Where to buy affordable film cameras

[Alan W]

You can get a Canon t70 and a 50mm lens for $30 or less if you have patience.It's a great camera and a 50mm lens that is second to none.You can get a Nikon n90s for less than $20.The canon AE 1 has become an expensive camera in recent times and the K1000 has always been sought after,which keeps prices high.As has been said above-Minolta and Nikon cameras from the eighties are cheap,new enough to work properly and readily available.I bought a Minolta maxxum 7000 last week on ebay with a 50mm lens and a 28-85mm lens for $32 shipped to me.

 

[ciniframe]

When you say"back in the 60's and 70's", are you talking about the 1800s or 1900s? The photo history books that I have read have led me to believe that "wet plate" was probably over with by 1900. Many of the cameras that people in this group buy and use come from the 1960's and 1970's. Maybe some of the younger members of this group need to read about the history of photography also. It really is quite interesting and usually only covers a period beginning in the 1830's....Regards!

My point was, current technology is electronic sensors. Yes, film is still available but photography should be able to be learned with a digital camera. Now, if one wants to teach how to use film with 35mm cameras then thats fine, the knowledge will transfer to some extent. Another good reason to teach a course with film cameras is to introduce a younger generation to the joys of film. But to learn about lens aperture controls and why you would choose one over another, how that would affect your choice of shutter speed, selective focus, and depth of field, etc. These could be learned with a DSLR that allows for full manual control and the feedback would faster in the limited class time allowed. I'm just not sure what inherent advantage other than initial cost, that a basic 35mm SLR over a basic DSLR. Now granted, initial cost is 10-15X or more greater if pricing a new DSLR but a Nikon D70 can be had for a $100 and a standard 50mm f1.8 AF Nikkor can be had from B&H refurbished for $100 so there you have only a 7X initial outlay. And it's getting harder to source reliable full mechanical 35mm SLR's for $30 with lens. So, the difference in initial price may not be more than 2X-4X.

 

[Sirius Glass]

My point was, current technology is electronic sensors. Yes, film is still available but photography should be able to be learned with a digital camera.

The ability to chimp will effectively kill any learning about light reading and camera settings.

 

[ic-racer]

I got my N55 from KEH for $7. Looked brand new, 3 years of use and still going strong. For example check offerings for Nikon N70, you can get them for $1.99 to $5.00 if they are sticky.

 

[ic-racer]

My point was, current technology is electronic sensors. .

That is like saying current technology is air travel instead of car. Digital sensor has nothing to do with film photography or even this forum. So why mention it and pollute a thread titled "FILM CAMERA."

I'm going to correct you: Current film technology is not any form of electrical sensor.

 

[btaylor]

Ha! Back in the '60s 70's we learned on... wait for it... fully manual 35 mm slr's and rangefinders! So that hasn't changed. It was all about learning f stops, shutter speeds, DOF, etc just like today. B&W 35mm because it was cheap.

 

[albada]

Most of the replies referred to SLRs, because that's what the OP mentioned, but here's another idea: rangefinder and viewfinder cameras. There are many cheap ones out there from the late 50s through the 70s, and they let you manually set aperture/speed/focus, so they should be fine for teaching photography. Even the lowly Kodak Pony would be fine for that. But you won't have interchangeable lenses with them.
Mark Overton

 

[ciniframe]

The ability to chimp will effectively kill any learning about light reading and camera settings.

No, it wouldn't. If a friend came to me with a DSLR and wanted to know about aperture and shutter speeds and DOF I could set up his camera to teach him the basic controls and how they can affect the final results. I'm sure any of us old film dogs would have the same ability to impart this knowledge. I would hope none of us would reply; "OK, but first go buy a film camera or I won't help you"
Now, as I noted, if someone is interested to learn about film so much the better. There is value in younger folks learning about our passion for film, and the advantages peculiar to the medium.
I like film. The cameras I like take film. It would probably be easier to, because of their simplicity, teach the mechanics of photography using old film cameras. That said, there is nothing holy and pure about film and a lot of folks here have both film and digital.

 

[ciniframe]

There is one more point I'd like to make about 'affordable film cameras'.
Don't worry about spending more than $30 on a film camera. Get a nice camera you can enjoy for a while, especially if you keep taking pictures using film. The thing is, at $5+ a roll for 36exp. loads (or about the same for a roll off 120 ) film cost, even if you do your own developing will quickly add up to much more than you paid for a basic 35mm SLR. If you get into darkroom work paper, and chems, cost money, and although you may find hardware at give away prices (or even free), it still adds up to many dollars quickly.

