That thought had crossed my mind and I asked him but I'm afraid his memory is going so no luck there, from my memory I think it may have been a Pentax of some sort? But think he may have replaced it as I remember as a kid him moaning about his camera breaking. Having thought about it I wouldn't be surprised if he has it tucked away somewhere gathering dust.
and help to keep the site free for all
What to look for in a 35mm camera?
- Thread starter Shnarf76
- Start date
That thought had crossed my mind and I asked him but I'm afraid his memory is going so no luck there, from my memory I think it may have been a Pentax of some sort? But think he may have replaced it as I remember as a kid him moaning about his camera breaking. Having thought about it I wouldn't be surprised if he has it tucked away somewhere gathering dust.
One consideration should be availability of batteries. Earlier camera's used batteries similar to the PX625 containing mercury, long discontinued. There were substitutes. Some had a slightly different voltage that effected exposure, others had a short life. Well worth looking into.
Thank you for the suggestion, I'll give it a serious look. I may end up with two cameras at this rate!
Thank you for that, you're right I can't access the classifieds at the moment (is that a good or a bad thing?). I'll do a search on that camera and see what's what.
Thank you for the advice, I'll keep that in mind.
TheBigYin
Moderator
- Messages
- 16,655
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- No
predictably, I would go for a non-asthmatic (i've always thought it was more of a wheeze than a cough!) version of the A1 with the 50mm f1/4 lens...
But, probably the best option if you've the time is this...
Ideally, I'd wait until one of the regulars in here was selling something that fitted the bill - that way you'd have known provenance - generally none of the regular guys in F&C sells on "duds" in here - they just move on cameras that they're not using enough to justify keeping anymore, or sell on good ones to fund the next exploration...
But, probably the best option if you've the time is this...
Ideally, I'd wait until one of the regulars in here was selling something that fitted the bill - that way you'd have known provenance - generally none of the regular guys in F&C sells on "duds" in here - they just move on cameras that they're not using enough to justify keeping anymore, or sell on good ones to fund the next exploration...
Thank you for the advice, I have a while to wait until I can access the classifieds but I guess that'll give me time to research the suggestions in this thread.
ChrisR
I'm a well known grump...
- Messages
- 11,025
- Name
- Chris
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Well, first ransack his house!
Only kidding, but there is a certain extra thrill using a camera used and loved by a parent. I have a Zeiss 6*6 folding camera used by my Dad and I'd never part from it. Still desperately searching my sister's place for the old 6*9 he used for the thousands of negatives I have from around WW2.
But, if his old camera was a Pentax, honour the tradition and buy a Pentax MX like I suggested earlier. For various reasons, they are a little less loved than the Canikon brands, but still excellent quality and fabulous lenses...
Mr Badger
Didymus
- Messages
- 7,457
- Edit My Images
- No
The other thing to consider is lens focal length; while the 50mm was sold with 35mm SLRs for many years as the 'standard' lens, quite a few people seem to prefer a 35mm lens for street photography, with 40mm being a good half-way option between the sometimes too 'tight' 50mm and the sometimes a bit too 'wide and distant' 35mm. However, 40mm wasn't a particularly widely available focal length in the late 70s and 80s when manual focus SLRs were in their heyday.
You can address this by getting a short zoom such as a 35-70 as a second lens to accompany your 50mm. If going with a Canon A series camera there's the Canon FD 35-70 f/4 zoom, which has got to be one of the most underrated lenses around, hence it can still be picked up fairly cheaply (this is the metal bodied one with constant f/4 minimum aperture, not the later plastic bodied one with f/3.5 to f/4.5 aperture). It's small and compact and not that much bigger than a 50mm, but the downside with this lens is that the bearing pads on the zoom mechanism can wear which produces play in the mechanism that can't be fixed as the parts are obsolete, so you need to find a 'mint' one that has no or minimal play between the inner lens housing and the outer lens body. Other than that, it should be sharp at all apertures and have minimal (particularly for its day) barrel and pincushion distortion. Price? Around £40 to £50 for a mint one in full working order, and that's got to be a bargain! Here's a shot taken with one (click to view and zoom in on Flickr):
You can address this by getting a short zoom such as a 35-70 as a second lens to accompany your 50mm. If going with a Canon A series camera there's the Canon FD 35-70 f/4 zoom, which has got to be one of the most underrated lenses around, hence it can still be picked up fairly cheaply (this is the metal bodied one with constant f/4 minimum aperture, not the later plastic bodied one with f/3.5 to f/4.5 aperture). It's small and compact and not that much bigger than a 50mm, but the downside with this lens is that the bearing pads on the zoom mechanism can wear which produces play in the mechanism that can't be fixed as the parts are obsolete, so you need to find a 'mint' one that has no or minimal play between the inner lens housing and the outer lens body. Other than that, it should be sharp at all apertures and have minimal (particularly for its day) barrel and pincushion distortion. Price? Around £40 to £50 for a mint one in full working order, and that's got to be a bargain! Here's a shot taken with one (click to view and zoom in on Flickr):
Last edited:
- Messages
- 929
- Name
- Maarten
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I have an OM1 and an OM2sp; I prefer the OM1 and I think it's a really nice camera.
One thing to keep in mind is that if you buy an old film camera on eBay you may need to get it serviced to get it to full working order. My OM1 was a bargain on eBay and in excellent cosmetic condition but the viewfinder had an age-related issue so I sent it to Miles Whitehead to be serviced.
I also have a Canon A-1; I really like the excellent viewfinder and the ability to choose aperture priority and shutter speed priority. Again this camera was suffering from "shutter cough" when I bought it.
Mr Badger
Didymus
- Messages
- 7,457
- Edit My Images
- No
Some of the older OM models used a now unobtainable mercury cell type battery, I believe they can be converted to take silver oxide type batteries though, but at a cost unless you can do this yourself. The OM10 needs the manual adaptor to obtain full manual control. I'm sure some of the Olympus owners will be along soon to give you more info. 
As for love for a camera, there will be people on here who love all sorts of cameras, so that's no real guarantee! However, David Bailey seemed to be able to get some good results from his OM cameras, and they do have a loyal following. At the time, it was probably 'top end' models from Nikon, Olympus and Canon (in that order?- no doubt there'll be some debate about that!) that were the most popular 35mm SLR choice for professional photographers. It's what suits the individual though, and you can only really tell that by handling and using a camera.
As for love for a camera, there will be people on here who love all sorts of cameras, so that's no real guarantee! However, David Bailey seemed to be able to get some good results from his OM cameras, and they do have a loyal following. At the time, it was probably 'top end' models from Nikon, Olympus and Canon (in that order?- no doubt there'll be some debate about that!) that were the most popular 35mm SLR choice for professional photographers. It's what suits the individual though, and you can only really tell that by handling and using a camera.
- Messages
- 2,996
- Name
- John
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I wouldn't worry about replacements for mercury batteries. My OM1 works just fine with an alkaline battery - this camera uses a bridge circuit for its light meter so voltage is not an issue at all.
OM2,3,4 etc are more automatic and voltage is likely to be critical for those.
OM2,3,4 etc are more automatic and voltage is likely to be critical for those.
I'll be avoiding buying a camera from eBay and will search for one from an online shop so I get a warranty with it.
Edit: or I'll buy from this forum if I can wait long enough for access to the classifieds!
Last edited:
- Messages
- 16,290
- Name
- Andy Grant
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Have a look at ffordes, they always have a good selection, price is reasonable and you do get a warranty. worth giving them a bell if you see something you like as they will get it off the shelf and give you a run through of its condition.
