Nikoo7
Hello,
I’m new here and I’ve got loads of questions... :)
First of all, I’d like to introduce myself briefly – that’s what you’re supposed to do, isn’t it? ;)
I’m 31 years old and come from BS in Lower Saxony. I’ve been taking digital photos for about two years. For the past few weeks, I’ve been the proud and very happy owner of a Canon EOS 5D. It’s my first full-frame camera.
The idea of trying out analogue photography has been on my mind for a while. Now that I’m reasonably familiar with the settings, I think the time is right and I’m really keen to give it a go.
For the past few days, I’ve been on the lookout for old lenses for my digital camera. Because of the prices, of course. I own a 50mm and a 28mm lens and would like to buy a telephoto and a macro lens to go with them. In doing so, I’ve also noticed that you can often get lenses cheaper as part of a set with a camera than buying them individually.
Now I’ve decided I’d like to buy a good analogue camera and have a few questions about it:
Are there also differences in format, such as full-frame, in the analogue world?
Which camera would you recommend? I’d like to stick with Canon.
As I’ve been using only manual settings for the past two years and would like to continue doing so, I don’t mind whether it has automatic functions.
However, I’d like to have a professional camera with which I can take beautiful photos – and if these differences do exist in the analogue world, then it should definitely be a full-frame camera.
As FD lenses don’t fit digital cameras, they’re probably cheaper than EF lenses. So, if there’s no difference in quality, I’d prefer to go for them when buying.
I’d be really grateful if anyone has the inclination – and patience ;) – to help me out further.
Best wishes,
Nikoo7
piu58
The Canon EOS range is extremely wide, so you’re bound to find something here (second-hand). All the cameras use 23x26 mm negatives, i.e. ‘full-frame’. There are very, very few cameras that produce half-frame or square images on 35mm film,
From the EOS series, I have/had the 500 and the 1000; these are extremely affordable models. And also an EOS 33, which is one of the later models, but still part of the high-end ‘consumer’ range. Of course, there are/were professional cameras too, just as there are today,
The advantage of EOS over FD: the lenses also fit digital cameras. The reverse is not necessarily true, as they must be designed for full-frame. Even if they fit mechanically, they do not cover the entire image circle.
Tandemfahren
Hi Nikoo,
Welcome to the "die-hard" club!
First things first: if you want to stick with Canon EOS (if only for the "compatibility" of the lenses), you won’t have any trouble choosing a body.
As for the format, your only option is 35mm (24x36), just like your "full-frame".
The only film format available is 135 (35mm) as colour negative, black and white and slide.
On eBay there’s plenty of choice, ranging from the ‘yoghurt pot’ models like the EOS 300 or 500, through the much better ones (mechanically speaking) such as the EOS 50, right up to the top-of-the-range models like the EOS 1, 1v etc., which also include the EOS 30. See how much you want to spend and ideally get yourself a ‘yoghurt pot’ as a backup (even if you just ‘need’ a different type of film, but the long roll still has 20 frames left).
The EOS models all have plenty of automatic functions, but can also be operated entirely manually. You’ll get the hang of it straight away.
I wouldn’t recommend the FD, not because it’s no good, but because you’d need everything in duplicate – is that worth it? That’s for you to decide.
And yes, there are plenty of different formats in the analogue world (laughs :-)
If we leave out the small film formats, in 35mm half-frame there’s 18x24, square 24x24, ‘Leica format’ 24x36 and a few unusual wide ones like 24x65.
On roll film, you then have 4.5x6cm, 6x6, 6x7, 6x9 and a few unusual wide formats,
And then sheet films ranging from 6.5x9cm to the awe-inspiring 11"x14".
The largest mass-produced film format I’m aware of was the Polaroid 50x60cm (!), see here: ? ? ? ? ? ??
http://forum.FOTOIMPEX.de/index.php?showtopic=2518
The only formats that are really widespread are actually 24x36, 4.5x6, 6x6, 6x7 and the medium sheet film formats. Although the exotic ones are, of course, the real treats.
What’s actually far more important is the question of the type of film and whether you want to develop and/or enlarge it yourself.