 

[blockend]

Questions like these make me wonder. Back in the 60's and 70's did photography instructors ask where they could buy wet plate cameras cheap?

The OP may not be a full time photography teacher, but is probably delivering a photography module to a school class. State school budgets for such things are tiny. A friend of mine taught a one off class last year at a very modest price, and the teacher told him his fee had wiped out the annual budget for such activities. That's the reality of public education today.

Finding old cameras that work reliably, and the time to check that is the case so students won't see film photography as a chance ridden activity, is for the committed. Would you spend hours testing a camera, replacing seals, and doing in twenty times over for someone else to use? That's why donation programmes are so important if film is to be seen as a creative medium for youngsters.

 

[Ste_S]

The OP may not be a full time photography teacher, but is probably delivering a photography module to a school class. State school budgets for such things are tiny. A friend of mine taught a one off class last year at a very modest price, and the teacher told him his fee had wiped out the annual budget for such activities. That's the reality of public education today.

Finding old cameras that work reliably, and the time to check that is the case so students won't see film photography as a chance ridden activity, is for the committed. Would you spend hours testing a camera, replacing seals, and doing in twenty times over for someone else to use? That's why donation programmes are so important if film is to be seen as a creative medium for youngsters.

I'm all for trying to get a new generation into film, but if budgets are tight, then why not teach with the kids own phone cameras ?

 

[BrianShaw]

Hi! I teach Photography, high school, where can I buy affordable film cameras, like Pentax K 1000, or Canon AE 1? I was hoping around $30 each. Thanks!

Have you put out a request to the school families asking for donation of un-used film cameras they might have tucked away in a closet?

 

[Neal]

Dear Mars,

Include the Yashica FX series in your searches, particularly the FX-2.

Good luck,

Neal Wydra

 

[Mars]

Why do you need to buy $30 cameras to teach photography now? How were you able to teaching photography before?

If the $30 is for an affordable film camera body, how much are you willing to pay for lenses?

Since many high school students use cell phones, why can you not teach the principles of photography with what they are actually using?

Long story. But, the kids love film. Digital cameras have to stay at school, they cannot take them home. Subject matter is then limited. I have done work on cellphones, but it is not as engaging for them. Like I said, they love film.

 

[Mars]

My point was, current technology is electronic sensors. Yes, film is still available but photography should be able to be learned with a digital camera. Now, if one wants to teach how to use film with 35mm cameras then thats fine, the knowledge will transfer to some extent. Another good reason to teach a course with film cameras is to introduce a younger generation to the joys of film. But to learn about lens aperture controls and why you would choose one over another, how that would affect your choice of shutter speed, selective focus, and depth of field, etc. These could be learned with a DSLR that allows for full manual control and the feedback would faster in the limited class time allowed. I'm just not sure what inherent advantage other than initial cost, that a basic 35mm SLR over a basic DSLR. Now granted, initial cost is 10-15X or more greater if pricing a new DSLR but a Nikon D70 can be had for a $100 and a standard 50mm f1.8 AF Nikkor can be had from B&H refurbished for $100 so there you have only a 7X initial outlay. And it's getting harder to source reliable full mechanical 35mm SLR's for $30 with lens. So, the difference in initial price may not be more than 2X-4X.

The kids love film. DSLRS have to stay in school, they cannot take them home, we only have a few. So, they end up all having the same pictures of our campus. DSLRS are not as engaging for them.

 

[OlyMan]

Yashica FR-I. Frame counter will probably be broken but that's par for the course.
I also agree with the view hesitantly offered by a few others that film cameras are probably now the slowest method to learn the fundamentals of photography; with digital you can see the results of your efforts immediately. There must be a truckload of ten year old digital bridge cameras on the used market all with M, A, S & P for $100 or less that would do the job, The price of film and D&P will quickly catch up with that, even if you do find a nice $30 film SLR to give you a $70 head start. But OP didn't ask for an opinion on whether film or digital was best, so I again offer these thoughts just for consideration.

 

[destroya]

twice a year there is a camera show in hayward and another in fremont that has lots of used equipment. but prices are going up and selection getting thinner.