- Messages
- 4,517
- Name
- droj
- Edit My Images
- No
I would be perfectly happy using eBay to source equipment as long as the seller has given a full and detailed appraisal of the item backed up by good pictures - if they haven't done this then it's likely that they don't understand what they're selling, and should be avoided. EBay's buyer protection should do the rest.
- Messages
- 1,076
- Name
- Mike
- Edit My Images
- Yes
For street/candid/walk-about GP photo making, a 35mm SLR wouldn't be my top choice. The design is inherently compromised simply to be an SLR with Through Taking Lens composition... and if you only intend ONE prime lens anyway? You are chucking away most of the advantages of it being an SLR to start with.
That is a Konica C35, range-finder model. I have the slightly less sophisticated 'view-finder' zone focus model. Mine belonged to my Grandad, when I was a child, and has all that 'classic' film camera styling of box with a lens on the front, advance lever wind-on; and aperture and focus around the lens.
It 'looks' like a propper camera.
NOW, I present it because its simply NOT an SLR. Not having a mirror box between the film and the lens, it can use a 'true' focal length lens, not a 'retro-focus' one, so the lens doesn't have to have correction elements in it or anything; plus not being interchangeable, the lens doesn't need a more intricate and convoluted interchangeable lens mount; so the lens can again, be 'better' and more rigid, and more reliable.
In 1973, these were also NOT a 'cheap' camera. There were 'budget' SLR's that were actually cheaper. & ISTR that my Grandad's cost aprox £35, which was a good weeks wages back then; equivilent to perhaps £700 in todays money.
YET, simply because they dont have an interchangeable lens, they are now dismissed in modern 'old camera' market. The view-finder models can be bought for between maybe £5 and £25, the range-finders, still for under £50, and just like in 1973, they are STILL a cracking camera.
Step away from SLR's and there are HUNDREDS of such 'bargains' to be found like this... its worth a LOT of thought, especially if you do not intend exploiting lens interchangeability.
The Konica, was one of the first affordable 'automatic' cameras, with 'coupled' exposure control to an inbuilt light meter. It was then easy to use, and didn't beg applying the f16-Sunny rule or a hand-held meter; AE system had full-auto exposure, controlling the shutter and aperture, or aperture-priority over-ride, the user selecting the aperture, down to a pretty fast f2.8 (I think) electronics balencing shutter against that. It has a conventional, I think 49mm filter thread on the lens, it I~S to all practical extents as 'versatile' as an SLR, with the advantages of cost and compact and better lens, for the sake of 'just' not having lens interchangeability.
For what you say you are looking for.. this one pretty much ticks all the boxes.... and for £25?!? You cant go wrong, really, you cant.
Has been mentioned, the imortal little Olympus XA2.
This is another Non-SLR 35mm camera, and still one of the smallest ever full frame 35mm film cameras ever made.
XA2 Number-One, is stitting on top of my record-player, next to the Daughters Cannon Digi-Compact. It's slightly disfunctional these days, and pretty much display only, having been bought when I was just 10years old in 1980, and gone around the world in my pocket a few times in my teens and 20's, and eventually been replaced with a couple of others, that are STILL my first choice carry-around camera, basically because it IS so small and pocketable.
It was in the 80's and 90's the favourite 'descreet' camera for candids and street photography, exploited by many pro's, because again, it was far from a 'cheap' consumer camera. Mine cost about £80 ISTR and was as expensive as Olympus's own entry level OM10 in the shop, that also not a budget starter camera, costing three times the price of something like a Practika SLR.
Its a lot more convenient to use than the Konika, and as said, it's enormousely pocketable and descreet. It lacks some optical excelence against the Konika due to the 'equated' 35mm lens, that is actually shorter than its own focal length to keep the camera compact, and its Automitic-Exposure only, there's no aperture-priority over-ride on this one; but exposure compensation can still be dialed in via the film-speed control.
I have literally been given two more of these things in more recent times, because of my effection for them, and the fact that as a Non-SLR, and as an at the time avante-guarde 'compact' they dont recieve the recognition as an 'enthusiast' camera or the prices.
Fantastic cameras, you can pick up litterally for next to nothing, £25 being a fair price, and even £50 for a minter, still cheaper than when new.
If you want a little more 'control' the plain Olympus XA (NOT the XA1, which is a cut-price consumer compact with selenium cell metering), offers range finder focus and some Aperture-Priority AE over ride. A LOT more expensive though, with 2nd hand prices typically around the £100 mark... and leading into other enthusiast non SLR 35mm's like the Minox 35, which is rather like the Konica, but has a pop-out true focal length 35mm lens, and again was an expensive enthusiast camera in its day.
This all leads away from 35mm SLR's..... which is my intension!
Two on the shelf above me are a Voiglander 120 roll film TLR, which I never use because of rusty rollers, and a rather wonderful Ziess Ikonta 120 6x9 'folder'..
This 'looks' like you'd expect an antique camera to, with its belows lens, which is simply wonderful, and again not compromised by mirror housing. At 105mm, for a 'standard angle' equivilent to 40mm or so on 35mm.
Its a fully-manual camera, with no integrated electronics or light-meter, so you have to use f16-sunny or a hand held meter, and set shutter and aperture on the lens, and the shear scale of that 6x9 negative!!! Image quality is fantastic, and the focus fade effects are wonderful and linear.
It's not a quick and easy camera to use, but if you are looking for that all manual fiddle-ability involvement, it offers it in full measure, and needn't be all that awkward to use.
As a carry-around camera, folded, it is actually more pocketable than any of my SLR's, I can just about slide it in its soft-case in a jacket pocket, and with a little nouse and savvy, judging settings by f16-Sunny and not making too many changes, it IS actually pretty quick and easy to use.... not very descreet though!
BUT, again NON-SLR, non interchangeable lens, not one of the renowned proffessional 'System' MF cameras, like a Rolie or Mamiya, these things are incredibly cheap on the open market, maybe £25-£50. (Mine was another bequest, like my Grandad's Konica, actually, but still).
Its a leap away from your ideas of what a 'classic' camera should look like, and only getting 6 frames a film on that one, it IS rather expensive to run... but it does make wonderful photo's and can be a joy to use. A-N-D needn't break the bank.
Which is ALL to say, think long and hard about this 35mm SLR Idea.... and how much of it is actually going to be useful to you.
Two or three more sat on the record player infront of me to consider, that are SLR's:-
First is an Olympus OM4. Top of the range SLR of the late 80's and early 90's, it was when I bought a house and had to itemise contents for insurance, a £2000 body only camera. And I REALY dont much like it any-more!
Wonderful camera, they were renowned for eating batteries. Y-e-s... mine is a US model with the OM4Ti's upgraded power saving electronics... it still eats batteries! And I stopped using it pretty much for that reason when they started taking mercury cells off the shelves cos of the envoro-mental issues! Probably valid actually... half a dozen OMK4's would probably killl all the fish in the north sea in a year! But still. Last outing on modern batteries, they didn't last a 46 frame film! That's still in it actually!
Yet, on 2nd hand market these things can command £100-200 or more price tags.
This does beg a lot of thought; and migration to widgetal has put a lot of such high end old film cameras on the 2nd hand market at what appear incredibly low prices compared to when new. But, get over that exitement, and I REALLY am sanguine whether many of them are worth anything close to the prices they command on the functional value.
So onto Second Offering, the Trusty Olympus OM10, which has also been mentioned.