THAT is still a long road with many junctions.
my2cts
Frank
TR
What “Tandemfahren” means by its odd figures is the various formats in which films are available. The “full-frame” format you mention is (simply) the “35mm format” and the standard that the digital world has only recently begun to approach. Next comes the larger “medium format”, followed by the “large format”.
With film, it is much easier (and much cheaper in terms of equipment) to achieve high “resolution” or detail. With any 35mm camera that can be operated manually, fitted with a reasonably good lens and using 100 ASA film (with relatively fine grain), you already achieve a level of image quality that can only be matched by a 5D Mark 2 etc. Much more is achievable with medium-format cameras, which can now be purchased quite cheaply on the second-hand market.
Provided you don’t rely on fast automatic functions, all you need is a light-tight ‘box’ that holds the film and lens and allows light to fall onto the film at a moment that can be defined as precisely as possible. The quality of the lens determines the quality of the photograph. With an old Praktica + Tessar lens for €15 on eBay, using a good 100 ISO colour film, you can achieve a similar image quality to that of a full-frame digital camera costing 150 times as much. With black-and-white film, an even higher image quality is achievable if you develop it yourself. However, you need to know how to scan the negatives properly. As you can see, “analogue” means more work, but you can achieve excellent results if you master the technique.
gurkensaft
Hi Nikoo,
My wife has a digital EOS, and I use an analogue 30 and 3.
We share the EF lenses. That’s very handy.
If I were you, I’d base my decision on the lens that comes with the camera – that’s what you’re ‘missing’ anyway.
They all take good pictures, even the entry-level cameras. When it comes to image quality (with modern analogue cameras), the lens and film are more important than the body.
The three- and four-digit models (1000, 500 etc.) and also, for example, the 50e are already available at reasonable prices.
The 3 is already a semi-professional camera, so it’s robust but also larger and heavier.
The 30/33 (V) is significantly more compact and lighter, and still quite ‘new’.
As it’s incredibly quiet, I’ve grown very fond of it.
The 1 and 1V are great cameras, but I might not recommend them for testing out at the start.
If you find the ‘Eye Control’ feature difficult to use, you can switch it off on all models and use the camera in the usual way ;)
Regards, Torsten
AchimBauer
Hello Nikoo7,
Most of it has already been said, but I’d recommend an analogue EOS – you can pick up the former flagship model for under 200 euros, and the smaller ones for around or under 50. You can find them on a well-known online auction site or at a camera shop with a good selection of second-hand gear. At the very least, the lens will fit a digital full-frame camera – as they say these days – and that’s all you’ll need for now. Then get a few rolls of transparency film! Use those to take a few test shots to see if the camera works. With transparency film, it’s easiest to tell if the exposure is off. If everything’s in order, you can decide what you want to do: colour or black-and-white slides, colour negative-positive or a large-format lab, or black-and-white in a specialist lab or at home yourself. Depending on what you want to do, you’ll need either a projector or a darkroom (sounds like a lot of hassle and expense, but it can also be done cheaply) or a reliable lab.
Once you’ve developed a taste for analogue photography, you can still decide whether you want to stick with 35mm, move on to medium format, panoramas or large format.
And there are also good second-hand bookshops online where you can buy excellent books on analogue photography.
One book I really value is Hedgecoe’s Photography Handbook, which provides a great overview of everything.
€
Regards, Achim
Olivinyl
Hi Nikoo,
I have a Canon EOS 500N with accessories (flash, battery pack, manual, extra lenses, etc.) to sell.
Please send me a private message.
Best regards, Oliver
wosis123
Hi,
There’s also a wide range of cameras and lenses in the FD series.
The last camera produced was the T90, which was groundbreaking at the time and anticipated many features of the EOS range, apart from the autofocus, of course.
As a professional model, there was the F1 before that, or rather almost at the same time; it was very modular with an interchangeable viewfinder, adjustment dials, etc., but it’s quite a bulky piece of kit, especially with the motor attached. You can find a pretty good overview here:
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/canon/fdresources/
If you want to get into this, you should already know what you want to do with it.