Craigslist sometimes has good deals but its mixed in with people thinking there stuff is worth more than new today so you have to sort thru lots of repeat posts. the good stuff goes fast so be ready to reply and buy the same day.

not many used camera store left in the bay area, the best being keeble and shukat but they closed, so now the big one is seawood in san rafael. KEH has good quality stuff with the best retunr policy out there, they really stand by their stuff. but prices have really jumped the last thwo years to ebay prices. sign up for their email alerts as they have selective sales on film stuff every few weeks or so.

also, try posting here when you become a subscriber in the want to buy thread.

john

 

[Chan Tran]

To the OP! How many cameras are you going to need? What kind of lens/lenses you think you would need? I think it's not easy but I think it's better if you have all the same cameras and lenses so all the kids have equal chance.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

I'm seeing the price of film cameras going up last year.

But Ebay can be a source. I bought a new cameras through Seattle Goodwill.

http://stores.ebay.com/seattlegoodwill/

 

[dabsond]

+1 on Film Photography Podcast. They assist many educators by donating cameras for schools.

 

[CMoore]

+1 on Film Photography Podcast. They assist many educators by donating cameras for schools.

https://filmphotographyproject.com/donate/

https://filmphotographyproject.com/

 

[Neil Grant]

There are many M42 mount cameras out there that can be found for cheap, brands like Zenit, Chinon, Yashica, Pentax... There are plenty of affordable lenses for them as well. It would probably be more cost effective to stay with one lens mount in case the bodies die on you. M42 bodies can be the cheapest and most plentiful available. Many of them are fully manual and come with or without a light meter.

I've had this M42 Chinon since the 1980's and it still works great, it was heavily used when I got it.

...you need to go unfashionable like this Chinon. I found mine in a dustbin a few years ago and I use it for my vintage m42 lenses like the Helios 44, Domiplan and Lydith.

Chinon SLR by Bryan Chernick, on Flickr


Nikon N60 by Bryan Chernick, on Flickr

 

[Sirius Glass]

No, it wouldn't. If a friend came to me with a DSLR and wanted to know about aperture and shutter speeds and DOF I could set up his camera to teach him the basic controls and how they can affect the final results. I'm sure any of us old film dogs would have the same ability to impart this knowledge. I would hope none of us would reply; "OK, but first go buy a film camera or I won't help you"
Now, as I noted, if someone is interested to learn about film so much the better. There is value in younger folks learning about our passion for film, and the advantages peculiar to the medium.
I like film. The cameras I like take film. It would probably be easier to, because of their simplicity, teach the mechanics of photography using old film cameras. That said, there is nothing holy and pure about film and a lot of folks here have both film and digital.

Great except that time and time again people have told me that when they stopped trying to learn on a digital camera and got a film camera they learned more and faster. Their statement was that they thought it was a waste of time to learn to how to expose on a digital camera. Take up your argument with them, not me. I am the messenger of a message which you refuse to read.

 

[CMoore]

I have taken two Photo Classes at our local college.....i can tell you that the Opinion/Experience of both the Students and The Faculty does not match yours.
For most students, it is Way Easier to learn about exposure with a Digital SLR, for the obvious Reasons/Facts.

 

[michr]

The ability to chimp will effectively kill any learning about light reading and camera settings.

I'll have to respectfully disagree. The ability to review the histogram after taking a photograph is an easy and essential learning tool. It's a fantastic way of closing the feedback loop. Take a picture, look at the histogram, rotate a dial, look at the histogram. There's no more direct way to see how the manipulation of the ISO/shutter/aperture settings affects the actual exposure. Think of the camera sensor as a matrix meter with millions of cells where you can readily see if any cell is over or under exposed.

If thirty years ago there had been a magic box that you could attach to the back of the camera which would show what the histogram does, photographers would have paid thousands of dollars for it and talked non-stop about it. But since it's a part of the digital system, some people think it things too easy. For those who invested all the work into learning the old way, where they had to close the feedback loop themselves through test shots, Polaroids and documenting their exposures, it seems so easy now that the student must be missing something by doing it the new way. But I don't think so.

In the course of a decade or so, film went from "this is how things are done" to "this is how things used to be done". Film used to be with it, contemporary, an essential medium of communication, and now it's not. Now it's backward-looking, and nostalgic. Why force new students to read an old alphabet? Aren't we trying to teach students today's tools for today's jobs, to communicate today's ideas, and prepare them for tomorrow's world?