Camera for student

[cknapp1961]

Sorry, forgot about the metering not working with autofocus lenses on the N80, but I shoot mostly B&W with it and guess exposures quite well.

 

[abstraxion]

N80 is where it's at. I don't see why a student would be using manual focus Nikkors as they cost much more than the kit zooms that flood eBay. I bought an N80 new in high school and still think it represents the absolute pinnacle of value (cheap, manual mode, manual ISO settings, great metering in matrix, center weight, and SPOT!)

 

[Ian Grant]

K1000 - more importantly is a totally manual camera

The reason the K100 was chosen was it was rugged lasts well with use but far more importantly is a totally manual camera.

What you don't want is a point & shoot SLR, particularly with autofocus, programme modes, or aperture/shutter speed priority.

So a substitute camera needs similar attributes.

Ian

 

[abstraxion]

What's wrong with a camera that can be A/S/P but also has manual mode? If one doesn't have the discipline to leave the camera on M they probably don't have the discipline for film photography.

 

[Anastigmatic]

Are those Fujicas M42 mount? I was trying to avoid M42 cameras because the lenses have, surprisingly, gotten a bit pricey in recent years

Yes they are, I guess its a matter of timing, I find them to be pretty cheap, lots to choose from. Though some of the other cameras mentioned are good (I like OM's myself but the glass on them IS getting way up there in cost lately, especially the f2's, not to mention they are usually more expensive to service than some of the others), the ST801 is not a bad choice really the more I think about it for students, very robust camera, with obvious buttons for beginners to use and locate (DOF preview etc), and doesn't need the battery conversion that the OM's do.

The KR5 is a poor mans K1000, similar camera to look at , use and feel (comes in modern snazzy black though LOL) but only 1/500 (early straight KR5's, later ones have faster speeds), give the students some ND filters to compensate and teach them something different at the same time. Has twin needle set up so you get an idea of what speeds and aperture setting are without removing your eye from the viewfinder, the meter turns on or off when you pre-open or close the film advance, best way to switch the meter on or off, compared to ANY other IMO, no need to half press shutter buttons while trying to adjust speeds, saves batteries going flat too, why didn't that method catch on with every one else!

 

[Anastigmatic]

What's wrong with a camera that can be A/S/P but also has manual mode? If one doesn't have the discipline to leave the camera on M they probably don't have the discipline for film photography.

If your choosing the camera for yourself, then obviously you know whether you will choose (or have the discipline) to shoot using manual or not. However, the reality is sometimes, students or learners will often take the easy way out for all sorts of different reasons, speed to get that shot, to shortcut, to get the 'better' exposure especially if they are comparing shots with other students....the list goes on and on, people just do the things we all know they do..dont give them the choice, when its removed, they learn quicker or miss the shots until they are...with practice and understanding comes the speed...auto modes slow down development IMO, YVMV

 

[Wade D]

The SRT 101 is a great manual camera and built like a tank. If you want to get really old school think Exakta VX but those are in the hands of collectors for the most part.
The FM 10 may be a Cosina with a Nikon badge but they are cheap and reliable for someone learning the ropes.

 

[frdrx]

I back the Yashica FR suggestion. There is some wonderful glass available in the Contax/Yashica mount at various price levels (from dirt cheap but adequate Yashica DSB lenses, through decent to excellent Yashica ML ones, to mostly brilliant but affordable standard Carl Zeiss T* lenses and super-fast and super-expensive Carl Zeiss wonders). The FR II is not a good choice, though, as it doesn't offer manual exposure control. Personally, I would recommend the Contax RTS or, better, RTS II Quartz instead, if you come across the opportunity to buy a good one. I love mine to death. You also cannot go wrong with
either a Yashica FX-3, FX-7, FX-3 Super, FX-7 Super, FX-3 2000 or FX-D (any FX, practically). Older Yashicas, such as the FX-2, are also good if they are in working order (mine isn't, yet); I'm amazed by their quietness and low level of vibration. Oh, I haven't mentioned the Contax 139 Quartz, which is a posh counterpart to the Yashica FX-D that has depth of field preview.

 

[Mick Fagan]

One camera that, surprisingly to me, has not been mentioned is the Nikon FE2.

This aperture priority camera has one feature when used in manual mode that is brilliant for students, a match needle system on the side of the viewfinder.

The photographer can select an aperture film speed combination based upon the camera meter. Then whilst keeping their eye on the viewfinder, they can turn either the aperture or the shutter speed to match over or under the camera meter and know how instantly by how much they have varied.

You can see the lights go on as they scan a subject and watch the black shutter speed needle stay put, whilst the green camera meter needle swings around.

