Have the film bug but don't know which camera to use...

southernjessie

southernjessie

Suspended / Banned
Messages
607
Name
SJ
Edit My Images
Yes
I used a Canon Sureshot Supreme for many years when I was younger but for the last 10 years have been using digital. After using Nikon I have recently moved to the Fuji X-trans cameras (X100S and X-Pro1) and am very happy with them.

However...after seeing more and more film photos I really want to start using a film camera again. I guess I just love the film look - the grain and that organic, real-life appearance that's both imperfect and believable.

I still have my Sureshot Supreme and also an Olympus Trip 35, plus an Olympus OM-1n MD with 50mm f1.8 lens. I used the Trip last week with Kodak Ektar 100 but was quite disappointed with the results - a mixture of blurred / mis-focussed images (my fault as I'm not used to the zone focussing yet) but also the colours just weren't that great. I'll probably switch to B&W completely, but I just wanted to ask about the actual cameras I own.

I don't mean this to be a stupid question but are these 3 cameras 'good' with regards to image quality with 35mm film? I know they're famous cameras and millions of people owned them, but considering just how many film cameras are available to buy at great prices, can these 3 hold their own against most other film cameras?

At the moment I'm sticking to 35mm but I'd love to try out medium format, although it looks like those cameras are way too expensive.

Sorry for the somewhat vague post and I hope my questions are not too naive. I have a pretty good knowledge of digital cameras but it's like starting out as a complete newbie when it comes to film.

Thanks

SJ
 
I would use the OM-1 with a black and white film you should be very pleased with the results.

Simon
 
Another vote for the OM-1N, although you might want to put a few rolls of colour through and get them processed somewhere like Asda and burned to CD. This is a cheap and cheerful route to get started in film and although the Asda scans are quite basic they can be corrected quite quickly in LR or PS.
 
I don't know about the Canon; the Trip 35 is good, but it doesn't give you much control, and I'd rather use it with black and white. I've not used it yet, but I've heard that Ektar needs very precise exposure or you get colour shifts.

Our usual advice is to run a few rolls of Poundland's best (Agfa Vista 200), and I too would suggest the OM1-n. Then for colour, try Portra 400, a lovely film.
 
Thanks guys - I've just put a roll of Agfa Vista Plus 200 in the OM-1 and will see how my focusing skills are ;) I might well pop them into ASDA because of the price. Eventually I'd like to try the B&W films like HP5, TRI-X etc, and also slide like Velvia.

I saw another post of recommended film cameras and that's why I asked. For example, someone said they loved the Nikon FE2. Being as I have Nikon lenses including an AI-S 24mm f2.8, I just wondered how the OM-1n compared to cameras like this?
 
Olympus Zuiko lenses are the equal of their contemporary Nikon, though there is less of them. Their not cheap though, the digi folk use them on their 4/3rd bodies.

I've only used one Nikon film body but I've got a lot of oly bodies and there perfectly good, you just need to get used to the shutter speed control being on the front of lens mount.
 
steveo_mcg said:
Olympus Zuiko lenses are the equal of their contemporary Nikon, though there is less of them. Their not cheap though, the digi folk use them on their 4/3rd bodies.
Click to expand...

Very much this. Oly lenses tend to be smaller and lighter than the contemporary equivalents so they balance better on a mirrorless body when using an adapter.
 
The trip will be Ok with print film in it if it works OK. The OM1 will be OK with whatever you want in it.

I wanted an OM1 but got an OM2 I also have a Trip 35 both are nice. Do you have the instruction manuals for the cameras? They are available online.
 
As others have said, the OM1 and the 50mm lens is a great combination and assuming the light seals are ok there's not much to go wrong.

The Trip seems to have the ability to make any colour film come out looking like it was shot in the 70's but everyone should have one. Once you've got the hang of the zone focussing they can produce some great results and with a roll of decent b&w the results can still be stunning.

I know nothing of the Sureshot but again just stick a roll of Agfa Vista through it just make sure it works.

And if you want to try medium format there are loads of cheap MF cameras out there, from the basic Agfa Clack to the very affordable Yashica 124G.
 
Last edited:
All the modern compacts if working properly will give you good results, I've accumulated about ten (boot sales from 50p to £1.50) and the only inferior one is the Olympus zoom model so I would say from that one experience that compacts with zoom lenses generally are as not as good as fixed focal lenses. But no matter what camera you use if the developing and scanning are carp then that could be the weakest link. Anyway enough of my blathering it has to be the OM1 and the Zuiko 50mm is a very good lens.
 
I have the manual for the OM-1n and my Trip was serviced by Stewart Duffy of Streetshooters. I'm finding the OM-1n a joy to use...I just hope my pics come out exposed ok and in focus!

alfbranch said:
The trip will be Ok with print film in it if it works OK. The OM1 will be OK with whatever you want in it.

