than necessary for the sake of your art. ;) Well, that's the nearest analogy I can think of!

@ancient_mariner likes his guitars too, so may have an alternative one. :)
 
Just in case they're of any interest...

I used to like fixed focus 35mm cameras as they really are just point and shoot although some have a sunny or cloudy setting. The first camera I had was a Kodak Instamatic 36 and the last I film compact bought was a Jessops Quick shot which I still have. I also liked the Olympus Trip 35 but that was limited in what ISO films it liked.
 
@ancient_mariner likes his guitars too, so may have an alternative one.

Using film is like going direct to desk - but without being able to listen to the recording until after you finished the session. You can chuck stuff like effects between the guitar & the desk to irreversibly change the sound, or you can do the processing afterwards: either in hardware if your desk is analogue or digitally if you use a DAW.

;)
 
Using film is like going direct to desk - but without being able to listen to the recording until after you finished the session. You can chuck stuff like effects between the guitar & the desk to irreversibly change the sound, or you can do the processing afterwards: either in hardware if your desk is analogue or digitally if you use a DAW.

;)

Ah, tape recording is so pure. Wish I could be a fly on the wall for those analogue recording days...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top