You’ll also find plenty of information there about FD lenses. Most of them are quite cheap to buy second-hand; as a general-purpose lens, for example, I have the 35-105/1:3.5, which costs around €100 second-hand in good condition. You can also start with a standard 50mm lens; the f/1.8 or the better f/1.4 versions are available cheaply (€50–80). Even the best lenses (the ones with the red ring), e.g. the 50mm f/1.2L or 85mm f/1.2L, cost only around €500.
You can find a very good overview of the ‘quality’ of the individual lenses here:
http://www.photozone.de/active/survey/querylenstxt.jsp?filter=%22brand=%27Canon%20FD%27%22
If you have any further questions, feel free to ask.
Best regards,
Hendrik
kindgottes92
As a relative newcomer to analogue photography, I can only agree with the previous speakers. I’ve had a digital EOS for quite some time now, and as I needed an analogue camera for a course at university back then, it made sense to buy an EOS. Thanks to a bargain on eBay, I ended up with the 500N. I got it for €30 without a lens but with batteries included. Which brings me straight to the only real downside of the thing: the camera needs d... expensive lithium batteries (€15 in the shop; I’ve now found some online for €6) – you can get 60 rolls out of them (without flash), but if you’re used to the convenience of rechargeable batteries, it’s a pain and one reason why I’m still thinking about getting a fully mechanical one. If you want to develop your own film, a camera where you can rewind by hand is also worth considering, as it allows you to leave the film tab sticking out of the cassette, which makes working in the dark much easier.
If you need affordable lenses for it, an EOS is also a good choice, because you can adapt old M42 lenses to it (an adapter costs around €5) and you can sometimes pick them up for next to nothing, even though they’re still in top condition optically and are also suitable for digital use.
?
Regards
Chris
piu58
> then you have the option of leaving the film tab sticking out of the cassette
?
On the EOS 33, you can adjust this.
Blendenlicht
Hello,
Well then, I suppose I’ll introduce myself too, if that’s how it’s done… :spudnikwaving:
I’m 47 years old and come from the southernmost part of the Ruhr region. I’ve been taking digital photos for ages and have now taken up analogue photography thanks to a friend. Over the last two months I’ve bought almost everything from eBay and, the day before yesterday, developed my first two rolls of film (Agfa APX-100) using chemicals from FOTOIMPEX. To everyone’s delight. It worked – as far as I, a complete amateur, can tell from looking at the negatives. I’ll be making the positives over the next few days. I completely forgot to buy a positive developer. :spudnikwhat:
Well, reading here now about which cameras and lenses are recommended, I feel a bit odd.
I’ve got myself a Canon A-1 (display model, unused and without a scratch) with those FD lenses that aren’t exactly highly recommended here. Plus all sorts of other lenses. My wife got a Canon EOS 3000N. Which I also enjoy using.
Am I now a bit odd with this setup?
Best regards :spudnikhattip:
André
Photux
I think the main argument against the FD system is its lack of compatibility. As far as I know, the distance between the film and the lens is particularly short, which means that EF lenses cannot be mounted at all, or only with restrictions. Mounting FD lenses on a different bayonet mount is another issue, but it’s no problem with system cameras (if you’re looking to go digital). The slightly larger telephoto lenses in particular are great fun to use with the 2x crop factor on my Olympus E-PL1. ^_^
For me, it all started when I ‘inherited’ a half-broken AE-1 with one or two lenses. Then one thing led to another, so that switching systems was no longer worth it. I currently have an AT-1, A-1 and T70 in use. The A-1 in particular is a really lovely piece of kit, though the T70 has its merits too (especially when it comes to price – I got mine second-hand on eBay for under €10 – but the automatic functions and the fact that it uses standard AA batteries are also not to be sniffed at).
As for lenses, I have a rather motley collection. My favourite lenses are a Canon 50mm f/1.4 (not the f/1.8 version – there’s a big difference!) and a Vivitar 135mm f/2.8; both have a great ‘bokeh’. I have to say that I’ve developed a penchant for fast prime lenses; contrary to my earlier fears, you can often do without a zoom lens quite easily. A fast 85mm would be brilliant, but it hasn’t been within my budget so far.