I wanted an OM1 but got an OM2 I also have a Trip 35 both are nice. Do you have the instruction manuals for the cameras? They are available online.
Click to expand...
 
Thanks - I read an article about the Fuji GA645 and I'd like to get an 'inexpensive' MF camera to try (if that exists :))


RaglanSurf said:
As others have said, the OM1 and the 50mm lens is a great combination and assuming the light seals are ok there's not much to go wrong.

The Trip seems to have the ability to make any colour film come out looking like it was shot in the 70's but everyone should have one. Once you've got the hang of the zone focussing they can produce some great results and with a roll of decent b&w the results can still be stunning.

I know nothing of the Sureshot but again just stick a roll of Agfa Vista through it just make sure it works.

And if you want to try medium format there are loads of cheap MF cameras out there, from the basic Agfa Clack to the very affordable Yashica 124G.
Click to expand...
 
I think when my OM-1n was serviced the guy put in some sort of adapter that lets it take more common batteries (not sure which battery). At the moment when I switch it on it works ok.

Would the Zuiko 28mm f2.8 be a good lens to get for landscape? Is it optically as good as the 50mm f1.8?


excalibur2 said:
All the modern compacts if working properly will give you good results, I've accumulated about ten (boot sales from 50p to £1.50) and the only inferior one is the Olympus zoom model so I would say from that one experience that compacts with zoom lenses generally are as not as good as fixed focal lenses. But no matter what camera you use if the developing and scanning are carp then that could be the weakest link. Anyway enough of my blathering it has to be the OM1 and the Zuiko 50mm is a very good lens.
Click to expand...
 
Well I don't have the Zuiko 28mm but everything I read from other members (on different forums) say "it's a very good lens". And yes you can use it for landscapes and indoor party shots etc but also 24mm to 200mm can be good for landscapes as well.
 
Last edited:
southernjessie said:
I think when my OM-1n was serviced the guy put in some sort of adapter that lets it take more common batteries (not sure which battery). At the moment when I switch it on it works ok.

Would the Zuiko 28mm f2.8 be a good lens to get for landscape? Is it optically as good as the 50mm f1.8?
Click to expand...
All the Olympus Zuiko prime lenses that I've used over the years have been top quality and 28mm is no exception. If you can find a 24mm at a decent price then it's worth the extra but the 28mm performs admirably.
 
Yeah the Zuiko 28mm is a good lens, I can't get on Flickr at work but I've got some half decent pictures with it. The 24mm is much more expensive (or it was) I think it gives a better angle of view on the little cameras.
 
Just to reinforce something said above, Ektar requires fairly precise exposure otherwise the colours go a bit potty, and the Trip 35 is likely to give you a lot of badly exposed shots - not really a problem with more normal print film (colour or B&W) but Ektar is a bit of an exception. If the meter on your OM1 is working well Ektar should be fine through that and you'd see what it can achieve (ie beautiful fine grain and colours when exposed correctly). I'm only reinforcing this point so you don't get put off shooting in colour or specifically with Ektar. I'd suggest you stick a roll of Poundland Agfa, Fuji Superia 200 or 400, or better still Kodak Portra 400 through the Trip if you want to try it with colour.

Also, if you're using it in typical UK lighting conditions, faster film (400 speed) will be better suited to the Trip, as it will result in smaller apertures being selected and you'll be more likely to get well-focused pics with the Trip's zone focus system.

Most of all, enjoy!
 
Thanks Nick and Steven. The 28mm is fairly inexpensive I think...I saw a couple of Ffordes for about £59. However, I might well stick with the 50mm as it offers more flexibility and I can use it better for portraits (not an ideal portrait length but can just about do)
 
Keep an eye out for the 135mm too, it is also a good lens and can be had relatively inexpensively.
 
Thanks Francesco! I didn't realise that about Ektar...all I read from reviews is that it had very good colours and saturation and everyone loved it. I figured I could drop it in my Trip and everything would be fine...well, the pics that were in focus had muted colours and no punch whatsoever. You're right, this experience did put me off using colour - at least with the Trip. Having said that, I might drop my other roll of Agfa Vista in and try again.

I do want to try some of the nice black and white films with the OM-1n though. I've marked out Neopan 400, Tri-X 400, FP4+ and XP2. I've never used any of these before so I'll have to see what their characteristics are like.