I too have noticed that people starting out with film photography, after coming from elsewhere with quite sophisticated cameras, have a vague idea of metering. Any camera with a match needle metering system seems to be easier to grasp than a coloured LED going from red to green or - to + for these people.

People without any knowledge of metering systems, are about 1 roll of film further down the track.

In this country the Nikon F3 normal or HP version is cheaper than most of the cameras mentioned. In the last year I have directed 3 people towards an F3HP and one towards an F3. All of these cameras were under $100 for the body, this, in a country where cameras are about 200% of the price they are in the USA.

Mick.

 

[2F/2F]

If you want a Canon A series camera with aperture priority, you have three choices. The AE-1 or AE-1 Program are not among them.

The only one that has Av, and also has manual control with the full array of shutter speeds is the A-1. The AL-1 does not have speeds below '30, and the AV-1 is really an AE-only camera, with only '60 flash synch setting and B as far as manual control.

The AT-1 is manual only, with no auto modes.

Basically, the Canon A series auto modes break down like so:

A-1: The Works (P, Tv, Av, full M)
AE-1: Tv, full M
AE-1 Program: P, Tv, full M
AV-1: Av, almost nonexistent M (bulb and flash-synch only)
AL-1: Av, partial M (shutter speeds above '30 only)
AT-1: full M only

I consider the AV-1 to be near useless for anything I would do. It is basically a glorified point and shoot. It's good for someone who wants the quality and lens advantages of an SLR, but with a point and shoot approach; somebody who simply wants to take quality pix, but with no real interest in photography itself. Therefore, it does have its uses, but not for a beginner who really wants to learn about photography, IMO.

The rest of them allow much more control, though the AL-1 handicaps the user more than the rest by eliminating the slow shutter speeds.

Everything but the AV-1 and AL-1 do have full manual modes.

 

[kombizz]

How about the dear Minolta!

 

[nocrop]

If it were me learning for the first time, in retrospect, I would have appreciated--really appreciated--an expert teaching me how to use a view camera, from exposure to final print. Not practical, but as a student of other types of fine art printing, it would have been a perfect learning path for me. I'm an outlier though.

I'd opt for an FM for most new students, I guess. My girlfriend loves her AE-1, for all that's worth (quite a bit, actually).

 

[2F/2F]

I agree that the view camera is the ideal tool for a "serious" student, once the initial technical learnin' has been done. However, I think that projected slides are the best way to initially learn basic technical matters such as exposure, while keeping focus on the simple task of image making and analysis. IMO, printing, black and white, and the negative thought process in general should not be introduced in a basic class. That may sound weird, but it is just my opinion. I think it is a technical overload, and removes focus from the final images themselves. Think of how much confusion and how many questions come from beginners that are rooted in their grappling with the technical details of the negative process, and how few questions are rooted in their grappling with images themselves. I think students should start by having positive color images as a result, learning basic exposure and depth of field type stuff, then move on to learn how to craft prints using negatives and monochrome materials.

Therefore, I don't see a digital SLR with manual control being used for the basic learning as being contrary to this thought process.

The problem, however, is that the cameras themselves are too complex, and provide too many options for distraction and/or laziness to occur.

So, what I think would be a great instructional tool is the following: a totally stripped-down digital SLR. I want a body that takes quality manual focus lenses with depth of field scales (such as the Nikon AI/AI-S line), and has three controls to worry about: aperture, shutter, and focus; just like the trusty K-1000-type camera. It should have a cable release thread and depth of field preview, shoot jpeg only, have some manual white balance settings, and enough resolution to make a decent quality print. 4 MPix is fine. Any more is too much. No auto modes. That's it.

After the basic technical learning this way, I feel that all students should move on to the art of crafting images by hand using fully analog techniques. There is no reason for this to not be taught just because most commercial work is shot digitally. Just because we have computers on which to type does not mean that we do not need to write by hand any more.

 

[Mike1234]

Please don't flame me, folks. After all I'm shooting film too because no digital camera can match what ULF can do. I'm no youngster either... been into photography l-o-n-g before digital was introduced.

It's just my opinion, and this is no fault of instructors, but I'd say schools are all too often "behind the curve" when it comes to technology. If a student truly WANTS to learn film photography then by all means put them in that class. However, film is on the verge of going by the way of the dinosaurs. It won't be all that long before nearly all studio and field photos are done digitally. Think about the repro industry for a moment and all those nice expensive lenses that were dumped on the market.

So... what I think is let them have the technology with which they're comfortable and will be working with in the future. Again, it's just my two cents, but if they'll be using updated/automated technology anyway they might as well be learning the real future of the profession. In other words... they need digital cameras.

 

[John Hermanson]

In the old days, photo instructors would advise students to get themselves a Pentax K1000 to learn the basics of photography.

