Recommended film camera to get?

I am looking to buy my first 35mm film camera, and are looking at either a Nikon f5 or a Canon eos 3.

I shoot fashion and portraits so one of the things that is important is the glass, and producing sharp images. Either 35mm or 50mm. As I shoot more environmental not an 85.

What I have heard is that eos 3 has a great auto and eye focus system and 45 focus points, though not too much else on either model.

Any advice would be great on which camera you would choose, and a sharp prime glass with it

Thanks

stewart9 said:

I am looking to buy my first 35mm film camera, and are looking at either a Nikon f5 or a Canon eos 3.

I shoot fashion and portraits so one of the things that is important is the glass, and producing sharp images. Either 35mm or 50mm. As I shoot more environmental not an 85.

What I have heard is that eos 3 has a great auto and eye focus system and 45 focus points, though not too much else on either model.

Any advice would be great on which camera you would choose, and a sharp prime glass with it

Thanks

Click to expand...

You won’t go wrong with an F5. But its heavy for a film camera, maybe not if your coming from a Nikon D5, or even a low end full frame like a Nikon D610. There are lots of other Nikon options (e.g. F80, F100) which will do more or less the same, are lighter and cheaper.

The F5 is not very “stealthy” if you want to do street work and that’s important?

As Photobygms says, if you’ve already got glass for one system then get the corresponding body.

Bodies come and go. Lenses are where you make your investment. Once you own several lenses of a particular system, it's expensive to switch. Fortunately, you really can't go wrong with either a Nikon or Canon 35mm system.

I started investing in the Nikon system in 1981, so I'm much more familiar with it than Canon. I'd be leery of the F5. It's a nice camera, but it's big, heavy, and being a pro model, most of the used ones have been thoroughly used. An F100 has some really nice features and was more likely to be owned by an amateur.

Honestly, I like my N8008s just as well as my F100. It's solidly built, handles well, and I like the viewfinder a little better. The autofocus is a little slower and there aren't as many focus points, but I usually focus, hold it, and recompose anyway. They're dirt cheap.

I assume you want autofocus and modern features. If not, the FM2n is a man's camera. Mine is mostly a shelf queen these days, but I'm never selling it. It's just too awesome for it's size.

Careful with the eye-focus feature. May not be what you're thinking.

You look at the view finder and the camera tracks your eye. So instead of moving the AF points with a selector, it will move with your eye.

And for the choice on the camera, if you already have glass, that's easy.

If you don't, both brands have amazing lenses today. On the canon, the OEM 50's aren't that great, but sigma has a nice 50mm.

If your budget is a little shorter, check out Minolta as well. There are great A-mount lenses that continued to the Sony ecosystem and can be found at quite nice prices now.

Regardless of Nikon versus Canon, I'd buy the best lens(es) my budget allowed and an acceptable body that will get the job done.

I use the Nikon F6 with Sigma Art 50 and 35mm lenses. You cannot get sharper AF lenses on film than those. Not all Sigma Art lenses work though, the later ones have electronic apertures which are not compatible with Nikon film cameras.

Those two Sigma Art lenses also work on the F100, F80, F75 - basically the Nikon AF slrs that use dials on the camera body to control the aperture. I would skip the F100 as it is prone to breaking the back door latch - it is made of plastic and gets brittle with age. With the F80 and F75 that doesn't matter so much as those cameras are dirt cheap. The F80 especially is amazingly good for its price.

But... here's the thing with film. The resolution does not match digital so most lenses if focused correctly can out-resolve the film. I also get fantastic results with the Nikon 50 1.8G, and the 50 1.4D lenses.

If I had Canon lenses, then sure Canon makes great cameras too.

HussH said:

I use the Nikon F6 with Sigma Art 50 and 35mm lenses. You cannot get sharper AF lenses on film than those. Not all Sigma Art lenses work though, the later ones have electronic apertures which are not compatible with Nikon film cameras.

Those two Sigma Art lenses also work on the F100, F80, F75 - basically the Nikon AF slrs that use dials on the camera body to control the aperture. I would skip the F100 as it is prone to breaking the back door latch - it is made of plastic and gets brittle with age. With the F80 and F75 that doesn't matter so much as those cameras are dirt cheap. The F80 especially is amazingly good for its price.

Click to expand...

Ive got a F5, F80 and F75, and I’ve owned the F100 - in my opinion the worst of those was the F100. It’s a good percentage of the price as the F5, and with the grip is the same size as the F5, but it’s not got the same quality. I sold mine and bought a F80, which is almost all the camera, for a lot less money. The F75 is very nice and very cheap - I’ve bought them for £3, but the viewfinder isn’t very good for manual focussing.

With a big lens at slow shutter speeds the F5 is the best choice - the inertia of the body plus the design of the shutter and mirror minimise vibration. Plus you get 8 frames a second for four seconds which would be pretty good for a mirrorless digital.

HussH said:

But... here's the thing with film. The resolution does not match digital so most lenses if focused correctly can out-resolve the film. I also get fantastic results with the Nikon 50 1.8G, and the 50 1.4D lenses.

Click to expand...