YES, you do need the optional manual adapter to achieve Aperture-Priority over ride of the coupled metering system. BUT.
Rather missing the point of the camera to use it. In quarter of a century I have learned not to bother. In AE mode the camera's meter will select shutter speeds in 1/3 stop increments, and it will change the expoisure interval mid exposure if light changes. In manual, the adapter more crudely increments only in full stops, and locks exposure at those set settings. Get to know an OM10, and its AE system, you a) dont need the manual adapter, and b) can get better results without it. If you dont know the intricacies of the system, you are just making work for yourself!
It was in 1979, I think, a new bench-mark in easy to use entry-level SLR's, and still is. It's also compact, for a 35mm SLR, and there are some great lenses for it.
The 'Fast' 50 Zoilko that came as standard, though, is probably NOT its best feature. f1.8 it is fast; but the 50mm 'normal' angle of view is just 'normal'. It was expected that buyers would exploit the interchangeable lens mount, and swap it out for something more wide angle, like a 35mm or 28mm, or more telephoto, like 90 or 135mm, or even a zoom or two.
The affection for the 'fast 50' is a little perverse; they were promoted for accademic excersises, and the aperture race to make ever faster 50's was pushed a LOT by the fact that the small film format of 35mm denied the more gradual focus fade effects achieveable with longer lenses giving wider effective angle-of-view on 120 Medium format cameras; its the same vogue that suggests the fast primes for APS-C digital SLR's now, and conseqent razor thing DoF and 'Looks Photo-Shopped' back-ground perspective.... but still.
Point is is was NOT, even in the hey-day of manual focus 35mm SLR's a particularly wonderful focal length, and for street/candid, the wider angle and closer focus of a 35 or 28 would probably be better apreciated.
B-U-T is you have to have that SLR cudos, and try the fast 50 on one, then its a pretty good place to start, and OM10's have always been noteably 'cheap'.... ish.
As said, they were around £90 brand new in the late 70's early 80's, which was not so 'cheap', but far from budget. With age, and Olympus effectively abandoning the entry-level OM's as Auto-Focus hit the high street, they hit the second hand shops for stupid prices like £10, which was why, as a student, I bought them!
Now, as what so many expect a 35mm SLR to look like and do, they fetch a 'premium' on 2nd hand market, but you should still have plenty of choice for under £50, and they are a very useful camera for the money, and as they ever were a wonderful beginners 35mm SLR.
Last on the shelf, is probably my favourite camera. Its a 1973 Sigma Mk1 SLR, Richoch copy.
All screw fit M42 lenses, and in my case all primes, the actual camera fell out of an attick during a house clearance in the early 90's and given to me for the help 'cos no-one else could use it! So I built up an all priume 'period' outfit around it, pretty much for pocket money, scouring the trade-ins and bargain bins in the camera shop when I went to buy film.
All manual, with a non-coupled TTL light meter, its pretty easy and comvenient to use; the tactile 'clunk' of turning mechanical dials to set aperture and shutter speeds is very very engaging, like using an old fashioned type writer rather than a modern electronic key-board.
Lenses are good, they are retro-focus to get past that mirror box, but primes, they are other wise little compromised, held very rigidly on that screw mount, unlile rather wobly bayonet mount of my much battered OM10!
I like it because of that mechanical feel and involvement, and it has just enough versatility with the interchangeable lenses and all manual metering to be more than averagely 'useful' and versatile....
B-U-T... I so often get home to find that I have been walking around all day with the 29mm prime on the front, luggiung its mercedes like mass about, plus that of bag of alternative lenses, and would have been as well off with 'just' the XA2 or the Konica......
WHICH, hints back to top, and Do you REALLY need or want an SLR? Are the compromises for the SLR mechanism, really worth it, IF you aren't going to exploit them, not changing lenses, and only having a 50, that is probably NOT the one you would pick for very much, IF you had the choice?
SO.....
I would advocate the OM10..... pressed to make sound bite, just answer the question, dont question it, answer.
It LOOKS like a propper manual focus SLR, ticks all boxes on that front... and does it as it always has for not a lot of money, and provides a lot of scope for porogress.
As ever, advice has to be that better pjhotographers take better photo's not better cameras, A-N-D in the world of film cameras this is even more true. Its JUST a light tight box to hold the lens and film. The lens and the film will make far more difference.
So spend your money on film, go take photo's and find what works for you.
I suspect, that with a little dabbling, the merits of a non SLR will start to make a lot more sense, and something like an XA2 for 'descreet' candids and street, will become far more atractive, or something like a Lubitel TLR for the medium format quality, more atractive, and the costs of alternative non SLR's will likely be a far less significant factor in any furture decission...
BUT those I suspect are best left for later, and the here and now is JUST to fulfill imediete asprirations for a 35mm SLR...
For which the OM10, has to be a bench-mark, for cost and convenience, and with a bit of luck NOT lock you into a system to misdirect future choices, too much.
But almost ANY 35mm SLR will probably DO... just get one, get some film, and get using it.... it REALLY doesn't matter that much!
That is a Konica C35, range-finder model. I have the slightly less sophisticated 'view-finder' zone focus model. Mine belonged to my Grandad, when I was a child, and has all that 'classic' film camera styling of box with a lens on the front, advance lever wind-on; and aperture and focus around the lens.
It 'looks' like a propper camera.
NOW, I present it because its simply NOT an SLR. Not having a mirror box between the film and the lens, it can use a 'true' focal length lens, not a 'retro-focus' one, so the lens doesn't have to have correction elements in it or anything; plus not being interchangeable, the lens doesn't need a more intricate and convoluted interchangeable lens mount; so the lens can again, be 'better' and more rigid, and more reliable.
In 1973, these were also NOT a 'cheap' camera. There were 'budget' SLR's that were actually cheaper. & ISTR that my Grandad's cost aprox £35, which was a good weeks wages back then; equivilent to perhaps £700 in todays money.
YET, simply because they dont have an interchangeable lens, they are now dismissed in modern 'old camera' market. The view-finder models can be bought for between maybe £5 and £25, the range-finders, still for under £50, and just like in 1973, they are STILL a cracking camera.
Step away from SLR's and there are HUNDREDS of such 'bargains' to be found like this... its worth a LOT of thought, especially if you do not intend exploiting lens interchangeability.
The Konica, was one of the first affordable 'automatic' cameras, with 'coupled' exposure control to an inbuilt light meter. It was then easy to use, and didn't beg applying the f16-Sunny rule or a hand-held meter; AE system had full-auto exposure, controlling the shutter and aperture, or aperture-priority over-ride, the user selecting the aperture, down to a pretty fast f2.8 (I think) electronics balencing shutter against that. It has a conventional, I think 49mm filter thread on the lens, it I~S to all practical extents as 'versatile' as an SLR, with the advantages of cost and compact and better lens, for the sake of 'just' not having lens interchangeability.
For what you say you are looking for.. this one pretty much ticks all the boxes.... and for £25?!? You cant go wrong, really, you cant.
Has been mentioned, the imortal little Olympus XA2.
This is another Non-SLR 35mm camera, and still one of the smallest ever full frame 35mm film cameras ever made.
XA2 Number-One, is stitting on top of my record-player, next to the Daughters Cannon Digi-Compact. It's slightly disfunctional these days, and pretty much display only, having been bought when I was just 10years old in 1980, and gone around the world in my pocket a few times in my teens and 20's, and eventually been replaced with a couple of others, that are STILL my first choice carry-around camera, basically because it IS so small and pocketable.