These days, a lot of photo students were spoilt by digicams, green box mode and wunderplastik in general. They seems to have very little patience to adapt to the slow working needed for K1000 like cameras.

So what is your opinion of a suitable for a starter film camera these days? I am thinking something that has a aperture priority mode and uses readily available battery. Pentax ME Super for instance.

What would you recommend?

OM-1, 1N / 2, 2N. 1,1N is all mechanical, the ideal student camera. Battery is for built in meter. 2,2N has electronic shutter, in "manual" behaves just like a 1/1N. If interested, contact me directly - omtech1@verizon.net - and I can set you up with an (important) OVERHAULED body of either along with a 50mm 1.8 lens. All warranted for 6 months (as long as the student doesn't drop it, submerge it, take it apart). John (32 years servicing OM)

 

[keithwms]

It's war in the classroom these days. The kids take their notes on laptops and kindles; they want to bluetooth their homeworks to my blackberry; they already have their own photogalleries online on their own sites in a flash gallery that they coded themselves last night.... that is the modern learning context.

Now, this modern context obviously gives us the opportunity to show the students something really unique: the value of meticulous manual work and hand craft. Nobody on an analogue site would dispute the value of that.

But at the same time: ultimately we train students to survive and (we hope) compete out in the real world, and I guarantee that they will be *screwed* if they aren't conversant in all of the techniques that are available.

So then the question is at what point they will go beyond the manual approach that we all value. Obviously that choice depends very much on the instructor and the pool of students. Like most instructors here (I assume), I teach smallish classes of students with abilities scattered all over the place, from advanced to way behind the curve, from intensely focused to AD/HD... you name it. Hence my really nonclassical choice, the F100 that provides fully manual as well as fully automated options: it allows you to do both and explore the relative strengths and limitations. And it is very easy to go back and forth and say, look, here is a scene where you really get fooled by automation... but then there is another scene where automation really gives you an advantage.

The really nice thing about the F100 is that it offers virtually *all* of the automation and gadgetry of any DSLR out there (which many students already have)... at a really low cost (used) and at the same time it can be treated like any fully manual camera... just that it has batteries, okay, that is a philosophical issue with some instructors

That comparison/contrast between manual and automated is what I think students really need to learn these days.

 

[2F/2F]

And it is very easy to go back and forth and say, look, here is a scene where you really get fooled by automation... but then there is another scene where automation really gives you an advantage.

That comparison/contrast between manual and automated is what I think students really need to learn these days.

True, that last sentence...but as to the other one, I would argue that the cases in which automated exposure truly makes for the more technically sound shot are the tiniest sliver of cases. IMO, the presence of auto modes is really only good as a teaching tool for teaching why photographers should generally avoid auto modes for best results. In my experience, auto modes screw you more than they help you, unless you approach them with a manual mindset, using them only to fix a desired shutter speed or aperture in place, and then using EC to retake what is in essence full manual control. The important thing to teach is that auto modes do not really make things any better unless 1) you approach them with a manual mindset, and simply use them as a very slight convenience, or 2) absolute speed is of the essence or you will simply miss the timing of the shot. In that case, an automated-exposure shot at the right time is certainly better than a perfectly exposed shot made at the wrong time.

 

[keithwms]

Yes maybe, but I think the student really needs to learn the value of all options, and get some training in critical thinking so that he/she knows when to use one or the other and whether one approach is limiting a creative vision. (The big surprise to many students is that automation can itself be limiting... but they wouldn't see that at all if they couldn't conveniently compare manual to automated, side by side, in parallel)

As educators our #1 mission, I think, is to remove as many limitations to learning as we can and to give the student the broadest possible range of possibilities. Students will leave the class and joyfully carry on learning... if we did our job right. At least, that is the mantra of the liberal arts college instructor, as I see it.

 

[mweintraub]

I think every kid should learn to drive a manual car. This is the same with photography. If they sign up for a class to teach photography, they should learn to use the tools.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Pentax's, the Minolta SRT family from the SR-1, SR-7, through the X-700, and the Nikon N-65, N-70, ..., F-100 are excellent cameras as student cameras and yet they can continue to be used as serious cameras for many years later.

Steve

 

[DLawson]

It's just my opinion, and this is no fault of instructors, but I'd say schools are all too often "behind the curve" when it comes to technology. If a student truly WANTS to learn film photography then by all means put them in that class. However, film is on the verge of going by the way of the dinosaurs.

This comes down to what has been a constant tug-of-war in "traditional education" for at least several decades. That is the question of whether a student should be receiving an education or job training.

There is nothing wrong with either one of those. But neither is a good substitute for the other.

I lean toward education, but them I'm a grumpy old man.