50mm AF-D is very good too and fast focussing on a F5

HussH said:

If I had Canon lenses, then sure Canon makes great cameras too.

Click to expand...

HussH said:

I use the Nikon F6 with Sigma Art 50 and 35mm lenses. You cannot get sharper AF lenses on film than those. Not all Sigma Art lenses work though, the later ones have electronic apertures which are not compatible with Nikon film cameras.

Those two Sigma Art lenses also work on the F100, F80, F75 - basically the Nikon AF slrs that use dials on the camera body to control the aperture. I would skip the F100 as it is prone to breaking the back door latch - it is made of plastic and gets brittle with age. With the F80 and F75 that doesn't matter so much as those cameras are dirt cheap. The F80 especially is amazingly good for its price.

Click to expand...

I have used the f100 before. I really liked it, yet the lense I was using was the 50mm 1.8, and twice had focus issues. Is there any form of compatibility issue if i use sigma with the f100? The upgrade in lense is what I'd prefer to spend on.

HussH said:

But... here's the thing with film. The resolution does not match digital so most lenses if focused correctly can out-resolve the film. I also get fantastic results with the Nikon 50 1.8G, and the 50 1.4D lenses.

If I had Canon lenses, then sure Canon makes great cameras too.

Click to expand...

Mike B USA said:

Regardless of Nikon versus Canon, I'd buy the best lens(es) my budget allowed and an acceptable body that will get the job done.

Click to expand...

Yes that is what I'm looking to do. I just want a camera I'm happy with

stewart9 said:

HussH said:

I use the Nikon F6 with Sigma Art 50 and 35mm lenses. You cannot get sharper AF lenses on film than those. Not all Sigma Art lenses work though, the later ones have electronic apertures which are not compatible with Nikon film cameras.

Those two Sigma Art lenses also work on the F100, F80, F75 - basically the Nikon AF slrs that use dials on the camera body to control the aperture. I would skip the F100 as it is prone to breaking the back door latch - it is made of plastic and gets brittle with age. With the F80 and F75 that doesn't matter so much as those cameras are dirt cheap. The F80 especially is amazingly good for its price.

Click to expand...

I have used the f100 before. I really liked it, yet the lense I was using was the 50mm 1.8, and twice had focus issues. Is there any form of compatibility issue if i use sigma with the f100? The upgrade in lense is what I'd prefer to spend on.

stewart9 said:

But... here's the thing with film. The resolution does not match digital so most lenses if focused correctly can out-resolve the film. I also get fantastic results with the Nikon 50 1.8G, and the 50 1.4D lenses.

If I had Canon lenses, then sure Canon makes great cameras too.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Re your focus issues, you won't know until you try. Some F100s have had front focusing issues, others have not. There is also the tolerance question, where the tolerances on the camera body and the tolerances in the lens may conspire to just make things not as good as it could be.

Best thing would be to get a lens from a place that allows you to return it if you see issues.

Mike B USA said:

Bodies come and go. Lenses are where you make your investment. Once you own several lenses of a particular system, it's expensive to switch. Fortunately, you really can't go wrong with either a Nikon or Canon 35mm system.

I started investing in the Nikon system in 1981, so I'm much more familiar with it than Canon. I'd be leery of the F5. It's a nice camera, but it's big, heavy, and being a pro model, most of the used ones have been thoroughly used. An F100 has some really nice features and was more likely to be owned by an amateur.

Honestly, I like my N8008s just as well as my F100. It's solidly built, handles well, and I like the viewfinder a little better. The autofocus is a little slower and there aren't as many focus points, but I usually focus, hold it, and recompose anyway. They're dirt cheap.

I assume you want autofocus and modern features. If not, the FM2n is a man's camera. Mine is mostly a shelf queen these days, but I'm never selling it. It's just too awesome for it's size.

Click to expand...

The issue I have found from nikon, looking at various reviews now, is that there arn't really any reliable and sharp lenses to use on a film camera body. I tried 2 different 50mm 1.8g's which were very soft, and the 24-70 g lense seems to not be very reliable to

stewart9 said:

Mike B USA said:

Bodies come and go. Lenses are where you make your investment. Once you own several lenses of a particular system, it's expensive to switch. Fortunately, you really can't go wrong with either a Nikon or Canon 35mm system.

I started investing in the Nikon system in 1981, so I'm much more familiar with it than Canon. I'd be leery of the F5. It's a nice camera, but it's big, heavy, and being a pro model, most of the used ones have been thoroughly used. An F100 has some really nice features and was more likely to be owned by an amateur.

Honestly, I like my N8008s just as well as my F100. It's solidly built, handles well, and I like the viewfinder a little better. The autofocus is a little slower and there aren't as many focus points, but I usually focus, hold it, and recompose anyway. They're dirt cheap.

I assume you want autofocus and modern features. If not, the FM2n is a man's camera. Mine is mostly a shelf queen these days, but I'm never selling it. It's just too awesome for it's size.

Click to expand...

The issue I have found from nikon, looking at various reviews now, is that there arn't really any reliable and sharp lenses to use on a film camera body. I tried 2 different 50mm 1.8g's which were very soft, and the 24-70 g lense seems to not be very reliable to

Click to expand...

