Starter Film camera?

any suggestions on a good camera to learn how to work the film on? (stationary pictures, not them new fangled moving pictures)
Very affordable (like $50 or less) that will "grow with me" and not be too crappy to use as I get better.
I found a canon eos ix with a 28-80mm lens for 60 bucks buy-it-now on fleabay.
I don't know much about working with film, I do pretty decently with digital but I really want to get into film. I guess I just like things that are more difficult to do?
and Ive always wanted to learn how to develop my own pictures.

so, to rein in a rambling post: learn me affordable, GOOD film cameras that I'll be using for many years to come.
Thank you braintrust

Hard to go wrong with the Cannon. My daughter just finished a photography class using one. Not a bad camera for the money.

I learned on a Pentax K1000. It's going to depend on whether you want a manual body or an automatic.

I'm also betting you can pick up developing equipment for pretty cheap with all the DSLR prices coming down.

Nikon or Canon. I'm a Canon man because I like their glass, but it really is Ford vs Chevy.

I have an AE1-p which I really like, because it can be used in varying degrees of automation, including fully manual. The only thing it lacks is autofocus.

does the eos ix not have a full manual setting mode?
I want something that I can control everything on, if that makes sense.
I've always been a big canon photo camera fan, but I'm willing to try out pentax, nikon, etc. no real brand loyalty here

Too bad I'm not back where grew up- my dad has all of the hardwere you need to develop B/W photos. Well, the film part, at least. I suppose you can develop anything with that- but apparently B/W is easier.

Oh, and GO FOR IT. There are some killer photographic art that's just amazing. And done without computers. Have a blast.

According to my Daughter the Cannon does have a full manual mode.

Duke, are you willing to let go of the AE-1? I have a 28mm prime I really want to try, and it's the best body that uses the old FD mount. Conversely, would you be interested in said lens? I still have the original packaging with the thing.

Under $50, I'd have to say that older Canon isn't bad, nor is Nikon. I learned on a Pentax SuperME. I recently sold it, and I'm having a bit of seller's remorse, even though it's been years since I've used it. A good camera is always nice to have, even if you have to send film off.

I've had both the AE-1 and an EOS Rebel X. The AE-1 has served me very well since 1980, then the Rebel replaced it. Both are rock solid and very easy to use.

Rebel was lighter, had auto focus, and auto rewind. It was also more advanced in the ways that made me a better photographer, but not in the ways that made me feel like an idiot. At first I felt like it was "flimsy" since it was newer and more plastic, but it proved to be an incredible camera. I bought it in 1992 and (despite being 95% digital now) I still use it and I'm still VERY pleased with it. I would say that the Rebel X was one of the last true film cameras. It had enough features to make things interesting without having features that did everything for you.

Wife has always been a camera nut. Her favorite was always a Pentax K 1000. Full manual. Find them in pawn shops. She has gone through 3 of them.

if you want the authentic feel of classic film find a full manual nikon, canon, or pentax with a prime 50mm (pretty much standard)... just make sure it's new enough to have a built in light meter...

if you want to be lazy I know some of the older pentax models starting in the 70's or so would auto set the shutter speed... so you could be real lazy and just set your F stop and focus.... i'm sure canon and nikon had similar stuff...

but for that era and the price you can't go wrong with any of the 3...

crap i've got an older minolta with AF and a 50mm just kicking around... think I put 1 roll though it at some point haha... full auto if you want but with some work you can go manual F/stop and shutter speed

My favourite is a Minolta SRT-200

Manual everything, built-in light meter, HUGE range of lenses all reasonably priced and it's all metal unlike the AE1 so when you drop it, it will be fine.

I own two bodys and about six lenses. My wife wanted a film camera so I bought her one, worst case scenario, I ended up with an extra body.

They're dirt simple, tough, have a hot shoe and bayonet lenses. Should set you back less than $50 for a body and a basic lens.

Looks like this:

More info here: http://www.rokkorfiles.com/SRT%20Series.htm

Shawn

cwh wrote: Wife has always been a camera nut. Her favorite was always a Pentax K 1000. Full manual. Find them in pawn shops. She has gone through 3 of them.

I have a Pentax KM, which is basically identical except for one added feature I never used. I've got multiple lenses, filters and other stuff. I've been trying to find it a new home for awhile but nobody seems to want film cameras anymore. If any of you are interested, mxbreed2 at comcast dot net will get you a reply.

I would urge you to get something outside the "modern" style of film SLR. You will learn more, and quicker, if you get something that is ALL manual, not just something with a manual setting. The EOS and similar modern SLRs are much more difficult to use in a manual mode - they are made for shutter or aperture-priority shooting, if not full-auto shooting. The older systems, like Nikon's FM, Canon AE-1, Olympus OM, Pentax K, are all-mechanical, and use batteries only for the light meter, if anything. Get one with a 50mm lens and go shooting.

