Maybe a sill question but just wondering??

[wesingit]

Does anyone still shoot with a 35mm camera?? I am just starting out with photography and use a Canon Powershot s3 is Someone told me they have a canon with extra zoom lens and accs. at a very low price only thing is its a 35 mm.

So i just wondered if anyone still uses one? Would anyone recommend it or stay with the digital?

[Nicole]

There are still people who shoot with film on here, and I'm sure one or two will chime in.

It depends what you want to use the SLR for whether or not I'd recommend going with it. I guess there are 3 things I'd ask myself first.

1. Are you happy to pay for film and developing? And wait to get your prints back?
2. Are you trying to learn about things like f/stop and shutter speed or are you familiar with them (since if you're trying to learn, you'll need to keep careful notes about your settings for every shot and match it up with the prints at the end)?
3. What is it that you want from the 35mm that your current camera isn't doing? If it's just to say, get more reach, that's perfectly fine too.

When I was using a film SLR I didn't really focus on any of the technical stuff and used auto mode most of the time. So I got perfectly fine shots, I just wasn't concerned about the technical part of it. Now, I couldn't imagine trying to learn about the technical part of it on film (even though obviously many, many, many, many people have done so). I just found it much easier to learn since I didn't have to be concerned about cost / time of developing.

Not sure if any of that answers your question, but hopefully gets you thinking about whether or not it is something you want.

[Nekrose]

Originally Posted by wesingit

Does anyone still shoot with a 35mm camera?? I am just starting out with photography and use a Canon Powershot s3 is Someone told me they have a canon with extra zoom lens and accs. at a very low price only thing is its a 35 mm.

So i just wondered if anyone still uses one? Would anyone recommend it or stay with the digital?

I think that having a 35mm to start out with helps a lot in developing your skills in photography. It forces you to learn why you have to do certain things.

I was lucky, because I had free access to a darkroom. And I learned how to develop my own film and make prints. It had helped me so much, because if something is off, I easily know how to correct it.

If it is very inexpensive, I say go for it! And if you want to upgrade to a dslr, you can use the lens (if it is compatible, but Canon's usually have pretty compatible lenses, or you can buy an adapter).

I started with film, and that is what really created my love for photography. But nicole is right, you do have to buy film and pay to have it printed. But it not that expensive nowadays.

[jdepould]

If it were an SLR, that'd be one thing, but for a point & shoot ... eh.

[Nicole]

Originally Posted by Nekrose

But nicole is right, you do have to buy film and pay to have it printed. But it not that expensive nowadays.

You're lucky! I definitely wouldn't consider it cheap here... can get very cost prohibitive.

[candleman]

Originally Posted by Nicole

You're lucky! I definitely wouldn't consider it cheap here... can get very cost prohibitive.

i recently paid $47 for one roll of 24 exposures to be printed at 4x6" (cheap b/w film)

....yeah.. i dont get the film out in a hurry

[IainM]

B&W seems to cost way more than colour, mainly because of the rarity of its use.

But I paid about $14(nzd) for one roll of film.

If its cheap - do it! you can always just buy a second hand (or new) digital body and then you can change between film and digital with ease.

[milosh]

I would definitely buy it, since using film and old cameras gives me some special feeling, which I still can't get when using my Nikon. And many people nowadays shoot digital and try to imitate film in post-processing. Plus it would be a great learning tool. And yeah, you can get your rolls developed and then scanned to digital format, you don't have to print them, which reduces costs considerably. I pay smth. like 4 $ for a roll of Fuji Superia 200 and some 4 $ to get it developed and scanned. That's really cheap. I have a Pentax Program A and an old Yashica FX-3 from smth. like '79.

[Nekrose]

Originally Posted by Nicole

You're lucky! I definitely wouldn't consider it cheap here... can get very cost prohibitive.

No way! I live in Hawaii, so nothing is super cheap. I see rolls go for about $5 and you can have photo's printed for $6.

I personally don't think it's too expensive. But I can see how it would stack up. The cost of living is higher here.

[Nicole]

Like candleman said, those are the kind of prices I'm used to seeing here. At $20+ per roll to get it developed plus the film? No thanks. That's what I paid the last time I got a roll developed. Your $11 all up for film and development, could be worse... that's a totally tolerable amount. But I'd struggle to even get film developed here for that ($16NZD). You can bet I wouldn't be doing a 365 on film

All whinging aside...

I think probably the important thing to come out of the discussion of various prices is that the OP should consider is the price of film / developing in their area (since it varies) and whether or not that's in the budget