It was in the 80's and 90's the favourite 'descreet' camera for candids and street photography, exploited by many pro's, because again, it was far from a 'cheap' consumer camera. Mine cost about £80 ISTR and was as expensive as Olympus's own entry level OM10 in the shop, that also not a budget starter camera, costing three times the price of something like a Practika SLR.
Its a lot more convenient to use than the Konika, and as said, it's enormousely pocketable and descreet. It lacks some optical excelence against the Konika due to the 'equated' 35mm lens, that is actually shorter than its own focal length to keep the camera compact, and its Automitic-Exposure only, there's no aperture-priority over-ride on this one; but exposure compensation can still be dialed in via the film-speed control.
I have literally been given two more of these things in more recent times, because of my effection for them, and the fact that as a Non-SLR, and as an at the time avante-guarde 'compact' they dont recieve the recognition as an 'enthusiast' camera or the prices.
Fantastic cameras, you can pick up litterally for next to nothing, £25 being a fair price, and even £50 for a minter, still cheaper than when new.
If you want a little more 'control' the plain Olympus XA (NOT the XA1, which is a cut-price consumer compact with selenium cell metering), offers range finder focus and some Aperture-Priority AE over ride. A LOT more expensive though, with 2nd hand prices typically around the £100 mark... and leading into other enthusiast non SLR 35mm's like the Minox 35, which is rather like the Konica, but has a pop-out true focal length 35mm lens, and again was an expensive enthusiast camera in its day.
This all leads away from 35mm SLR's..... which is my intension!
Two on the shelf above me are a Voiglander 120 roll film TLR, which I never use because of rusty rollers, and a rather wonderful Ziess Ikonta 120 6x9 'folder'..
This 'looks' like you'd expect an antique camera to, with its belows lens, which is simply wonderful, and again not compromised by mirror housing. At 105mm, for a 'standard angle' equivilent to 40mm or so on 35mm.
Its a fully-manual camera, with no integrated electronics or light-meter, so you have to use f16-sunny or a hand held meter, and set shutter and aperture on the lens, and the shear scale of that 6x9 negative!!! Image quality is fantastic, and the focus fade effects are wonderful and linear.
It's not a quick and easy camera to use, but if you are looking for that all manual fiddle-ability involvement, it offers it in full measure, and needn't be all that awkward to use.
As a carry-around camera, folded, it is actually more pocketable than any of my SLR's, I can just about slide it in its soft-case in a jacket pocket, and with a little nouse and savvy, judging settings by f16-Sunny and not making too many changes, it IS actually pretty quick and easy to use.... not very descreet though!
BUT, again NON-SLR, non interchangeable lens, not one of the renowned proffessional 'System' MF cameras, like a Rolie or Mamiya, these things are incredibly cheap on the open market, maybe £25-£50. (Mine was another bequest, like my Grandad's Konica, actually, but still).
Its a leap away from your ideas of what a 'classic' camera should look like, and only getting 6 frames a film on that one, it IS rather expensive to run... but it does make wonderful photo's and can be a joy to use. A-N-D needn't break the bank.
Which is ALL to say, think long and hard about this 35mm SLR Idea.... and how much of it is actually going to be useful to you.
Two or three more sat on the record player infront of me to consider, that are SLR's:-
First is an Olympus OM4. Top of the range SLR of the late 80's and early 90's, it was when I bought a house and had to itemise contents for insurance, a £2000 body only camera. And I REALY dont much like it any-more!
Wonderful camera, they were renowned for eating batteries. Y-e-s... mine is a US model with the OM4Ti's upgraded power saving electronics... it still eats batteries! And I stopped using it pretty much for that reason when they started taking mercury cells off the shelves cos of the envoro-mental issues! Probably valid actually... half a dozen OMK4's would probably killl all the fish in the north sea in a year! But still. Last outing on modern batteries, they didn't last a 46 frame film! That's still in it actually!
Yet, on 2nd hand market these things can command £100-200 or more price tags.
This does beg a lot of thought; and migration to widgetal has put a lot of such high end old film cameras on the 2nd hand market at what appear incredibly low prices compared to when new. But, get over that exitement, and I REALLY am sanguine whether many of them are worth anything close to the prices they command on the functional value.
So onto Second Offering, the Trusty Olympus OM10, which has also been mentioned.
YES, you do need the optional manual adapter to achieve Aperture-Priority over ride of the coupled metering system. BUT.
Rather missing the point of the camera to use it. In quarter of a century I have learned not to bother. In AE mode the camera's meter will select shutter speeds in 1/3 stop increments, and it will change the expoisure interval mid exposure if light changes. In manual, the adapter more crudely increments only in full stops, and locks exposure at those set settings. Get to know an OM10, and its AE system, you a) dont need the manual adapter, and b) can get better results without it. If you dont know the intricacies of the system, you are just making work for yourself!
It was in 1979, I think, a new bench-mark in easy to use entry-level SLR's, and still is. It's also compact, for a 35mm SLR, and there are some great lenses for it.
The 'Fast' 50 Zoilko that came as standard, though, is probably NOT its best feature. f1.8 it is fast; but the 50mm 'normal' angle of view is just 'normal'. It was expected that buyers would exploit the interchangeable lens mount, and swap it out for something more wide angle, like a 35mm or 28mm, or more telephoto, like 90 or 135mm, or even a zoom or two.
The affection for the 'fast 50' is a little perverse; they were promoted for accademic excersises, and the aperture race to make ever faster 50's was pushed a LOT by the fact that the small film format of 35mm denied the more gradual focus fade effects achieveable with longer lenses giving wider effective angle-of-view on 120 Medium format cameras; its the same vogue that suggests the fast primes for APS-C digital SLR's now, and conseqent razor thing DoF and 'Looks Photo-Shopped' back-ground perspective.... but still.
Point is is was NOT, even in the hey-day of manual focus 35mm SLR's a particularly wonderful focal length, and for street/candid, the wider angle and closer focus of a 35 or 28 would probably be better apreciated.
B-U-T is you have to have that SLR cudos, and try the fast 50 on one, then its a pretty good place to start, and OM10's have always been noteably 'cheap'.... ish.
As said, they were around £90 brand new in the late 70's early 80's, which was not so 'cheap', but far from budget. With age, and Olympus effectively abandoning the entry-level OM's as Auto-Focus hit the high street, they hit the second hand shops for stupid prices like £10, which was why, as a student, I bought them!
Now, as what so many expect a 35mm SLR to look like and do, they fetch a 'premium' on 2nd hand market, but you should still have plenty of choice for under £50, and they are a very useful camera for the money, and as they ever were a wonderful beginners 35mm SLR.
Last on the shelf, is probably my favourite camera. Its a 1973 Sigma Mk1 SLR, Richoch copy.
All screw fit M42 lenses, and in my case all primes, the actual camera fell out of an attick during a house clearance in the early 90's and given to me for the help 'cos no-one else could use it! So I built up an all priume 'period' outfit around it, pretty much for pocket money, scouring the trade-ins and bargain bins in the camera shop when I went to buy film.
All manual, with a non-coupled TTL light meter, its pretty easy and comvenient to use; the tactile 'clunk' of turning mechanical dials to set aperture and shutter speeds is very very engaging, like using an old fashioned type writer rather than a modern electronic key-board.
Lenses are good, they are retro-focus to get past that mirror box, but primes, they are other wise little compromised, held very rigidly on that screw mount, unlile rather wobly bayonet mount of my much battered OM10!