Everyone has their own favorite film SLR body and system. This is mine:

I'd take ddavidv up on his offer, that's a great camera and Pentax K-mount lenses are super cheap and plentiful.

I actually learned on a Zenit EM. Now THAT is an old and quirky camera. Takes great photos, and you can get them for about $20 in working shape.

May I also suggest the Zenit Photosniper?

I always used the Minolta X-700, which has the ability to go full manual. The X-370-N was probably the last manual-capable film camera in production. Both use the Minolta MD-series lenses. Both should be quite plentiful and cheap.

The K-1000 is the quintessential "manual" SLR. Can't go wrong with it.

Nothing wrong with Canon either.

It's been 20 years since I took classes in photography. The darkroom work is very cool. If you really want to get blown away, find a large-format camera that shoots 4 x 5 sheet film. The image quality is stunning.

I started w/ a Nikon N4004s, not very high on the food chain but shot some good stills and road racing/ circle track racing in AF or manual. Lenses were reasonable at the time. I'd recommend the Nikon Speedlight if possible, aftermarket can't compare. Granted, it's prolly not a $50 deal but it was good at what it did.

I did my photo degree with an AE-1. I have also worked with some Nikon FMs(2,10), and a Pentax K1000, IIRC. While I shot in manual half the time, I just far preferred the Cannon, I felt it had a much easier to read light meter.

Derrick, I don't really want to let it go, but let me look into what glass I have and I may be interested. I think I already have a 28mm, though.

And to whoever said the AE-1 is not all metal, mine sure is.

In reply to Duke:

WIkipedia says plastic:

In keeping with its cost-cutting philosophy, Canon designed the AE-1 to use a significant amount of structural plastic for a lighter and cheaper camera at the expense of being less impact resistant. Canon went to great effort to disguise the use of plastic - the injection-molded acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene (ABS) top and bottom plates were copper-electroplated and then satin chrome finished (or black enameled) to give the look and feel of metal. Extensive use of electronics also allowed simpler modular internal construction instead of mechanical linkages. Five major and 25 minor internal modules reduced the individual parts count by over 300. Modular construction, in turn, allowed automated production lines in order to reduce cost. Unfortunately, cost concerns also resulted in the use of plastic in some of the moving/operating mechanisms.

Trans_Maro wrote: In reply to Duke: WIkipedia says plastic: In keeping with its cost-cutting philosophy, Canon designed the AE-1 to use a significant amount of structural plastic for a lighter and cheaper camera at the expense of being less impact resistant. Canon went to great effort to disguise the use of plastic - the injection-molded acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene (ABS) top and bottom plates were copper-electroplated and then satin chrome finished (or black enameled) to give the look and feel of metal. Extensive use of electronics also allowed simpler modular internal construction instead of mechanical linkages. Five major and 25 minor internal modules reduced the individual parts count by over 300. Modular construction, in turn, allowed automated production lines in order to reduce cost. Unfortunately, cost concerns also resulted in the use of plastic in some of the moving/operating mechanisms.

Well, I guess I stand corrected. Never had any operational or durability issues with it, though.

We used the K1000 in high school--killer camera that doesn't need a battery. (The battery just powers the light meter.) Last time I looked, a good, metal K1000 was closer to $100, though.

I also grew up with Canon. The A1 is an amazing camera, but I haven't checked prices in a long time.

My personal favorite film camera is my Nikon FM, it gets more use than my FM2, FE or F3HP. The camera works flawlessly from scorching desert heat to freezing sub zero temps (I used it at -15 F once and it worked perfectly). It is completely mechanical and the battery only powers the light meter. I have dented the case (bottom plate) dropping it off a small cliff with me in tow. If I am shooting film it is my go to camera.

By the way this model is also used by many professional photographers that shoot in extreme conditions. To this day you will see photos in National Geographic taken with an FM or FM2. Nice thing is the lenses will mount to modern Nikons and some bodies can even meter with them.

if you go classic just make sure it all works right... the shutter curtan can gum up with time... also check for fungus in the lens (set the f stop wide open and look though bright light to see any spider web looking stuff on any of the glass)

got my dad looking for his old Nikkormat (budget nikon)... it's what I learned to shoot SLR on... only electronics was the light meter...

If you want to go in a slightly different direction, rangefinders offer an interesting contrast to SLRs. There were a fair number of good Japanese models in the 1960s-70s that can be had relatively cheaply. Smaller frame than most SLRs, quieter, and some had really nice lenses. If you want to get really retro, find a Soviet Leica copy. Some of them are quite good, and the post-war glass is fantastic; I've had great results with my late model FED-2.