Camera for A Level photography

It is also just an A level subject. The chances of becoming a professional photographer (who uses film) are about as slim as the chances of me becoming a biologist after my A level in Biology.

Since when has the education system been relevant. It is just teaching stuff and then testing against it. I can count on one hand how many practical uses I have had of the things I studied at A level.
 
Richard King said:
part of being at school is about learning, and learning to value things, to appreciate that with things like photography it is what you do, not the camera that makes the most difference will set the student up for life.

By buying the best because of peer pressure, you are setting the child up to understand that the opinions of others are more important than the decisions one makes one self. The next step on this slippery slope is that they will want a car, and it will need to be a new one etc. etc.

Get them a basic camera, and let them toughen up a bit. When they start producing great photography, they can earn a bit of money and upgrade.
Click to expand...

Spot on
 
Having done A level photography the 30D will be just fine and far better than some will turn up with. Mine was not about the technology you held in your hand but the knowledge you knew, demonstrated and learned from. As mentioned above a good lens will be far better than a new body at this stage. I would also refrain from buying any new lenses for him until a month or so into the course just to see what they advise.

I am now doing a degree in LBM and people turned up with bridge to full frame cameras on the first day. One chap only had a compact.
 
ernesto said:
It is also just an A level subject. The chances of becoming a professional photographer (who uses film) are about as slim as the chances of me becoming a biologist after my A level in Biology.
Click to expand...


Good to optimism is alive and well :)

Maybe not straight after, no, but in 5 years time? Or are you saying no one who completes an A-level works as a photographer regardless of when?? I hope not the latter because I have access to statistics that prove you very, very wrong.
 
Pookeyhead said:
Good to optimism is alive and well :)

Maybe not straight after, no, but in 5 years time? Or are you saying no one who completes an A-level works as a photographer regardless of when?? I hope not the latter because I have access to statistics that prove you very, very wrong.
Click to expand...

Good to see a realistic approach is alive and well more like. Schools are putting out dreamers who are setup to fail as they are not given a dose of reality. Those dreamers are then convinced into taking a degree at a cost to themselves of £30K (and they are even told not to worry about that as they may never have to pay it back because they will never get a well paid enough job - yes teachers are actually saying this!)

If you have the motivation to get into and succeed at a photographic based job then great but that will be more about perseverance and attitude than what A levels you took, especially 5 years later.
 
ernesto said:
Good to see a realistic approach is alive and well more like. Schools are putting out dreamers who are setup to fail as they are not given a dose of reality. Those dreamers are then convinced into taking a degree at a cost to themselves of £30K (and they are even told not to worry about that as they may never have to pay it back because they will never get a well paid enough job - yes teachers are actually saying this!)

If you have the motivation to get into and succeed at a photographic based job then great but that will be more about perseverance and attitude than what A levels you took, especially 5 years later.
Click to expand...

Looking at the data from 2003 to 2011, on average 27% of our graduates are working in the photographic industry. We have an active alumni - a great many doing very well in a range of roles from full-time assistants to high end advertising and fashion. Quite a few are in related industries too, such as gallery curators, publishers and photographic agents.

These are facts, not opinion. I'd say that's quite far removed from setting up to fail. Your comments suggest that graduates do NOT have perseverance and a good attitude. I've no idea where you studied, but it sounds crap.

You seem bitter. Did it not go well for you?
 
Last edited:
That reads that 73% are now spending £30k and end up doing a job that has nothing to do with photography. That is where the realistic approach is required. Yes you can do a photography based degree after your A levels but there is a 73% chance that what you end up doing will be unrelated so ask yourself whether that is £30k well spent. This is the part the teachers don't mention, hence giving a lot of students false dreams. The student should be well armed with the likely results and make a more informed decision on their £30k investment in themselves.

As for students not having perserverance and a good attitude, you have said that yourself in the thread about learning more from film. You may want to check that...
 
Hi,

I think 30D is good enough.

But having a budget to get lens and a film body is a good idea.

EOS 5, 50, 30 are very affordable film bodies.
For extra old school, manual focus SLR like the old Canon AE-1 or Olympus OM10. But the light seal may need replacing.

Then lenses. A couple of cheap zoom, a nifty fifty, maybe some tubes for macro.

Perfect starter kit!
 
ernesto said:
That reads that 73% are now spending £30k and end up doing a job that has nothing to do with photography.
Click to expand...

. Most people with a degree actually work in something other than the main field they studied in, and is not unique to creative arts. Does that mean education is a waste of time? I'll tell you what, let's go back to the good old days where education was something that most people never had access too. I mean, us working class folk could then just send our kids up chimneys instead. That would solve the problem nicely wouldn't it.

Some people's opinions are dangerous.
 
ernesto said:
schools keeping up with current trends? whatever next.
Click to expand...



The lads need to learn the principle of photography first and the nature of light...film is excellent for this. My son ( who I might add) takes excellent shots has reverted to film on an old Russian camera and loves it.....its alll the retro look-its cool these days..flares are back lol:lol:
 
Pookeyhead said:
. Most people with a degree actually work in something other than the main field they studied in, and is not unique to creative arts. Does that mean education is a waste of time? I'll tell you what, let's go back to the good old days where education was something that most people never had access too. I mean, us working class folk could then just send our kids up chimneys instead. That would solve the problem nicely wouldn't it.

Some people's opinions are dangerous.
Click to expand...

Education is never usually a waste of time, although can be. But it also shouldn't be sold as a solution to all - especially those who could spend £30K on something more worthwhile that would help a future career much more than a pipe dream degree which will make absolutely no difference to what they do in life.

Most people in teaching don't have anything else to go on and are only able to look at things from the perspective of someone in the education system who knows nothing else. Not the best people to be giving advice.

And how is my opinion dangerous exactly? Is it because it differs from yours?
 
When I did A-level photography I used my Dad's Olympus OM2 which was awesome, then I got a Canon EOS 300 for my 18th birthday which was about half way through the course. Yep it was all film when I did it.

I've not read all the replies to the thread but I would say if people want to buy him a new camera there is no harm in that. Sometimes a nice new piece of equipment makes the user happy to use it which might mean they take more interest in the course. :shrug:


One piece of advice I would give a potential photography A-level student is do more than the bare minimum of work. If you just do what they ask it can get a bit boring and you might not really learn an awful lot. I had three fantastic teachers who saw me and my friend were really interested and after we had finished all the required work they used to take us aside and teach us a few extra techniques. This was both good from a learning point of view but it just felt good that they saw something in our enthusiasm and it spurred me on to pursue photography ever since.
 
ernesto said:
And how is my opinion dangerous exactly? Is it because it differs from yours?
Click to expand...

It's dangerous because all higher education is expensive, so advocating that it's useless unless it absolutely guarantees you a job at the end of it is a dangerous opinion if you ask me. If everyone had had view, we'd quickly become a poorly educated nation compared to others. The ramifications of that are pretty damning for us as a country.

I keep hearing £30k banded around a great deal... where's this figure coming from? Who charges £10 a year? Many HE colleges and unis care charging 6 or 7K a year. Still a lot, but 18 to 20K is more realistic.


Anyway... this thread is about an A level course!! It will probably be costing nothing! Stop being so negative.
 
Agree, A levels are free so irrelevant here. And yes, A levels are great!

By the way, I didn't say higher education is useless unless it absolutely guarantees a job. What I am getting at is that just because higher education is available to all (which it has to be) it doesn't mean you have to do it or it is the best direction for everyone. The costs need to be considered even more now but it is not just about cost, it is about time and energy that could be misspent.
No negativity here, but also not blind positivity that I see from the teaching industry who have a vested interest in it all.

Oh, and the average cost expected for 2013 is £8,500 per year...
 
Last edited:
ernesto said:
By the way, I didn't say higher education is useless unless it absolutely guarantees a job. What I am getting at is that just because higher education is available to all (which it has to be) it doesn't mean you have to do it or it is the best direction for everyone.
Click to expand...

I agree, and if you read the other thread I'm pretty vocal in, you'll see me agreeing with you.



ernesto said:
No negativity here, but also not blind positivity that I see from the teaching industry who have a vested interest in it all.

Oh, and the average cost expected for 2013 is £8,500 per year...
Click to expand...

I have no vested interest in it at all!! If I recruit the wrong people and they drop out and our retention rates drop I'm in-line for a firing squad!! You clearly have no idea who it works for those teaching in HE these days. If I interview a candidate for a BA who just wants to shoot weddings I'll be advising them to look elsewhere - you don't need an honours degree to shoot weddings. I'm sure there are colleges who don't recruit ethically, but they're not common because if we lose a student we get a financial clawback from HEFCE.. effectively, we get money taken away from us. Recruiting people who are not suitable is financial suicide for universities and colleges.

anyway... look.. this thread is about A levels.
 
Its just a box with a hole in it, a good lens is more important... its about the photographer learning the skills ...better equipment only adds to complication..full manual and a good lens..
digital and film camera required..stick to one brand and you wont cry later..

don't get hung up on gear !
 
weybourne said:
Can you even by a brand new 35mm film SLR nowadays? It seems a bad show if A level/modern photography course syllabuses (or is it syllabi?) makes 'obsolete' equipment compulsory :thinking:
Click to expand...

Yes you can still buy brand new 35mm SLR's and there is a huge range of quality secondhand equipment out there.

And what makes you think film cameras are obsolete? It was still alive and kicking the last time I looked.

And it also gives the students a great grounding in the basics and understanding of photography and its evolution.
 
My daughter started her A Level in photography this term. All of the colleges she looked at said don't worry about getting a camera before you start.
They start off with the basics and pin hole cameras, then a bit of film before going on to DSLR.

The colleges all had kit to loan out and use during lessons. It is only when they start to use DSLR's and want to take them home to do projects that it becomes easier to have your own rather than sharing.
 
RaglanSurf said:
And what makes you think film cameras are obsolete? It was still alive and kicking the last time I looked.

And it also gives the students a great grounding in the basics and understanding of photography and its evolution.
Click to expand...

as far as I know it is still required if you take up any foto degree !
well stated ..... :D
 
RaglanSurf said:
Yes you can still buy brand new 35mm SLR's and there is a huge range of quality secondhand equipment out there.

And what makes you think film cameras are obsolete? It was still alive and kicking the last time I looked.

And it also gives the students a great grounding in the basics and understanding of photography and its evolution.
Click to expand...

Please read my previous posts to get the answer you ask for. With a risk of repeating myself (and perpetuating an off-topic discussion)...

...If you can't buy the hardware brand new - then it is fair to say the hardware is obsolete - please note that my comments were regarding 35mm film SLRs only - not film cameras per se. If the hardware is obsolete then it follows that the technology is obsolescent (irrespective of how many people are still buying 35mm film for old and second-hand SLRs) - the only way this can be bucked is if the hardware becomes available brand new.

If 35mm film SLRs are available brand new - provide me with two links to two different brand new current stock 35mm SLR models available from a UK seller, despatched from the UK - where stocks are confirmed. I reckon that you'll struggle to find one link, never mind two - either way, the exercise will demonstrate that the hardware is not readily available. Try the same exercise for DSLRs and you will have no problem.

I'm not against film photography - nor do I think that photography cannot be taught using film as a medium - I have two film SLRs myself and I started my photography in the 60s using a manual only film camera (even the focussing was done with a tape measure or guesswork). What I have done earlier in the thread is to question (in light of my assertion that the hardware is obsolete) the validity of making film photography a compulsory and significant part of a modern photography A-level course (as was postulated by earlier posters)
 
There's the Nikon F6, Phenix above, the Vivitar V3800, the Voigtlaender Bessa R4, I'm damned sure there are others too.

The fact is you can still buy a new 35mm camera if you want one.
 
Last edited:
Pookeyhead said:
http://www.dalephotographic.co.uk/mall/productpage.cfm/DalePhotographicOnline/_F6

"Now £1,530.00"

http://www.firstcall-photographic.co.uk/products/2262/phenix-dc303k-cw-50mm-f17-lens

http://www.microglobe.co.uk/vivitar-35mm-v3800n-slr-film-camera-with-50mm-f17-lens-p-8335.html

Not in stock ("Email me when in stock" on web-page)

http://www.voigtlaender.de/cms/voigtlaender/voigtlaender_cms.nsf/id/pa_fdih7g8er9.html

Not an SLR

There's 4 for you. Your point? :)
Click to expand...

weybourne said:
either way, the exercise will demonstrate that the hardware is not readily available
Click to expand...

I think your links have demonstrated my point - that 35mm film SLR are not 'readily' available - the point of the exercise was to show that it is a struggle to find them.
 
I did edit because of that... but they are still manufactured, and shipped worldwide... I think you'll find they only order them in when requested. I doubt many places will have them sat on the shelf these days. That makes sense if you think about it.

The fact is though, you can still buy them if you want them. I doubt it will be a struggle... you'll just have to order it and wait 10 days or so.



Aren't we being pedantic here though... and doing so in the wrong thread?
 
weybourne said:
I think your links have demonstrated my point - that 35mm film SLR are not 'readily' available - the point of the exercise was to show that it is a struggle to find them.
Click to expand...

I note that Firstcall photographic have at least 3 "new" film SLR cameras available with a 1-3 day delivery time. I've used them in the past (some time in 2008) to purchase 2 holga cameras and they seemed pretty efficient.

Obviously they are not exactly "best sellers" so you will not find them on the shelf of your local Jessops, but waiting 1 to 3 days for a camera is hardly that much of an inconvenience.

The main reason there is not much of a market for "new" film SLRs is that they are in such abundance on the second hand market at much lower prices than it would take to manufacture the same camera from new.
 
I think I use my film cameras possibly more often than I write by hand these days (if you exclude initialling invoices for payment at work).

I certainly wouldn't argue that my son should be taught at school only to type on a keyboard (which, at the age of 5 he is better at from using one at home) because handwriting is obsolete.
 
Musicman said:
I think I use my film cameras possibly more often than I write by hand these days (if you exclude initialling invoices for payment at work).

I certainly wouldn't argue that my son should be taught at school only to type on a keyboard (which, at the age of 5 he is better at from using one at home) because handwriting is obsolete.
Click to expand...

This doesnt really seem like the best comparison to me though, theres likely to be the need for everyone to write by hand for the foreseeable future were as the need to shoot on film professionally seems much less.

To me digital just seems like such a good tool for teaching, the instant response makes learning from errors a far quicker process.

One advanatge of film I spose is that its more honiest, less chance of photoshoping mistakes away or passing off someone elses work as your own.
 
Moreorless said:
One advanatge of film I spose is that its more honiest, less chance of photoshoping mistakes away or passing off someone elses work as your own.
Click to expand...

Which is why it's still used extensively as a teaching tool.
 
Pookeyhead said:
I did edit because of that... but they are still manufactured, and shipped worldwide... I think you'll find they only order them in when requested. I doubt many places will have them sat on the shelf these days. That makes sense if you think about it.

The fact is though, you can still buy them if you want them. I doubt it will be a struggle... you'll just have to order it and wait 10 days or so.

Aren't we being pedantic here though... and doing so in the wrong thread?
Click to expand...

The point is that it is a disappearing market - if, after searching for those links, you still believe that the new 35mm film SLR industry is very much alive and not on its last legs, then I believe that you are deluding yourself - one supplier for an esoteric model (the F6) and a small selection of far eastern models which are re-hashes of old big-name models that have long since ceased production. When I asked for the links, it was intended in the style of a 'rhetorical question' - to highlight the difference in the new film and digital SLR markets - I didn't really expect people to start posting links as though that would prove that the new film SLR market is a healthy and thriving one :thinking:

This bit of the discussion was a slight digression from the OP on a reported compulsory requirement of film SLR camera for A-level. I agree that it is a bit off-topic and I have perpetuated that but only by answering repeated challenges to an opinion that I stated earler in the thread.
 
It may well be difficult to buy a new film SLR but the real advantage with using film is that you don't need to buy a new camera and can happily use a 30 year old SLR that costs £20 and performs as it did when new. What have you got to lose? (especially if developing is free/part of the course)

On those grounds it actually makes sense for a student to use film.
 
weybourne said:
The point is that it is a disappearing market - if, after searching for those links, you still believe that the new 35mm film SLR industry is very much alive and not on its last legs, then I believe that you are deluding yourself
Click to expand...

I don't, and I'm not. It is still there however, and probably will remain so as a niche market for some time to come yet. You only have to look in the film based forums on here to see how popular it is still.



POAH said:
maybe those with art degrees :lol:
Click to expand...

Yeah, yeah.. we get it.. art degrees are useless. (ZZzzzzz).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top