I like it because of that mechanical feel and involvement, and it has just enough versatility with the interchangeable lenses and all manual metering to be more than averagely 'useful' and versatile....
B-U-T... I so often get home to find that I have been walking around all day with the 29mm prime on the front, luggiung its mercedes like mass about, plus that of bag of alternative lenses, and would have been as well off with 'just' the XA2 or the Konica......
WHICH, hints back to top, and Do you REALLY need or want an SLR? Are the compromises for the SLR mechanism, really worth it, IF you aren't going to exploit them, not changing lenses, and only having a 50, that is probably NOT the one you would pick for very much, IF you had the choice?
SO.....
I would advocate the OM10..... pressed to make sound bite, just answer the question, dont question it, answer.
It LOOKS like a propper manual focus SLR, ticks all boxes on that front... and does it as it always has for not a lot of money, and provides a lot of scope for porogress.
As ever, advice has to be that better pjhotographers take better photo's not better cameras, A-N-D in the world of film cameras this is even more true. Its JUST a light tight box to hold the lens and film. The lens and the film will make far more difference.
So spend your money on film, go take photo's and find what works for you.
I suspect, that with a little dabbling, the merits of a non SLR will start to make a lot more sense, and something like an XA2 for 'descreet' candids and street, will become far more atractive, or something like a Lubitel TLR for the medium format quality, more atractive, and the costs of alternative non SLR's will likely be a far less significant factor in any furture decission...
BUT those I suspect are best left for later, and the here and now is JUST to fulfill imediete asprirations for a 35mm SLR...
For which the OM10, has to be a bench-mark, for cost and convenience, and with a bit of luck NOT lock you into a system to misdirect future choices, too much.
But almost ANY 35mm SLR will probably DO... just get one, get some film, and get using it.... it REALLY doesn't matter that much!
Mr Badger
Didymus
- Messages
- 7,457
- Edit My Images
- No
OM10? For a start, it's silver and black, so you'll most likely have to pay the 'retro-look added tax' price for that. These days, for a mint-ish one with manual adaptor and fungus and defect free 50mm Zuiko lens you'll pay around £80 to £90 to own one. Would I pay around £20 to £60 more for a Canon A1 with 50mm lens? Yes, all day long, because it's a much better camera! Particularly in terms of handling and ease of use if your coming from a modern Canon DSLR. Why? The A1 has the same P AV TV and M settings as the modern Canon DSLR; so the user of a modern day DSLR should be familiar with those settings, so should find the transition to film photography a bit less confusing because of that to start with.
As for budget priced point-and-shoot 35mm compact cameras for street photography, there's the Canon Sureshot Supreme, a mid-80s black plastic slightly banana-shaped classic, somewhat unloved these days but with an f/2.8 lens and a fairly good autofocus and auto exposure system; it wasn't voted European Camera of the Year in 1986 for nothing. https://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/film120.html Today's price? As it's not silver and black and doesn't have a quirky clam-shell case look to it, a good, fully working example can usually be found on eBay for less than £10.
Truth is, there's a myriad of 35mm film cameras out there that will do the job, but the more you look the more confusing the choice becomes. So perhaps it's best to keep within the OP's original brief, a manual focus 35mm SLR. Once he's got his teeth into that and the world of film photography I think he'll be in a better place to choose his next film camera, be that a compact, a rangefinder or another make of SLR.
As for budget priced point-and-shoot 35mm compact cameras for street photography, there's the Canon Sureshot Supreme, a mid-80s black plastic slightly banana-shaped classic, somewhat unloved these days but with an f/2.8 lens and a fairly good autofocus and auto exposure system; it wasn't voted European Camera of the Year in 1986 for nothing. https://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/film120.html Today's price? As it's not silver and black and doesn't have a quirky clam-shell case look to it, a good, fully working example can usually be found on eBay for less than £10.
Truth is, there's a myriad of 35mm film cameras out there that will do the job, but the more you look the more confusing the choice becomes. So perhaps it's best to keep within the OP's original brief, a manual focus 35mm SLR. Once he's got his teeth into that and the world of film photography I think he'll be in a better place to choose his next film camera, be that a compact, a rangefinder or another make of SLR.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 724
- Name
- Pete
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I saw these for a replacement
https://www.bristolcameras.co.uk/p-weincell-mrb625-1-35v-zinc-air-battery-px625-px13-.htm
Mr Badger
Didymus
- Messages
- 7,457
- Edit My Images
- No
They work but usually only last a few months once activated, so I think a professional conversion is cheaper in the long run.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 2,996
- Name
- John
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Those do not last long, mind. Once you remove the tab and let air into the cell they start to age and continue to age even if you do not use the camera. Life span is just a week or so.
- Messages
- 1,076
- Name
- Mike
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Depends where you look, I suppose. I wouldn't pay anything close to that for a ten! They are worth around £25 - £50, depending on condition and spec. A manual adapter may inflate the price tag, but I wouldn't pay extra for it, and you can still pick up a pretty good ten, with adapter for maybe £30...
Tip: They suffer mirror lock up if the batteries are flat.... look at non working offerings and take a chance that new batteries and re-cock will make them work! Chuck away or punt on anything that doesn't!
And at that sort of money, for that kind of camera? Take a chance, or five! - For the price of an £80 camera from a dealer, that might have a month's money back garantee, you can buy 3 or 4 Ten's private or off the bay, and afford to just chuck-em away or punt 'em back on if they aren't such great cop!
That's why I bought them back in the 90's! I could pick one up, even in the camera shop 2nd hand for as little as a decent roll of film! Stuff the condition, just USE... and in my case, AB-use... chucking around an SU bar or muddy field... treat it as a petrol-station disposable, but with a decent lens and metering system!
The XA2's clam-shell case isn't 'quirky'.. its avante-guarde! It was a bit quirky when it was launched, but it very rapidly became the 'norm' for a 35mm compact, either with a full clam-shell cover or as later Mjui, a sliding door cover, every-one copied that feature! One of the things that makes it a classic!
A-N-D yes... prices do seem to have risen in the last few years, and the camera bizarely has attained something of a cult following as a 'Lomo' Eh?!?! This is a high end compact not a wobbly plastic lens 'toy'!!! But as granny's draws have been cleared out, many have popped up along side such 'cheap' cameras in the 2nd hand shops, to appeal to the Neveau Lomo brigade, as well as re-emerge as a little bit of excellence in thier own right.. but even so, £25 gets a good one, which is still an enormous bargain for what was an £100 camera when new.
Control comparability? Hmmm... possibly one of the things to avoid when buying an old film camera; you WANT the thing to feel different, to make it worth using, not be just the same, or you might as well just shoot the electric-picture-maker and save the price of the film!
BUT, one of the beauties of old and particularly non-SLR film cameras is just how cheap they can be, a-n-d they ARE just a light tight box for the film; the camera as is has remarkably little influence over a good photo, and certainly a lot less than where so much is effected by electrikery in silicon sensors and programming code... you can afford, even on a modest budget to get a few, of different types if wanted, for different jobs, and just burn film! Datz wot dey for after all!
Maybe an XA2 for street and candids, a Pentak K mount Practika, 35mm SLR for the style, and a Lubitel or similar 120 TLR for some medium format experimentation; could have all three for under £100 and the film to put through them!
Fraser Euan White
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 3,062
- Name
- Fraser White
- Edit My Images
- Yes
For street/candid/walk-about GP photo making, a 35mm SLR wouldn't be my top choice. The design is inherently compromised simply to be an SLR with Through Taking Lens composition... and if you only intend ONE prime lens anyway? You are chucking away most of the advantages of it being an SLR to start with.
