[jqjones]

Ok forum, as the title says, I am looking into film photography to help expand my knowledge base.

What would be a good camera to start with?

My current lineup looks something like this

Bodies

K-x
K-110

Lens

M-50 1.7
M-28 2.8
FA 35-135 3.5-4.5
Two DAL 18-55 Kit lenses
Tamron 70-300 4-5.6

I also have a Canon AE-1 with a 50mm 1.8 that is completely minty fresh. I received it from my father in law who used once or twice after he bought it back in the day.

I do have a local photography store who will process film.

I'm looking at getting some rolls of film and taking the AE-1 out for a run, but I would like a pentax film body to take advantage of some of my other lenses.

Thanks for the help.

[tuco]

What do you have in mind. Manual, semi-automatic or automatic camera?

[jqjones]

Not quite sure at this point.

Automatic in the sense of autofocus would be nice. This would take advantage of any FA lenses I may buy in the future. On the other other hand, manual would be a good learning tool.

Maybe both?

[kytra]

I have an Pentax MZ-L AF camera. Control-wise it is very similar with the DSLR. Has a lot of advanced features. Highly recommended!

Look here for more info: PentaxForums.com - Pentax Camera Reviews - Pentax DSLRs, Film SLRs, and Medium Format

[Simian Summit]

I have an Pentax MZ-L AF camera. Control-wise it is very similar with the DSLR. Has a lot of advanced features. Highly recommended!

Look here for more info: PentaxForums.com - Pentax Camera Reviews - Pentax DSLRs, Film SLRs, and Medium Format

Looking at the review, I think that the MZ-L looks like quite the a decent camera, much better than my brother's MZ-10 (which I can't even stand to pick up it feel's like such garbage). Anyway commentary aside I think that before you decide on a camera, you should decide what you want to do with film. I think that film's main strengths are in night photography and B&W, and as I don't shoot a lot of either with film (as I don't want to take the number of photos I need to a good exposure at night and I haven't got off of the sweet sweet fix of getting cheap drug store film yet) so I put down my fully automatic program plus and shoot with my ever increasing collection of K1000s.

I like using the fully manual camera, because what I really like about shooting film is that you are constrained by the roll of film. Someone once saw me shooting with it and said that he felt that using a digital was better because you can shoot to your heart's desire and keep only the pictures that you want. In his words, if there is no cost to something than one should take advantage of it (as with shooting more shots with the digital). My thought is that if there's no cost to something than it's worthless so I try to take more time in thinking about what I shoot and hopefully come back with better photos (this is the theory anyway, we're still working on the practice - this being said I also have a K20D which I sometimes use like a machine gun). Back to my K1000 though, I think that shooting fully manual and consciously deciding on aperture, and shutter speed settings and whether to over/under expose the shot compared the my single meter reading also (hopefully in time) will help me to improve my skills.

However, the main reason that I like film is that I like to take a roll film after it's shot or that I just find lying around the house to the drug store or lab (depending on my mood) and then receive it back and seeing what I get. I like the surprise. This is the same whether I use my K1000, program plus, my brother's crappy MZ-10 or any of my many $5 point and shoots that I picked up at the Sally Ann (most economically quality pictures in my opinion).

So I think that you have have ask yourself, why do you want to have the extra expense and hassle of shooting film. I think that once you can answer that question your camera choice should be narrowed (if not obvious). I think that you have a wide variety of lenses and so whether you want to shoot manual, automatic, mechanical or electronic, I think that you're set, just decide what you want to do.

Good luck

Elliot

[ChrisPlatt]

I'd try using the AE-1 first. If you like film, many Pentax DSLR users find the PZ-1P very familiar.
If you'd prefer something less highly automated there are many choices among Pentax bodies.

Chris

[MariusCTM]

I have an Pentax MZ-L AF camera. Control-wise it is very similar with the DSLR. Has a lot of advanced features. Highly recommended!

Vrei s-o vinzi?

[stevebrot]

I'd try using the AE-1 first. If you like film, many Pentax DSLR users find the PZ-1P very familiar.
If you'd prefer something less highly automated there are many choices among Pentax bodies.

Chris

...and many choices among non-Pentax K-mount bodies too...


Steve

[GeneV]

The ZX-L is a nice choice as a transition camera as well. It is often cheap in good condition at around $50-60. I'd say that for the cost of buying and processing a few rolls of film, it is worth being able to try out film on his Pentax lenses.

As Steve said, non-Pentax K-mount bodies from the mf era are a good buy. Classic but very basic Pentax cameras like the K1000 have gotten a cult following that has pushed the price up to where I would not necessarily recommend them as a body to try out film. The Pentax autofocus bodies of the plastic era like the ZX series and others are often less than half the price of classic Pentax mf bodies, and they feature exposure modes that will be familiar to DSLR users, built in flashes and winders. Some, like the PZ series, are truly dirt cheap to the point of almost being throw-aways, and can be a good place to start. Just be sure the body does not have a "crippled" K mount (as in the ZX30-60), so that the "M" lenses will work properly.

[Blue]

If I didn't have a film camera but had the experience I have, I'd decide if I wanted an AF body and or a mf body.

The AF I would go with a ZX5n unless I could get my hands on a MZ-3 or a PZ1/1p. As far as mf goes, the SuperProgram and K2 would be my choice.

However, there are several good choices such as the ZX-L, *ist, KX, MX, MV, Me Super and even the ME F. If money isn't an issue the MZ-S and LX are good choices.

[ChrisPlatt]

The MZ/ZX series cameras are often cheap, but many have the dreaded motor with the plastic gear.
When it breaks (which they invariably do) the camera becomes completely disabled.

The replacement motor has a metal gear and will provide long service, but it's an expensive repair.

Chris

[GeneV]

The MZ/ZX series cameras are often cheap, but many have the dreaded motor with the plastic gear.
When it breaks (which they invariably do) the camera becomes completely disabled.

The replacement motor has a metal gear and will provide long service, but it's an expensive repair.

Chris

If he spends $25 for it, then who cares? Then he will know a little more about whether this film thing is for him and can buy one of the metal models.

[Agnostic]

For autofocus the MZ5-n (identical to the ZX5-n) is a good affordable choice. It's a very well designed camera, great ergonomics, very simple yet flexible controls and very good auto exposure. It has all the basics a good camera needs: shutter priority, aperture priority, full manual exposure, DOF preview, exposure lock, the ability to push or pull film and exposure compensation.

[jqjones]

Anyway commentary aside I think that before you decide on a camera, you should decide what you want to do with film. I think that film's main strengths are in night photography and B&W, and as I don't shoot a lot of either with film

Really, one thing that keeps drawing me towards film is the B&W shots that I keep on seeing.

Hopefully when I get a hold of a few extra dollars I'll need to order some B&W film.