equipment planning

[Markster]

For the non-US members, it's also culturally/socially a sign of guilt when one takes the 5th (aka pleads the 5th).

 

[tkamiya]

 

[ntenny]

The body you have is fine and gives you access to a very nice range of lenses. A very cheap and good lens is the 50/1.8. $100 new, sharp and very nice. I can pretty much do almost everything with a 50.

Amen to that. That 50/1.8 lens might be the best bang for the buck of any modern lens on the planet. (I do think the 50/2.5 "compact-macro" is better when used in manual focus, but it's more expensive and the autofocus is kind of cranky.)

Contrary to what some others have said, I think you should run out and buy this one lens; shooting with a fixed focal length requires a little bit of discipline, and IMHO what you learn while developing that discipline is an important part of the core of photographic skills. (Also, I just think it makes sense to spend your money on optics rather than mechanics most of the time.)

I love the older FD stuff, but I don't think you need to rush to it. It's out there if you ever feel the need for something more viscerally manual, or stumble on a bargain.

-NT

 

[Rol_Lei Nut]

While I agree there's no need to rush a purchase, keep in mind that if you plan on using the camera manually, the EOS system is far from optimal for manual use.

A more "dedicated" manual camera can be nicer to use and, especially, give much easier and more accurate focusing if chosen well.

 

[Markster]

Why not the EOS? Does it not have a viewfinder? You can peer through, adjust the focus, change the f stop, etc? Or is it all going through an LCD on the back like a DSLR or something?

 

[hpulley]

There is a top LCD for times when you can't look through the viewfinder but it has a real viewfinder.

Manual settings aren't too bad on the EOS cameras really. My old EOS 650 is a pain as it doesn't show under/over exposure in the viewfinder but the top LCD shows it, odd... My EOS-1N is very nice in manual mode however, full meter in the viewfinder, separate aperture and shutter speed controls, spot metering.

I still prefer an FTbN or my RB67 for manual work. Even my AE-1 kind of gets in the way for manual settings.

 

[ptschantz]

Guys, thanks for all the input. The EOS allows for manual operation, it just isn't as simple to make adjustments as an older manual only camera (hence the original question). I'm looking now at getting a tripod, some filters, and when possible a 'nifty-fifty' (50/1.8). After that I'll probably hold off on any more camera related purchases until after getting a darkroom / processing setup and a lot more experience under my belt.

I'd like to say thanks again for all the input. This is definitely my favorite online source of info!

Pete

 

[Jeff Kubach]

I like the old Canon FD system. Either the F-1 or the FTb.

Jeff

 

[ptschantz]

Thanks Jeff, I've looked at both of those, definitely contenders when I get another 35mm body!

 

[Markster]

I'd suggest erring on the side of caution. Don't go buying a new camera kit just yet. Become comfortable with the EOS before moving backwards to FD. Then you'll know what you like, what you were missing, or what you now miss, etc.

I think your 35-70mm zoom will work in place of a 50mm prime lens, as well. The 50mm is more of a work-with-what-you-have discipline type of thing. However if you already have that zoom, it's nice. You can just limit yourself to not zooming (willpower?).

Just a conservative opinion.

 

[ptschantz]

thanks Markster, I think I'm on the same page. I might go ahead with the 50mm prime (in a little while) just because it would be more hand for everyday use. I have plenty of stuff to work on getting, so waiting on a second camera won't be a big sacrifice.

Pete

 

[Rol_Lei Nut]

Why not the EOS? Does it not have a viewfinder? You can peer through, adjust the focus, change the f stop, etc?

Short answer: not all viewfinders are created equal and what is good for an AF viewfinder isn't good for manual focus.

Also, *how* you change speeds, stops & so on can make a big difference.

Being *able* to do something and doing it well are very different. EOS cameras *can* be used manually, but that isn't what they were primarily designed to do.

 

[Markster]

Oh, I see. I don't mean to get off-topic here, and as I don't have hands-on with that camera (or many outside my own) I'll bow out gracefully

 

[rjbuzzclick]

I love all-manual, mechanical cameras. A turning point for me with this ELAN 7E I've been given, was to realize that I shouldn't try to force it to be an all manual camera, it's not really set up for it. I tend to use it in aperture priority mode, with either manual or auto-focus. I'm a manual-focus kind of shooter, but the tiny focus ring on the kit lens is not the easiest to grab. Regardless, I'm enjoying the camera more than I expected I would.

 

[MattKing]

I recently bought a Canon EOS 300/Rebel 2000 at a thrift store for $20.00. It came with an EF 28-90mm kit lens. I bought it because I didn't have a 35mm SLR with auto-focus and a built in flash. I think I got a good deal .

To the OP, just a few things to consider:

1) The 28mm-90mm lens I got is quite good for a kit lens, and would give you a bit more usability - especially on the wide end. In my region, they can be had for very little money used;
2) Canon sells two types of lenses. The EF lenses that will fit your camera will also fit on most of the Canon Digital SLRs, although small sensors result in a "crop factor" for all but the top range full format bodies. The Canon EF-S lenses will not fit on your camera, because they are designed for a slightly modified mount, and to cover the smaller sensors on most of the Canon DSLRs;
3) Older, non-auto-focus Canon bodies and lenses used an FD mount, which is incompatible with your camera;
4) Your camera can be used with other non-Canon mount lenses, via adapters designed to put those non-Canon mount lenses on them. That's good for someone like me, who has a reasonably diverse set of good non-Canon lenses, but I lose a lot of the functionality, such as auto-focus; and
5) There are a number of 3rd party manufacturers (Sigma, Tamron, etc.) who make lenses that will fit your camera, as well as Canon DSLRs. Some of those lenses are excellent, but it can be really confusing when you are trying to determine whether a lens can be used on a film body, or is restricted to use on the smaller sensor DSLRs.

I too recommend that you stay with what you have (or maybe a 28-90 instead of the 35-70) until you have a better idea what you like.

Welcome, and have fun!

 

[ptschantz]

Thanks again for all the responses! I'm going to shoot what I have (with the possible exception of a 50mm prime) for the time being, and concentrate on getting set up to develop / print.

 

[ptschantz]

I just wanted to let you all know that your responses have reinforced what a great site this is. I have become a subscriber so I can help support this awesome resource.

 

[Soeren]

When I bought my Nikon F90X I got the 28-70mm F/3,5-4,5 kitlens for it. At the time my main interest was nature, close-ups and landscape. After learning with the zoom for a while I found the right solution for me was getting a 24mm wide and a 105mm macro. Then after a while I got a 50mm instead of the zoom. I think that having a descent zoom lens covering the normal range the best move would be getting lens doing some of the stuff your zoom doesn't. get to know your camera and then find out what you really miss. Some people are into very small dof or lowlight reportage and they get the fast lenses like the 35mm f/1,4 or 85mm f/1,4, some are into wideangle closeups and find the 24mm and 24mm TS lenses are for them. Find out where your photography and interest leads you.
Best regards

 

[ptschantz]

Thanks Soeren!