That is a Konica C35, range-finder model. I have the slightly less sophisticated 'view-finder' zone focus model. Mine belonged to my Grandad, when I was a child, and has all that 'classic' film camera styling of box with a lens on the front, advance lever wind-on; and aperture and focus around the lens.
It 'looks' like a propper camera.
NOW, I present it because its simply NOT an SLR. Not having a mirror box between the film and the lens, it can use a 'true' focal length lens, not a 'retro-focus' one, so the lens doesn't have to have correction elements in it or anything; plus not being interchangeable, the lens doesn't need a more intricate and convoluted interchangeable lens mount; so the lens can again, be 'better' and more rigid, and more reliable.
In 1973, these were also NOT a 'cheap' camera. There were 'budget' SLR's that were actually cheaper. & ISTR that my Grandad's cost aprox £35, which was a good weeks wages back then; equivilent to perhaps £700 in todays money.
YET, simply because they dont have an interchangeable lens, they are now dismissed in modern 'old camera' market. The view-finder models can be bought for between maybe £5 and £25, the range-finders, still for under £50, and just like in 1973, they are STILL a cracking camera.
Step away from SLR's and there are HUNDREDS of such 'bargains' to be found like this... its worth a LOT of thought, especially if you do not intend exploiting lens interchangeability.
The Konica, was one of the first affordable 'automatic' cameras, with 'coupled' exposure control to an inbuilt light meter. It was then easy to use, and didn't beg applying the f16-Sunny rule or a hand-held meter; AE system had full-auto exposure, controlling the shutter and aperture, or aperture-priority over-ride, the user selecting the aperture, down to a pretty fast f2.8 (I think) electronics balencing shutter against that. It has a conventional, I think 49mm filter thread on the lens, it I~S to all practical extents as 'versatile' as an SLR, with the advantages of cost and compact and better lens, for the sake of 'just' not having lens interchangeability.
For what you say you are looking for.. this one pretty much ticks all the boxes.... and for £25?!? You cant go wrong, really, you cant.
Has been mentioned, the imortal little Olympus XA2.
This is another Non-SLR 35mm camera, and still one of the smallest ever full frame 35mm film cameras ever made.
XA2 Number-One, is stitting on top of my record-player, next to the Daughters Cannon Digi-Compact. It's slightly disfunctional these days, and pretty much display only, having been bought when I was just 10years old in 1980, and gone around the world in my pocket a few times in my teens and 20's, and eventually been replaced with a couple of others, that are STILL my first choice carry-around camera, basically because it IS so small and pocketable.
It was in the 80's and 90's the favourite 'descreet' camera for candids and street photography, exploited by many pro's, because again, it was far from a 'cheap' consumer camera. Mine cost about £80 ISTR and was as expensive as Olympus's own entry level OM10 in the shop, that also not a budget starter camera, costing three times the price of something like a Practika SLR.
Its a lot more convenient to use than the Konika, and as said, it's enormousely pocketable and descreet. It lacks some optical excelence against the Konika due to the 'equated' 35mm lens, that is actually shorter than its own focal length to keep the camera compact, and its Automitic-Exposure only, there's no aperture-priority over-ride on this one; but exposure compensation can still be dialed in via the film-speed control.
I have literally been given two more of these things in more recent times, because of my effection for them, and the fact that as a Non-SLR, and as an at the time avante-guarde 'compact' they dont recieve the recognition as an 'enthusiast' camera or the prices.
Fantastic cameras, you can pick up litterally for next to nothing, £25 being a fair price, and even £50 for a minter, still cheaper than when new.
If you want a little more 'control' the plain Olympus XA (NOT the XA1, which is a cut-price consumer compact with selenium cell metering), offers range finder focus and some Aperture-Priority AE over ride. A LOT more expensive though, with 2nd hand prices typically around the £100 mark... and leading into other enthusiast non SLR 35mm's like the Minox 35, which is rather like the Konica, but has a pop-out true focal length 35mm lens, and again was an expensive enthusiast camera in its day.
This all leads away from 35mm SLR's..... which is my intension!
Two on the shelf above me are a Voiglander 120 roll film TLR, which I never use because of rusty rollers, and a rather wonderful Ziess Ikonta 120 6x9 'folder'..
This 'looks' like you'd expect an antique camera to, with its belows lens, which is simply wonderful, and again not compromised by mirror housing. At 105mm, for a 'standard angle' equivilent to 40mm or so on 35mm.
Its a fully-manual camera, with no integrated electronics or light-meter, so you have to use f16-sunny or a hand held meter, and set shutter and aperture on the lens, and the shear scale of that 6x9 negative!!! Image quality is fantastic, and the focus fade effects are wonderful and linear.
It's not a quick and easy camera to use, but if you are looking for that all manual fiddle-ability involvement, it offers it in full measure, and needn't be all that awkward to use.
As a carry-around camera, folded, it is actually more pocketable than any of my SLR's, I can just about slide it in its soft-case in a jacket pocket, and with a little nouse and savvy, judging settings by f16-Sunny and not making too many changes, it IS actually pretty quick and easy to use.... not very descreet though!
BUT, again NON-SLR, non interchangeable lens, not one of the renowned proffessional 'System' MF cameras, like a Rolie or Mamiya, these things are incredibly cheap on the open market, maybe £25-£50. (Mine was another bequest, like my Grandad's Konica, actually, but still).
Its a leap away from your ideas of what a 'classic' camera should look like, and only getting 6 frames a film on that one, it IS rather expensive to run... but it does make wonderful photo's and can be a joy to use. A-N-D needn't break the bank.
Which is ALL to say, think long and hard about this 35mm SLR Idea.... and how much of it is actually going to be useful to you.
Two or three more sat on the record player infront of me to consider, that are SLR's:-
First is an Olympus OM4. Top of the range SLR of the late 80's and early 90's, it was when I bought a house and had to itemise contents for insurance, a £2000 body only camera. And I REALY dont much like it any-more!
Wonderful camera, they were renowned for eating batteries. Y-e-s... mine is a US model with the OM4Ti's upgraded power saving electronics... it still eats batteries! And I stopped using it pretty much for that reason when they started taking mercury cells off the shelves cos of the envoro-mental issues! Probably valid actually... half a dozen OMK4's would probably killl all the fish in the north sea in a year! But still. Last outing on modern batteries, they didn't last a 46 frame film! That's still in it actually!
Yet, on 2nd hand market these things can command £100-200 or more price tags.
This does beg a lot of thought; and migration to widgetal has put a lot of such high end old film cameras on the 2nd hand market at what appear incredibly low prices compared to when new. But, get over that exitement, and I REALLY am sanguine whether many of them are worth anything close to the prices they command on the functional value.
So onto Second Offering, the Trusty Olympus OM10, which has also been mentioned.
YES, you do need the optional manual adapter to achieve Aperture-Priority over ride of the coupled metering system. BUT.
Rather missing the point of the camera to use it. In quarter of a century I have learned not to bother. In AE mode the camera's meter will select shutter speeds in 1/3 stop increments, and it will change the expoisure interval mid exposure if light changes. In manual, the adapter more crudely increments only in full stops, and locks exposure at those set settings. Get to know an OM10, and its AE system, you a) dont need the manual adapter, and b) can get better results without it. If you dont know the intricacies of the system, you are just making work for yourself!
It was in 1979, I think, a new bench-mark in easy to use entry-level SLR's, and still is. It's also compact, for a 35mm SLR, and there are some great lenses for it.
