Entering the Analog Arena

[Immaculens]

Hi folks, I popped into my local shop chatting with the manager and said I think I want to try shooting film. 10 minutes later we were in the basement and she opened a drawer that had various 35mm cameras and lenses. She basically gave me my pick of the litter. There were various P&Ss, a Nikon SLR but I chose a Minolta Maxxus 9000 fron 1985 with a grip, and 2 lenses - one being a 70-210 f4 (with mold) and a 28-80 variable zoom. I'll go back for a f4 zoom but also peek at the Nikon I ignored. Been reading the 9000 manual and reading about cheap yet good 35mm film.

A local female photographer shoots film and post in a FB group and it intrigued me so here I am. I very often, for fun, try to replicate retro filmy looks with my 5Dc and 7D2 and thought why not give film a try. Has a P&S growing up.

One YouTuber vid suggested two different 35mm films for a retro look but then said that P&S cameras from the 80s + that suggested film hits the sweet spot.
I'm hoping to score a mid-level or high end Canon SLR from the late 90s or 2000s - what can you suggest I look for? Thanks!
Filmless in Ontario,
Will

 

[Terry McDaniel]

I’d start with Tri-X 400 film. It was a classic the day it was introduced. Ilford HP5 is also a good choice.

 

[gjl711]

Tri-X was so grainy. I always preferred Pan-X. Way slower but much less grain. Not sure if anyone still makes it though. I believe Ilford had something similar, Pan-F maybe? Pan- and some letter.

 

[Immaculens]

Actually I asked what mid-level or higher Canon 35mm camera would folks suggest from the mid 90s to 2000s...

 

[gjl711]

Actually I asked what mid-level or higher Canon 35mm camera would folks suggest from the mid 90s to 2000s...

Can't go wrong with any of the AE-1s. There were several but if you can find a EOS-1, that would be awesome.

 

[Immaculens]

Can't go wrong with any of the AE-1s. There were several but if you can find a EOS-1, that would be awesome.

So perhaps the AE-1 series is akin to the 5D series?

 

[gjl711]

So perhaps the AE-1 series is akin to the 5D series?

I may have mis-wrote. I thought that the AE-1 was a EOS mount, but it may have been a FD mount. You might be limited to the EOS type cameras. I took a quick peek at the Canon museum for the EOS mount cameras, the AE-1 wasn't in the list. Here are the EOS film cameras Canon made.

View by series - Camera Hall - Canon Camera Museum

Search Canon's cameras by product series and release period.

global.canon

 

[Joeseph]

I may have mis-wrote. I thought that the AE-1 was a EOS mount, but it may have been a FD mount. You might be limited to the EOS type cameras. I took a quick peek at the Canon museum for the EOS mount cameras, the AE-1 wasn't in the list. Here are the EOS film cameras Canon made.

View by series - Camera Hall - Canon Camera Museum

Search Canon's cameras by product series and release period.

global.canon

yes, the AE-1 is FD mount... (I had one, it was great!) ultimately I needed an auto focus camera due to my eyesight.

 

[Immaculens]

So I should be on the lookout for either an eos Elan 7 or eos 1

 

[gjl711]

So I should be on the lookout for either an eos Elan 7 or eos 1

Or the EOS Rebels (not to be confused by the digital Rebels.)

 

[mjp3210]

So I should be on the lookout for either an eos Elan 7 or eos 1

I have a Canon EOS Rebel Ti which I think I bought in 2004. It was a very affordable film camera and worked well enough for me. I bought a Canon EF 28-105mm f 3.5- 4.5 USM zoom lens to put on the camera and today, I use that same lens on my Canon digital SLR (Canon EOS Rebel T6i).

