[Kaufeetime]

Most common color print film ISO are 100, 200, 400, and 800. Each film speed/ISO is twice as sensitive to light as the last, allowing a faster shutter speed. I would use 100 at family picnics on a bright sunny day. 200 ISO would make an excellent all around film. 400 could be used on dark cloudy days and other low light conditions.

ISO = International Organization for Standardization

[builttospill]

400 is probably a little too much for the MX's maximum shutter speed of 1/1000s outdoors. I'd stick with 200 because it's easy to find and works well for all purpose shooting.

Also, If you're new to SLRs the best thing you can do is learn about how shutter speed, film speed and aperture work together before shopping for lenses. For beginner's I often recommend they spend a few minutes browsing this website, Aperture, shutter and ISO value | SLR Camera Simulator, and it does wonders for someone trying to figure out the relationship between those items.

[LesDMess]

BTW, most all negative film (C41) can absorb an astonishing amount of overexposure particularly when compared to digis. You didn't say which films specifically but for instance the Kodak Portra 400 has this quality as shown below compared to some digis I've used.



Link to larger version -> http://www.fototime.com/3EDD4D13204247B/orig.jpg

And to Derek's point about the MX's 1/1000 shutter speed limitation, you can see from my examples that with normal processing and scanning, a 2 stop difference between 100 speed and 400 speed film won't even need special development compensation.

I've tested other films like Fuji 100, Kodak BW400, Kodak Ektar 100, Kodak TMAX 100 and 400 as well as Kodak Portra 160 and all are good overexposing by 3-4. Of course you should make sure your meter and technique are accurate.


This has some quite practical use as you can shoot particularly wide latitude scenes with all the confidence of post processing both shadows and highlights as shown below.






You might come upon a scene that your meter recommends 1/60 but you want 1/4 to smooth the water but you don't have ND filters with you to make a "proper" exposure. Of course knowing that Kodak Ektar 100 can handle 4 stops overexposure with ease you shoot it with confidence - with no development compensation, like the example below.




Shooting at box speed and your cameras suggested exposure is just that - a recommendation. However it is a good idea to learn the characteristics of your film, camera and your aesthetics so that you have a known good reference point. After that adjust to your own taste and have fun at it! Good Luck!

[CCasper]

Again, thanks for the help guys

[CCasper]

Oh and I just realised I have a Minolta-fit Sigma 24mm f2.8 (how I got it is a long story and in retrospect it looks different to the one in the picture as it doesn't have any aperture ring). Would it be worth getting an adaptor for it to be able to fit it to my MX?

[Kaufeetime]

It sounds like your lens was designed for a digital camera. The MX needs the aperture ring to make correct exposures.

about Minolta adapter

[CCasper]

Ah, all right. Well, it's for a film SLR I have, but it'll all automatic so I don't use it. Was worth a shot.

[Simian Summit]

Lens wise, generally people like having a three lens system

I never knew this was a thing. For me it was just convenient. Although I do like my M28 f2.8, A50 f1.7, and M135 f3.5 combo...They usually do the job for me, plus they all share the same filter size....Although this is also not quite true, for a little bit more reach sometimes I put my Vivitar 70-210 in my bag, but it does get a little crowded with it.

What speed should I buy?

I think that this is a personal preference thing, but I like to shoot 100...Kodak Ektar 100 for colour or Ilford FP4 (124 iso) for B&W. However, this being said, this where your really get to play and find out what you like best. There are all sorts of films out there that have different looks and different effects and shooting ranges. If you want something that's more bullet proof (although both of the films above are pretty forgiving) in a medium speed you may want to check out Portra 160. It has been shown to have HUGE latitude (although I like the colours better in Ektar).

Elliot

[Alliecat]

I shoot 99% outdoors & find 200 to be a good all-around film. You might get a wee bit more grain with 400, though many are pretty good. If you are shooting in a lot of low light, or things moving quickly, you might want to try it, but generally 200 will give you a good range from bright sun to lower light & longer exposures. Since you are just getting started, I'd say shoot a few rolls of 200 & see how it goes. If you consistently find that you can't get non-flash shots because it's too dark & you can't open up any further or use any slower shutter speed satisfactorily, then you could try 400 & see if that works better for you. It's still only going to give you one stop...
But again, since you're just starting with film, maybe it would be a good idea to stick with the one speed till you get the hang of things, rather than adding film speed as another variable right away.
Good luck & have fun

[stevebrot]

I shoot 99% outdoors & find 200 to be a good all-around film.

What he said...remember too that color film is daylight balanced. Things go all yellow when shooting in dim incandescent light.


Steve