The 'Fast' 50 Zoilko that came as standard, though, is probably NOT its best feature. f1.8 it is fast; but the 50mm 'normal' angle of view is just 'normal'. It was expected that buyers would exploit the interchangeable lens mount, and swap it out for something more wide angle, like a 35mm or 28mm, or more telephoto, like 90 or 135mm, or even a zoom or two.
The affection for the 'fast 50' is a little perverse; they were promoted for accademic excersises, and the aperture race to make ever faster 50's was pushed a LOT by the fact that the small film format of 35mm denied the more gradual focus fade effects achieveable with longer lenses giving wider effective angle-of-view on 120 Medium format cameras; its the same vogue that suggests the fast primes for APS-C digital SLR's now, and conseqent razor thing DoF and 'Looks Photo-Shopped' back-ground perspective.... but still.
Point is is was NOT, even in the hey-day of manual focus 35mm SLR's a particularly wonderful focal length, and for street/candid, the wider angle and closer focus of a 35 or 28 would probably be better apreciated.
B-U-T is you have to have that SLR cudos, and try the fast 50 on one, then its a pretty good place to start, and OM10's have always been noteably 'cheap'.... ish.
As said, they were around £90 brand new in the late 70's early 80's, which was not so 'cheap', but far from budget. With age, and Olympus effectively abandoning the entry-level OM's as Auto-Focus hit the high street, they hit the second hand shops for stupid prices like £10, which was why, as a student, I bought them!
Now, as what so many expect a 35mm SLR to look like and do, they fetch a 'premium' on 2nd hand market, but you should still have plenty of choice for under £50, and they are a very useful camera for the money, and as they ever were a wonderful beginners 35mm SLR.
Last on the shelf, is probably my favourite camera. Its a 1973 Sigma Mk1 SLR, Richoch copy.
All screw fit M42 lenses, and in my case all primes, the actual camera fell out of an attick during a house clearance in the early 90's and given to me for the help 'cos no-one else could use it! So I built up an all priume 'period' outfit around it, pretty much for pocket money, scouring the trade-ins and bargain bins in the camera shop when I went to buy film.
All manual, with a non-coupled TTL light meter, its pretty easy and comvenient to use; the tactile 'clunk' of turning mechanical dials to set aperture and shutter speeds is very very engaging, like using an old fashioned type writer rather than a modern electronic key-board.
Lenses are good, they are retro-focus to get past that mirror box, but primes, they are other wise little compromised, held very rigidly on that screw mount, unlile rather wobly bayonet mount of my much battered OM10!
I like it because of that mechanical feel and involvement, and it has just enough versatility with the interchangeable lenses and all manual metering to be more than averagely 'useful' and versatile....
B-U-T... I so often get home to find that I have been walking around all day with the 29mm prime on the front, luggiung its mercedes like mass about, plus that of bag of alternative lenses, and would have been as well off with 'just' the XA2 or the Konica......
WHICH, hints back to top, and Do you REALLY need or want an SLR? Are the compromises for the SLR mechanism, really worth it, IF you aren't going to exploit them, not changing lenses, and only having a 50, that is probably NOT the one you would pick for very much, IF you had the choice?
SO.....
I would advocate the OM10..... pressed to make sound bite, just answer the question, dont question it, answer.
It LOOKS like a propper manual focus SLR, ticks all boxes on that front... and does it as it always has for not a lot of money, and provides a lot of scope for porogress.
As ever, advice has to be that better pjhotographers take better photo's not better cameras, A-N-D in the world of film cameras this is even more true. Its JUST a light tight box to hold the lens and film. The lens and the film will make far more difference.
So spend your money on film, go take photo's and find what works for you.
I suspect, that with a little dabbling, the merits of a non SLR will start to make a lot more sense, and something like an XA2 for 'descreet' candids and street, will become far more atractive, or something like a Lubitel TLR for the medium format quality, more atractive, and the costs of alternative non SLR's will likely be a far less significant factor in any furture decission...
BUT those I suspect are best left for later, and the here and now is JUST to fulfill imediete asprirations for a 35mm SLR...
For which the OM10, has to be a bench-mark, for cost and convenience, and with a bit of luck NOT lock you into a system to misdirect future choices, too much.
But almost ANY 35mm SLR will probably DO... just get one, get some film, and get using it.... it REALLY doesn't matter that much!
What a fantastic post!
I don't agree with all of it but the time/effort/thought put into writing this to help someone else should be applauded - fantastic Mike
Fraser Euan White
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 3,062
- Name
- Fraser White
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Surprised nobody has mentioned the Pentax K1000 - taught a lot of people how to use a camera over the years
@Teflon-Mike What a fantastic post! Thank you for taking the time to write such a long and in depth post, I will certainly take your advice onboard. My photography journey is just starting so there is plenty of time to start a small camera collection but to start I really must scratch the itch I have for a 35mm slr, the compacts and rangefinders can come at a later date and trust me, I will be purchasing a compact of some kind.
Thank you to you all for taking the time to post your thoughts and advice, it's been a real help.
Thank you to you all for taking the time to post your thoughts and advice, it's been a real help.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 1,559
- Name
- Craig
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Hi Shnarf. I do indeed have a Nikon FM for sale on here. It is a lovely camera, in fact I also have a Canon AE-1 program that I see has been mentioned too. I think I actually prefer the Nikon, I'm only keeping the Canon as I have a couple of very nice lenses for it but only the 50mm for the Nikon.
It is quite a simple camera to use with a simple meter which is very useful, some of these film cameras don't have these and it can be difficult to get your exposure correct unless you are quite experienced. The FM will work without a battery and that is what appealed to me so much about it, the battery powers only the meter. It was bought from West Yorkshire cameras that has been mentioned on this thread, a very reputable shop.
I'm usually a digital shooter but my foray into film has been very enjoyable, I'm only selling as it simply doesn't get used much at the moment. I am also a keen cyclist and I do tend to fluctuate between the two hobbies and that one is very much dominating at the moment so I'm not finding much time to use all these cameras.
Feel free to PM me if you have any specific questions about the camera though.
It is quite a simple camera to use with a simple meter which is very useful, some of these film cameras don't have these and it can be difficult to get your exposure correct unless you are quite experienced. The FM will work without a battery and that is what appealed to me so much about it, the battery powers only the meter. It was bought from West Yorkshire cameras that has been mentioned on this thread, a very reputable shop.
I'm usually a digital shooter but my foray into film has been very enjoyable, I'm only selling as it simply doesn't get used much at the moment. I am also a keen cyclist and I do tend to fluctuate between the two hobbies and that one is very much dominating at the moment so I'm not finding much time to use all these cameras.
Feel free to PM me if you have any specific questions about the camera though.
- Messages
- 135
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
I managed to get an OM10 with manual adapter and 50mm lens for £25 on ebay earlier in the year. It in good condition and all working but you do take the risk on ebay. Loads come up on ebay so its easy to make low bids and see how you go, they are not always listed under cameras as well.
Mr Badger
Didymus
- Messages
- 7,457
- Edit My Images
- No
Just you have a look in the completed items section on eBay and anything approaching mint, with 50mm Zuiko lens, manual adaptor and replaced light seals (as the original ones will almost certainly have turned to goo!) will be around the £80 to £90 mark these days; I know, as I sold a virtually mint one earlier this year. The £50 ish ones tend to have scuffs/dents/scratches, perished light seals and/or loose switches, etc. and may well lack a lens, so its probably false economy if you intend to keep the camera, or want one that works perfectly without spending money buying a lens and/or getting the camera serviced and mended (which makes buying a minter in the first place look cheap in comparison!). So I'd forget about buying a 'budget' one as there's often a reason for the price, unless of course you find someone that doesn't know the current price of things or happen to drop lucky at a boot sale, etc.