TheGreatSoprendo said:
Just to reinforce something said above, Ektar requires fairly precise exposure otherwise the colours go a bit potty, and the Trip 35 is likely to give you a lot of badly exposed shots - not really a problem with more normal print film (colour or B&W) but Ektar is a bit of an exception. If the meter on your OM1 is working well Ektar should be fine through that and you'd see what it can achieve (ie beautiful fine grain and colours when exposed correctly). I'm only reinforcing this point so you don't get put off shooting in colour or specifically with Ektar. I'd suggest you stick a roll of Poundland Agfa, Fuji Superia 200 or 400, or better still Kodak Portra 400 through the Trip if you want to try it with colour.

Also, if you're using it in typical UK lighting conditions, faster film (400 speed) will be better suited to the Trip, as it will result in smaller apertures being selected and you'll be more likely to get well-focused pics with the Trip's zone focus system.

Most of all, enjoy!
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Ektar is a film that has tremendous exposure latitude, but to get the saturated effect you need to carefully expose as underexposure tends to turn it duller and more blue, but overexposure actually exaggerates the saturation effect even more. It is a great film though, and like all colour films the scans will only be as good as where you got them done - high street branches are sadly usually pretty poor as their mostly staffed with operators who just leave everything on full auto which is why I send all my colour films away to labs that I know do a good job.
Another point to consider is that if you scan Ektar yourself, be wary that most scanning programs don't have a colour profile for it (In the early 90's there was another film called Ekatr 100 but it was quite different and most profiles [e.g the one in Vuescan] are for that]) so it can be difficult to get the proper effect.
 
Thanks Samuel - I actually dropped it in by hand to Eye Culture in Bethnal Green, east London. I'd heard good things about their processing and prices, so was naturally disappointed when I got the CD.

With digital I tend to underexpose since I can pull out details in shadows better than highlights. Is it the opposite with film then?
 
southernjessie said:
I do want to try some of the nice black and white films with the OM-1n though. I've marked out Neopan 400, Tri-X 400, FP4+ and XP2. I've never used any of these before so I'll have to see what their characteristics are like.
Click to expand...

Most of the mainstream B&W films are nice in my opinion - I've had good results with all of the above and others. I've started using TMax 400 a bit recently as it's fast but has fine grain, and is available quite cheaply (if you buy a few rolls at the same time: http://www.7dayshop.com/kodak-profe...RvLXZpZGVvLXN1cHBsaWVzP2NhdD0yMSNsaW1pdD1hbGw=). For slower B&W film I prefer Acros to FP4 but it's more a question of taste than anything else. Tri-X is your more traditional grainy B&W, XP2 (or the Fuji/Kodak equivalent) is handy if you want to just put through a minilab or supermarket (worth checking if your local Asda develops C41 film - mine will do it for £2 plus a CD of scans for £1 without prints, which is a nice cheap way of doing it especially when you're just trying things out, though they won't do normal B&W films).
 
Yep - my local ASDA certainly do! They won't be high res scans but I can try the XP2 with them.

I'm planning to pop in to Silverprint this Saturday as they sell most of the films I'm thinking of getting (except the Neopan 400) for about the same price as 7dayshop with no p&p - I'll pick up the TMax 400 as you mentioned as well.

They did suggest developing my b&w film at home but I really don't have the first clue about this. It's something that would be nice to do but in reality I'll probably just get my rolls developed.


TheGreatSoprendo said:
Most of the mainstream B&W films are nice in my opinion - I've had good results with all of the above and others. I've started using TMax 400 a bit recently as it's fast but has fine grain, and is available quite cheaply (if you buy a few rolls at the same time: http://www.7dayshop.com/kodak-profe...RvLXZpZGVvLXN1cHBsaWVzP2NhdD0yMSNsaW1pdD1hbGw=). For slower B&W film I prefer Acros to FP4 but it's more a question of taste than anything else. Tri-X is your more traditional grainy B&W, XP2 (or the Fuji/Kodak equivalent) is handy if you want to just put through a minilab or supermarket (worth checking if your local Asda develops C41 film - mine will do it for £2 plus a CD of scans for £1 without prints, which is a nice cheap way of doing it especially when you're just trying things out, though they won't do normal B&W films).
Click to expand...
 
I realy like my Olympus Trip 35 but I have to say it shines with B and W dunno why, i modded mine slightly with a step up adapter ring and use an orange 52mm filter from my Nikons and the results are super with an Ilfoord 400.
 
Really nice pic - thanks for posting. Looks like I'd better try and pick up a 28 and possibly the 135 :)
 
southernjessie said:
Thanks Samuel - I actually dropped it in by hand to Eye Culture in Bethnal Green, east London. I'd heard good things about their processing and prices, so was naturally disappointed when I got the CD.

With digital I tend to underexpose since I can pull out details in shadows better than highlights. Is it the opposite with film then?
Click to expand...

