Film SLRs

[NSXType-R]

Hey, just curious, anyone still use film in their cameras?

I'm asking because I have used up the last two rolls of film that I have in my dad's FM2, and I don't know what film to buy. The results were kind of bad. The only thing I really messed with was the apeture, so it shouldn't have came out all that bad. I was using some old Fuji film stuff that was expired, so that might be the reason.

And eventually, I might get a FM10, because I do not have a film SLR that autofocuses.

And what's the difference between slide film and just regular film?

Thanks.

[scottie300z]

I have a minotla 5 that I use. I'll eventuallly use some pics in the comps. But I also normally use expired film as well and the results come back fine. But that depends on how old and in what condition the film was stored. (the colder the better) I use it cause it's cheap. You can find a group on flickr that is only expired film if you're interested in seeing other people's results. Tomorrow I'll be able to let you know what film I use since I'm not where my camera is now.


Slide film doesn't require as good of an eye to develop the colors correctly. So the results are less dependant on developing and makes the film more expensive by a buck or two, if I remember correctly.

[coolieman1220]

as you know, i have a Nikon N70. great film camera the only thing is it needs batteries that are a pain to find and really expensive especially for the amount i use it.

forget film, go full frame! D700

[RacingManiac]

I have a Minolta 7 and I use it occasionally. I've shot maybe 5 rolls of slides in the last 2 years....so not that often...Slides are hard to use because you can't develop them like pictures normally. I think there are places you can do it, but normally you just get little slide that you can use in a projector. Or you can have them digitally scanned. But at that point there adds a layer of additional issue as you can f-up the WB and resolution if your scanner is not good.

Good slides as used by many are the Fuji Velvia series, I think they go from ISO 50 and up....not cheap though at ISO 50...

[my porsche]

I use my dad's Canon AE1 from the 70-80s, takes great quality photos (quality shot when I scanned them), here are some I took with it. I like Kodak Black & White film, take the color shots with my DSLR.

[NSXType-R]

I have a minotla 5 that I use. I'll eventuallly use some pics in the comps. But I also normally use expired film as well and the results come back fine. But that depends on how old and in what condition the film was stored. (the colder the better) I use it cause it's cheap. You can find a group on flickr that is only expired film if you're interested in seeing other people's results. Tomorrow I'll be able to let you know what film I use since I'm not where my camera is now.


Slide film doesn't require as good of an eye to develop the colors correctly. So the results are less dependant on developing and makes the film more expensive by a buck or two, if I remember correctly.

So slide film doesn't need to be developed if you cut it up and scan them all?

as you know, i have a Nikon N70. great film camera the only thing is it needs batteries that are a pain to find and really expensive especially for the amount i use it.

forget film, go full frame! D700

I wish I had the money for that.

No, but the thing is, I might take a photography class just to fulfill a requirement, and that might mean I'll need to buy a film SLR. I would use my dad's FM2, but that's just freaking ancient, and I hate the manual focus. Sure it makes you think about the shot more, but I can't do anything quick with that. Plus, my newer lens doesn't work on it.

[NSXType-R]

I have a Minolta 7 and I use it occasionally. I've shot maybe 5 rolls of slides in the last 2 years....so not that often...Slides are hard to use because you can't develop them like pictures normally. I think there are places you can do it, but normally you just get little slide that you can use in a projector. Or you can have them digitally scanned. But at that point there adds a layer of additional issue as you can f-up the WB and resolution if your scanner is not good.

Good slides as used by many are the Fuji Velvia series, I think they go from ISO 50 and up....not cheap though at ISO 50...

So if I got this correctly, you do not need to develop slide film if you have a scanner?

I use my dad's Canon AE1 from the 70-80s, takes great quality photos (quality shot when I scanned them), here are some I took with it. I like Kodak Black & White film, take the color shots with my DSLR.

So you use your film SLR to shoot B and W. Interesting. Nice photos.

[coolieman1220]

alvin, you can borrow the N70. no one here uses it, might as well put it to good use!

[RacingManiac]

So if I got this correctly, you do not need to develop slide film if you have a scanner?



So you use your film SLR to shoot B and W. Interesting. Nice photos.