 

[Mr Chodes]

EOS-1 are cheap. Superseded by EOS-1N and EOS-1V.
EOS-3 has the 45 point AF that 1V has and the Digital 1D series. It also has Eye-Control AF and E-TTL flash metering

 

[Immaculens]

EOS-1 are cheap. Superseded by EOS-1N and EOS-1V.
EOS-3 has the 45 point AF that 1V has and the Digital 1D series. It also has Eye-Control AF and E-TTL flash metering

Thank-you ~ maybe the eos-3 is what I'm after. I'm accustomed to an 1/8000th shutter. Need to verify what batteries it needs.

 

[HannahsDad]

I used to shoot a Canon Elan IIe in my younger years. Now, I shoot R5s, but decided I wanted to see what film looked like on our next trip to Wyoming. So, I purchased an Elan IIe on eBay for $59. It uses and EF lens mount, so I don't have to go getting new lenses. Always loved that camera. After much searching, I finally found a place in the DFW area that not only does film development, but also does b&w and color prints using an old-style darkroom and chemicals (no scanning). I am extremely curious to see how some of the film shots compare to my raw images. Downside of course is that I can't take it into Photoshop and manipulate it, but that was the intent anyway.

Scott

 

[Immaculens]

The Elan 7 seems ideal for me except the max 4000 shutter thing. I enjoy shooting a thinner depth of field in film and notice a 400 speed film gives me the grain I want in the background. But 400 iso and 4000 shutter don't seem to be compatible with my preference of shooting at f/1.8 -f/2.5

 

[HannahsDad]

The Elan 7 seems ideal for me except the max 4000 shutter thing. I enjoy shooting a thinner depth of field in film and notice a 400 speed film gives me the grain I want in the background. But 400 iso and 4000 shutter don't seem to be compatible with my preference of shooting at f/1.8 -f/2.5

I can understand that. I mostly got it for shooting landscapes. For action (wildlife), I'll stick with my R5s and long lenses (and the 22 fps), but I really wanted an inexpensive comparison between a digital landscape image and film. So, I plan to shoot some early morning sunrise and sunset shots. I think for that, the 100 ISO film I selected will be ideal. Very low grain and should enlarge well. But, it has been so long since I shot film, I may go through an entire roll just getting setup!

 

[Bergmen]

Actually I asked what mid-level or higher Canon 35mm camera would folks suggest from the mid 90s to 2000s...

Another excellent choice of Canon film cameras from that era is the Canon A-1. I had one for years and it was a great camera. Both shutter and aperture priority modes, very versatile.

Dan

 

[ExPOSED]

I’d start with Tri-X 400 film. It was a classic the day it was introduced. Ilford HP5 is also a good choice.

I second Ilford HP5. Recently have been shooting it in my Canon AE-1 and love it.

 

[Lester Wareham]

Another excellent choice of Canon film cameras from that era is the Canon A-1. I had one for years and it was a great camera. Both shutter and aperture priority modes, very versatile.

Dan

I had one, probably still in a wardrobe.
Also had a match needle meeting Ftb which was the even earlier FL mount.
Happy days.

On film, for B&W I preferred Ilfird FP4 (125 ASA / ISO), HP5 was a bit grainy on 35mm but I liked on medium format. Colour I used to use K64 but I am sure that is no longer available.

 

[ShipleyNW]

Back in the 80s and 90s I shot with F-series Nikons (F2, F3, F4). Those were the flagship Nikons and worth every penny. They were rugged, dependable and every accessory Nikon made -- finders, meters, focus screens, motor drives, backs, etc -- they made one for those cameras so you could outfit them for whatever job you needed them to do.

But they were expensive and heavy and complicated. I'm not sure I'd be able to pick one up today and just start using it.

While I always carried a flagship Nikon, I also carried a Nikon FM2 as a second body. Not as fancy, not as customizable as an F-series, but damned reliable and easy to use. If I were going to shoot with a film camera today, that would be the one.

I never, ever, shot with a zoom lens back then. The technology just wasn't there at the time.

If you can match up your film to the light and the subject, use the slowest film you can get away with. But if you're not sure, use Tri-X or HP-5. You can shoot anything with those.