Yes it is actually (with negative film, not with slide though) - to get a negative with excellent dynamic range and shadow detail then slight overexposure is the way to go with negative film. Consumer films can easily tolerate 2 stops overexposure before highlight detail is lost, and most professional ones extend that the 3 stops (Portra 160 and 400 especially). Underexposure however is associated with loss of shadow detail, and increased contrast and grain where the scan or print has to be pushed to recover detail.

The best way I've found is to meter off the darkest part of the scene (spot metering is useful), and then decrease the exposure by 2 - 2.5 stops before taking the picture.
 
Do not right off the trip run a print film through it.

here are a couple of shots from mine they are not the best scans though they look better in the original prints

Trip-35001 by alf.branch, on Flickr

Trip-35002 by alf.branch, on Flickr
 
Nice work from the Trip Alf, I think it just needs a bit of careful film choice to get the best from it as you have.
 
Ok, that's useful to know. The OM-1n has the needle exposure indicator so should I get an accurate exposure of a dark part of the scene and then just adjust the aperture/shutter speed so that I overexpose a bit (i.e. the needle is above the mid point of a 'good exposure)?

s162216 said:
Yes it is actually (with negative film, not with slide though) - to get a negative with excellent dynamic range and shadow detail then slight overexposure is the way to go with negative film. Consumer films can easily tolerate 2 stops overexposure before highlight detail is lost, and most professional ones extend that the 3 stops (Portra 160 and 400 especially). Underexposure however is associated with loss of shadow detail, and increased contrast and grain where the scan or print has to be pushed to recover detail.

The best way I've found is to meter off the darkest part of the scene (spot metering is useful), and then decrease the exposure by 2 - 2.5 stops before taking the picture.
Click to expand...
 
Yes, you just have to remember that the OM1 meters across the whole frame rather than a small spot as Samuel is suggesting.
 
southernjessie said:
Yep - my local ASDA certainly do! They won't be high res scans but I can try the XP2 with them.
Click to expand...

I like XP2 but I didn't like how the Edinburgh Asda scanned it; dreadfully over-sharpened and quite a nasty effect. I usually send my C41 films (including XP2) to Photo Express in Hull, who charge £4.50 a film (allowing for the 50p TP reduction) for processing and a 2000 dpi scan, see the Film Processing sticky above. Photo Express don't do black and white, E6 or any 120 though :( . And also worth remembering that Boots do XP2 on a buy-one-get-one-half-price basis.
 
I've asked the Asda operator if she can not sharpen and she said " the machine is set by the engineers" but I've been using Tesco and Asda for years and some film\film fresh or OOD\lens\subjects...combo are very good and some are annoyingly too sharp. I suppose I should know the answer but haven't got around to doing a spreadsheet to find the best combo etc
 
I just wanted to ask about ASA and available light: I took my OM-1n to St James' Park a while ago to take some pics. It's overcast but I wouldn't say dark at all...there's no sun but to my eyes it's fairly bright. I have Agfa Vista 200 and when I switched the camera on, the exposure indicator needle just didn't want to know. I kept the 50mm lens wide open at f1.8 and even brought the shutter speed down to 1/30th and 1/15th and still the needle showed underexposure. I even turned the ASA dial to 400 from 200 but it made no difference. The needle only responded when I moved the shutter speed to 1/2 second.

Does this mean that I really need sunshine for ASA 200? Or even 400?

Can it be a dodgy exposure meter? The camera was fully serviced a few years ago and I only used it once since then.

I'd like to stick some Tri-X 400 or Tri Max 400 in and use the camera in lower light conditions but this doesn't give me much confidence.
 
southernjessie said:
I just wanted to ask about ASA and available light: I took my OM-1n to St James' Park a while ago to take some pics. It's overcast but I wouldn't say dark at all...there's no sun but to my eyes it's fairly bright. I have Agfa Vista 200 and when I switched the camera on, the exposure indicator needle just didn't want to know. I kept the 50mm lens wide open at f1.8 and even brought the shutter speed down to 1/30th and 1/15th and still the needle showed underexposure. I even turned the ASA dial to 400 from 200 but it made no difference. The needle only responded when I moved the shutter speed to 1/2 second.

Does this mean that I really need sunshine for ASA 200? Or even 400?

Can it be a dodgy exposure meter? The camera was fully serviced a few years ago and I only used it once since then.
.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that seems way off. Plugging in 1/2s, 1.8, 200 into my meter gives an EV of 3. That's not overcast, that's dark. Pointing it out of my window at an overcast Welsh afternoon gives me an EV of 10.
 
Sounds like the meter is dead or the batteries are. Overcast with Sunny 16 (11 really) would give you 1/250 at around F5.6
 
Thanks guys. It could be because the battery was put in about 3 years ago and the camera wasn't used much.

Are there any places or people in the London or SE / Surrey area that you could recommend to take a look at it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top