I am pretty sure you still need to "develop" slides, just you can't get "prints" of them like you do with film, unless you go through some pretty complicated process....you still need to "seal" the exposure so that the film can't be exposed again(I have never developed my own stuff, so I don't know the intricacy and terminology). But slides comes out as color "positive" as in the same color as how it was taken, as opposed to normal film with negative....

[#1 Mustang Fan]

Lol, We have a couple of Pentax Film Cameras. A ME-S one of the more modern decent of their range, MZ-5 which though is a bit older still supports auto-focus and is mine. Then we have one of dads originals a MZ Super which is extremely old/ancient but only recently stopped working on a trip up North. My Dad has a thing with Pentax

So for my Photography class next year I will steal (I hope) the good one. And because I have never really developed film (have helped my brother do it) it will be an interesting experience...

[#1 Mustang Fan]

I am pretty sure you still need to "develop" slides, just you can't get "prints" of them like you do with film, unless you go through some pretty complicated process....you still need to "seal" the exposure so that the film can't be exposed again(I have never developed my own stuff, so I don't know the intricacy and terminology). But slides comes out as color "positive" as in the same color as how it was taken, as opposed to normal film with negative....

I'm not so sure. I remember doing a couple of prints through our old scanner that had an attachment for scanning negatives. But the last time I did it was a long time ago. Ask John Thawley or someone of the likes

[henk4]

I'm not so sure. I remember doing a couple of prints through our old scanner that had an attachment for scanning negatives. But the last time I did it was a long time ago. Ask John Thawley or someone of the likes

I have a scanner that does slides, colour film and B&W film.
Slides always provided the best quality pictures, and it took the digital industry quite some effort and time to match it. Before UCP went digital we always used slides.

[drakkie]

Fujica AX-5 and AX-3 here from my father with a collection of 25 x-mount lenses. Pity the lenses are unasble on modern camera's and the old slr's are very hard to run. We need these special batteries that are impossible to find

[NSXType-R]

alvin, you can borrow the N70. no one here uses it, might as well put it to good use!

Cool, I'll keep that in mind. I haven't decided on classes yet, so I'll still have to see what I am offered.

I am pretty sure you still need to "develop" slides, just you can't get "prints" of them like you do with film, unless you go through some pretty complicated process....you still need to "seal" the exposure so that the film can't be exposed again(I have never developed my own stuff, so I don't know the intricacy and terminology). But slides comes out as color "positive" as in the same color as how it was taken, as opposed to normal film with negative....

I understand. I checked on B and H, slide film gets expensive.

I have a scanner that does slides, colour film and B&W film.
Slides always provided the best quality pictures, and it took the digital industry quite some effort and time to match it. Before UCP went digital we always used slides.

Wow. How many rolls of that stuff did you go through in a typical shoot? Must have been a pain to reload film every 36 or so exposures.

Fujica AX-5 and AX-3 here from my father with a collection of 25 x-mount lenses. Pity the lenses are unasble on modern camera's and the old slr's are very hard to run. We need these special batteries that are impossible to find

Yeah, those shrunken AA batteries are expensive. Not that hard to find though, but I can imagine if I were running the more modern lenses with autofocus and VR on an old SLR it would probably eat through those batteries.

[John Thawley]

They are not "slides"... they are "transparencies."

It's not all that big of a deal. There are LOTS of people still shooting film. Yes... it's a hassle as far as purchasing the film (not that much at the local drugstore anymore) getting GOOD processing... and of course, then getting prints.

What has added greatly to the hassle is the way we use photographs today. Because most distribution... be it commercial or just personal use, is digital. So, ultimately a film negative or transparencies needs to be digitized anyway. Regardless of the end use (outside of fine art prints) at some point in the process, the image will need scanning.

But, if you're interested in shooting film, there are several companies still making wonderful and affordable film cameras. Bessa, Voightlander, Leica, Zeiss... and so on. You should also keep in mind, some of the finest lenses in the world are built for these cameras. Most Leica lenses are $1000 and up. None of them are autofocus. It's nothing to spend $3500 or more on a 50mm f/2.0 Leica lens.

This is a much larger segment of the high-end hobby market than people realize.

Lastly, if you are not familiar with WHAT an aperture setting changes and WHAT the variable combination of shutter speed and aperture play on the composition and style of an image.. well... don't go there, girlfriend. LOL

JT