I’ve got a number of Nikon 50mm AF and non-AF and have never had an issue with them being very soft. Stopping down to f/4 or f/5.6 will improve sharpness.

stewart9 said:

The issue I have found from nikon, looking at various reviews now, is that there arn't really any reliable and sharp lenses to use on a film camera body. I tried 2 different 50mm 1.8g's which were very soft, and the 24-70 g lense seems to not be very reliable to

Click to expand...

If you don't like Nikon lenses, then invest in Canon or something else. Of the dozen or so Nikon lenses I have, including a 50mm f/1.8G, none of them are "very soft," even wide open. Of course, you're the best judge of what works for you. When I'm shooting people, extreme sharpness isn't in my top three concerns for lenses anyway.

stewart9 said:

The issue I have found from nikon, looking at various reviews now, is that there arn't really any reliable and sharp lenses to use on a film camera body.

Click to expand...

I have learned to take film reviews with a grain of salt and rely on my own opinions. There are a lot of people who, for lack of a better way of putting it, don't know what they're talking about. They don't understand the vibration inherent in film cameras they say the lens isn't sharp.

If there were no sharp lenses for film cameras, there would be no sharp photos before 2005 or so.

As for reliability, I've yet to have a lens break on me. And I own a few dozen. Some dropped. By me.

HOWEVER remember a couple of things. First, the resolving power of film is different from digital. The irregular pattern of film grain is always going to pose challenges.

Second, if the photos are scanned, that introduces another layer of complexity. If the film isn't perfectly flat in the scanner -- and that's an issue with some film stocks more than others, btw -- the photos will look soft at the edges. That's not because of the lens.

Pixel-peeping is best done with digital. With film, unless you love grain (and I do), either shoot in medium format or don't look too close.

I have offered up the challenge that if I were to post three scanned photos, one taken with a $150 Nikon AI 50/1.4, one with a $30 Pentax 50/1.7 and one with a $12 Minolta zoom, no one would be able to tell me which was shot with which. So far no takers.

Pixel peeping, IMHO, is best done with digital. If you need the sharpest photos possible, well, much as I prefer film and much as I hate to say it, digital is a better bet than 35mm.

In terms of sharpness of 35mm SLRs, Nikon's pretty hard to beat, but the truth is that as long as you avoid early (pre-1988ish) zooms and no-name lenses, it's hard to go wrong. That aforementioned $30 Pentax is cheap not because it's bad but because it's ubiquitous.

The recommendation for Minolta was a good one. If autofocus is what you want, you can get a 400/430si or Maxxum 5 for $12 and a perfectly good lens for about the same amount. They're cheap but practically disposable. Great way to start and see if film is for you.

I have a few Nikons and like them (I'm more of a Pentaxian myself) but I personally wouldn't buy an F5. F4 is better and I wouldn't buy that either, a) because most Fs are high-milers and b) I think that much automation makes film photography boring. I have a Nikon N8008 (85% of an F4!) and while it takes great photos I rarely shoot with it. Too much like digital, and if I want the digital experience I'll shoot with my Sony!

Aaron

I used multiple Nikon F5 bodies for weddings. Wouldn’t trade them for anything

stewart9 said:

I am looking to buy my first 35mm film camera, and are looking at either a Nikon f5 or a Canon eos 3.

I shoot fashion and portraits so one of the things that is important is the glass, and producing sharp images. Either 35mm or 50mm. As I shoot more environmental not an 85.

What I have heard is that eos 3 has a great auto and eye focus system and 45 focus points, though not too much else on either model.

Click to expand...

The eye focus system may not work properly if you wear glasses.

stewart9 said:

I am looking to buy my first 35mm film camera, and are looking at either a Nikon f5 or a Canon eos 3.

I shoot fashion and portraits so one of the things that is important is the glass, and producing sharp images. Either 35mm or 50mm. As I shoot more environmental not an 85.

What I have heard is that eos 3 has a great auto and eye focus system and 45 focus points, though not too much else on either model.

Any advice would be great on which camera you would choose, and a sharp prime glass with it

Thanks

Click to expand...

Both are great cameras. If you already have lenses for one of them, stop right there.

Otherwise, consider lens options. Both have decent, but unexceptional 50/1.8 and 50/1.4 lenses. In Nikon's case, the AF-S is significantly superior to the AF-D.

Canon's lens compatibility is simple: every EF lens is, and everything else is not. Nikon's is way more complex. The good thing is that the F5 is one of the most compatible Cameras Nikon ever made, even including most manual focus lenses. The bad is that it does not include the latest E (electronic aperture) lenses, including the latest 24-70/2.8 VR.

Back to specific lenses: both system's 50/1.8 and 1.4 lenses are good, but not great. Canon has the $1400 50/1.2L and Nikon has the $1600 58/1.4. The best option for both might be the $950 Sigma Art 50/1.4. I have heard conflicting accounts of whether the F5 is compatible with the Sigma.

At 35mm, Canon has the 35/1.4L and the 35/2, with and without IS. Nikon has 1.8 and 1.4, neither with VR. Again, Sigma Art may really be the best option.