However, buying at boot sales and markets is OK for people who know what to look for when checking an old camera (and even they will buy a lemon occasionally!), but it's a potential minefield for the novice or beginner. So buying your first 35mm SLR from a reputable shop/dealer (check the internet for comments and feedback on the shop/dealer's name) with a 3 to 12 month guarantee is probably the safest bet for a newcomer to film cameras to start. After all, why risk adding the vagaries of a malfunctioning camera to the initial learning process?
Last edited:
ChrisR
I'm a well known grump...
- Messages
- 11,025
- Name
- Chris
- Edit My Images
- Yes
You need to tell us first what formats you use (135, 120, 4x5, 8x10... ok, not the latter, you'd already have a scanner...).
If you shoot both 135 and 120, then most folk would go for something like the Epson Perfection V500 or related models. If it's 135 (35mm) only, then you can get better results with a dedicated scanner like the Plustek 7xxx series (or 8xxx series, which AFAIK is the same hardware with updated software).
ChrisR
I'm a well known grump...
- Messages
- 11,025
- Name
- Chris
- Edit My Images
- Yes
If you're just in or getting back in to film cameras, try this thread: https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/first-film-camera-ever-or-for-many-years.481985/
Mr Badger
Didymus
- Messages
- 7,457
- Edit My Images
- No
You could always get your negatives scanned by the lab when you first start, have a look at the prices from Filmdev and AG Photolab to give you an idea of cost. I use an Epson flatbed film scanner (V600 Photo), which does a reasonable job of 35mm and will also do medium format 120. The Epson 550 is also a popular choice. You can get higher resolution from a Plustek scanner, but it doesn't do medium format. Other choices are available, from the little £40 camera in a lightbox type budget scanners (about as good as you'd expect for the money) to £12,000+ pro-lab type scanners. So the choice is yours, but not one you need to make immediately.
Last edited:
You could always get your negatives scanned by the lab when you first start, have a look at the prices from Filmdev and AG Photolab to give you an idea of cost. I use an Epson flatbed film scanner (V600 Photo), which does a reasonable job of 35mm and will also do medium format 120. The Epson 550 is also a popular choice. You can get higher resolution from a Plustek scanner, but it doesn't do medium format. Other choices are available, from the little £40 camera in a lightbox type budget scanners (about as good as you'd expect for the money) to £12,000+ pro-lab type scanners. So the choice is yours, but not one you need to make immediately.
That's great thank you, I didn't know I could get them scanned at a lab when getting the film processed. They go up to £12,000+!! I don't think I'll be going for one of them!
That was a good read, thank you.
- Messages
- 332
- Name
- Rob
- Edit My Images
- No
Mike's post including the photo of the Konica C35 reminded of another option you might consider as a great, very discreet "street camera", if you can find a good example - the Olympus Trip 35:
http://camerapedia.wikia.com/wiki/Olympus_Trip_35
http://camerapedia.wikia.com/wiki/Olympus_Trip_35
Fraser Euan White
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 3,062
- Name
- Fraser White
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I have an old epson perfection 3200 photo that works perfectly although does need a 'driver fudge' for it to work with windows 7 & 10. It would cost you a whole £10 collected (postage would increase the cost considerably!). I can write down how to get the scanner working correctly with Windows 7 & 10 for you. The quality of the scans from 35mm is really nice though
Here is a scan I made from it this year:
img033 by Fraser White, on Flickr
- Messages
- 780
- Name
- Ariel
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I know that Yashica is not usually a favorite brand, but a simple and good camera is the Yashica FX-3 Super 2000 and with a Yashica ML 50mm f/1.4 lens you cannot fail. The camera has a full mechanic all-metal focal plane shutter (so no dependency on batteries to work), it uses two very common and still available LR44 batteries for the light meter, it is small and light, the speeds go up to 1/2000 and 25-3200 ISO. It is reliable and cheap.
And with the Contax/Yashica mount you can use all the Contax's Carl Zeiss lenses or any M42 lenses (for M42 you will have to buy a 5 Euro ring adapter), I use a nice Super-Takumar 50mm f/1.8 with it.
There are a lot of reviews available on the net.
Here the manual: http://www.butkus.org/chinon/yashica/yashica_fx-3_7/yashica_fx-3_7.htm
SPECIFICATIONS
Type: 35 mm single-lens reflex camera with focal plane shutter.
Negative Size: 24 x 36 mm
Lens Mount: Contax/Yashica mount. Shutter Vertically running metal focal-plane shutter.
Shutter Speeds: B (bulb), 1 to 1/1000 sec. (12 steps).
Flash Synchronization: X contact hotshoe (synchronizes at 1/125 sec. or slower).
Self-Timer Mechanical with about 10-sec. delay. Shutter Release: Mechanical.
Exposure Metering: Through-the-lens, full-aperture center weighted light metering with SPD cell; manual exposure with LED display; metering range: EV 2--18 (with ASA 100 and 50 mm F1.4 lens); ASA 12--1600 film speed range; exposure meter switch activated by pressing shutter release button halfway in.
Exposure Meter Power Source: Two 1.5 V alkaline (LR44) or 1.55 V silver oxide (SR44) batteries.
Viewfinder: Eye-level, pentarism finder; 92% field of view and 0.91X magnification (with 50 mm lens at infinity).
Focusing Screen: Split-image/microprism.
Viewfinder Information: Display of correct exposure, over- and underexposure with 3 LEDs; flash signal indicating that the flash is fully charged.
Film Advance: Lever with 130° stroke and 20° stand-off.
Film Rewind: Film rewind crank. Exposure Counter Additive, auto reset. Dimensions: 135 (W) x 84.5 (H) x 50 (D) mm Weight: 445 9 (without batteries).
Look what a beauty
I can highly recommend that Yashica ML 35mm f/2.8 lens too.
@Craigus I've messaged you about the Nikon, just awaiting a reply. If you still have it I'd be very interested in purchasing it once ive seen some pictures via email. Thank you.
TheBigYin
Moderator
- Messages
- 16,655
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- No
Thank you very much for making me have to put my Moderators Hat on at 8:15 on a sunday morning
am I right in that you've not been here long enough to use the classifieds yet... If so, trying to buy a camera in a thread that one of the staff has already replied to and is following is NOT the brightest of moves...
presumably you emailed him back to say you couldn't sell to him outside of the classifieds on here ?? Because any other reply would not be a good one to make.
am I right in that you've not been here long enough to use the classifieds yet... If so, trying to buy a camera in a thread that one of the staff has already replied to and is following is NOT the brightest of moves...
presumably you emailed him back to say you couldn't sell to him outside of the classifieds on here ?? Because any other reply would not be a good one to make.
- Messages
- 7,620
- Name
- Jonathan
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Thank you very much for making me have to put my Moderators Hat on at 8:15 on a sunday morning
am I right in that you've not been here long enough to use the classifieds yet... If so, trying to buy a camera in a thread that one of the staff has already replied to and is following is NOT the brightest of moves...
presumably you emailed him back to say you couldn't sell to him outside of the classifieds on here ?? Because any other reply would not be a good one to make.
<John Malkovich> [gasp] Mummy slapped daddy at the dinner table! </John Malkovich>
Last edited: