Film SLR body specifications?

MindofMel

MindofMel

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,586
Name
Mel
Edit My Images
Yes
In digital, if you buy an amateur say d3000 and then a d300s - there is a jump in image quality - better sensor, MP, handling etc

Is this possible in film? Or all film bodies essentially going to produce the same image?

I've had a nikon F301 for a few months or so, and I love it! However, sometimes the images it produces are a bit 'muddy' (as seen in this set, which I love despite this 'muddiness': http://www.mindofmel.co.uk/portfolio/tamil-mullivaikal-rembrance/

So i.e if i upgrade from my F301 to say a FE2, or FM2n - can i expect any improvements?
 
Some nice images. They don't appear muddy to me although I'd say some of the shadows are a bit blocked up and lacking detail but that's likely to be an exposure/ processing issue rather than anything to do with the camera.

You wont see a difference in IQ by upgrading to a higher grade film body. One thing film still has in common with digital is that you'll see the biggest leap in quality by investing in glass.

Having said that if your'e a real film devotee then you wont go far wrong in grabbing one of the older Nikon flagship bodies such as an F3, F4 or F5 -they're designed with pros in mind and you will see a difference in build quality and handling. They're also a bargain compared to what they originally cost, although prices are tending to firm up on nice examples.
 
Ahh i really want to get my stuff processed somewhere other than Jessops - maybe that's the problem.

Currently, I roam around with the 85mm f1.8 on it, but should hopefully be sticking some AIS lenses on it soon.

Ichecked the F301's metering by comparing its suggestions at various apertures to what my D300 said and what Lightmeter app said on my iphone and it was pretty much bang on 8/10 times.

Thing is with those, is the bodies get larger. I really like the slim, smallness of the F301.. If anything i would want a smaller film body :S

CT said:
Some nice images. They don't appear muddy to me although I'd say some of the shadows are a bit blocked up and lacking detail but that's likely to be an exposure/ processing issue rather than anything to do with the camera.

You wont see a difference in IQ by upgrading to a higher grade film body. One thing film still has in common with digital is that you'll see the biggest leap in quality by investing in glass.

Having said that if your'e a real film devotee then you wont go far wrong in grabbing one of the older Nikon flagship bodies such as an F3, F4 or F5 -they're designed with pros in mind and you will see a difference in build quality and handling. They're also a bargain compared to what they originally cost, although prices are tending to firm up on nice examples.
Click to expand...
 
HMM I would say Yes, No answer to that.

The main thing with film, bit like digital is the lens quality is the biggest thing to getting better images from your machine.

Film PRO bodies tend to offer better metering more robust bodies and they also tend to be modular so can change the metering heads, motor drives, some take 250 film back etc.

I don't think you would notice (I am sticking my neck out hear) much of a change if you jumped to the FE and FM series as they both use centre weight metering, similar (I think) to the F301.

However if you say jumped to a FA then you might. It was the first of the Nikons to use matrix metering and while very simple when compared to the likes of the F5 or D700 systems, it does work very well.

The older F2 series may as they have centre weight metering systems that are 60/40 bias towards the centre of the frame almost making them spot meter which takes a little getting use to.

Also I agree with CT

Here is an example from a Nikon FA using a 85mm lens, Kodak Extachrome shot later afternoon in November.

Albert-Victor.jpg
 
Better bodies usually just means more/better features. At the end of the day, the things that matter are your lens, the film you shoot and the processing. I'd be tempted to say you'll get better results from getting your film posted to a real dev place rather than jessops. I send all my film off and the one time I didn't, even my non-photographer wife could tell I hadn't. Your scanning may also be an issue....
 
A lot of the difference between newer and older bodies were feature sets really - as SLRs progressed towards the late 70s and into the 1980s, that meant more automation, more metering systems and so on.
 
MindofMel said:
Thing is with those, is the bodies get larger. I really like the slim, smallness of the F301.. If anything i would want a smaller film body :S
Click to expand...

Fair comment. In that case I'd say an FM2 or FM2n should fill the bill nicely for you. They're not battery dependent and very robust build quality, in fact a cracking little camera. Have read of this review

http://www.bythom.com/fm2n.htm

I do drop film into my local Jessops now and again as they do a 1 hour service which is handy when I can't be bothered to do it myself. I can't really fault them although I just get them to process the film (no prints) and do the scanning myself.
 
Agree with everything above - its pretty much just the lens that affects the quality of a film image. If you have two different cameras with identical lenses and film, set to the same aperture and shutter speed then there will be no difference between the two pictures.

Try Club 35 for developing, their about the same cost as a Jessops 1 hr service for a set of 6x4 prints and a low res (~2 - 3 mp) CD, for £9.10 and a freepost address. Their very quick and normally get my films back to me within 3/4 days of me sending the film, the quality is also of an excellent standard.

http://www.club35.co.uk/35mmcolourdandp.html
 
MindofMel said:
So i.e if i upgrade from my F301 to say a FE2, or FM2n - can i expect any improvements?
Click to expand...

No, Film and lens dictate IQ. The body is essentially just a light meter and a shutter, and any other function you want it to perform (AF for example).
 
I have access to a plasticky 80s-90s Pentax film SLR, but still prefer shooting my MX from the 70s. With the same 55mm f/2, they will give the exact same images, but my preference for the MX comes from the feel and camera itself. If you go for one of those Nikon film SLRs, it'll be exactly the same - you'll get that nice metal Nikon film SLR touch, which might be enjoyable enough in itself, but certainly no IQ change.
 
I've a EOS-3 (1998 design) and a EOS-30 (2004 design) film body - both of which are pretty much the last generation Canon film bodies... Given the same settings, manual focusing and the same glass, they'll take the same picture. The '3 has a much better, brighter viewfinder - with 97% coverage rather than 90% of the '30 - a small difference but definitely noticeable. Both have the amazing eye-controlled focusing - which I'd love them to fit to current digital kit. The '3 is pretty much a full pro-level body, especially when combined with the PB-E2 bower booster, whereas the '30 is much smaller and more of a high end entry to enthusiast body. Given a free choice I'll take the '3 anytime, unless I'm going to be schlepping it up and down 2-3 mountains, where the '30 comes into it's own. The '30 does make a great backup body to the '3 though, and I do tend to shoot in the same way with either camera.
 
i use

PhotoExpress...dev and scan to CD with CD sleeve contact sheet.... £5 incl pp

very fast turnaround - last roll was 3 days
 
The answer to the question is....


mustanir said:
Your scanning may also be an issue....
Click to expand...


This is by far the biggest variable if you want to try and compare apples with oranges.

There is supposed to be 20mp in digital speak in your average 35mm film frame, but probably close to 100% of this forum do not have access to a scanner capable of recording that detail.
Better quality = better scans, better scans = pro lab drum scans.
 
MindofMel said:
Thing is with those, is the bodies get larger. I really like the slim, smallness of the F301.. If anything i would want a smaller film body :S
Click to expand...

A rangefinder? I have a Voigtlander Bessa R3A which is very neat.

Andy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top