The BEST Film Camera to Buy Right Now


Jay: Today, we’re gonna take a look at film
cameras, and what we suggest if you’re looking to buy a film camera, and, kind of, some ideas
which ones you should get and applications, right? Kenneth: Yeah. I mean, the great thing about film is there
are so many different cameras at so many different price points to do so many different things
in so many different formats, you have a lot of choices. But the downside is that sometimes you don’t
really know where to start if you’re not into it. Jay: If you’re not sure, if you’ve never shot
film, you’re gonna have a… It’s a pretty confusing thing to get going
on. So, here’s a couple of suggestions. So my number one camera… We’ll go back and forth. My number one favorite camera in the world
is the Hasselblad. Kenneth: It’s a great camera. Jay: Yes, it is. So 500 centimeters, these run about $1,000
for this whole set up to $1,400. Fabulous for doing weddings. Fabulous for… Not exactly a… Kenneth: It’s not a fast camera. Jay: No, not a fast camera. It has no meter. So the downside of this camera is there’s
no meter. You got to view find it, get a look into the
top of. So if you get it up high, it’s hard to get
in there and look. But, the upside is beautiful, sharp images… Kenneth: Beautiful. Just…yeah. Jay: …on that size lens. You got to interchange the back and the back
so you can change it out… Kenneth: It’s PDF format, so very clean. Jay: PDF format, very clean. So you got that large 120, that medium format. You get 12 shots in a roll. Kenneth: The thing I love about Hasselblad
is the square image. It’s so unique. I love it. Jay: So there’s no horizontal. There’s no vertical. They’re just square. Kenneth: I’ll start in with a budget option
for my number one camera. This is a great starter camera if you’re getting
to film, but you’re not sure you wanna invest too much. It’s a Canon AT-1. The more common version is the AE-1. They’re both around about $200. It does have a meter. It takes a battery. It has basically, anything you need in a basic
film camera. Shoots 35 millimeter. Great starter point. The great thing about Canon FT lenses is they’re
all super cheap. You can get a full set of lenses for just
like $1,000. It’ll be great, yeah. Jay: Wow. So it’s easy to pick up a lens and it has
a couple of lenses with it. Kenneth: That might be a little bit of exaggeration. The thing about it…the advantage is the
cost. So the Hasselblad is gonna run you, you know,
$20, $30 to develop 12 images. This is gonna run you $20, $30 to develop
36 images, so. Jay: Much different. All right. My number two camera is… I just think it’s so vintage. This old twin-lens reflex. You’re looking down here. You’re focusing one lens to be able to look
through, one lens to take the picture. I think these are fabulous. Kenneth: I love them. Jay: Again, it’s 120 film. So you’re getting a 120 image. These run about $400, $500. Kenneth: Really? Jay: Well, these I saw lower in the $200 range
on eBay. But if you want just a really… Kenneth: Super fun experience. Jay: This is really, a vintage experience. Kenneth: Again, medium format camera. You’re gonna get about 12 exposures per roll,
and there’s no meter, so be prepared. Jay: No meter. Kenneth: But really fun. All right. My next choice would be, I don’t have it with
me, but the Canon F1. So the Canon F1 is a step up from this. Canon F1 is like a real professional-grade
camera. Still, all the same, you know? You can get one that’s full mechanical without
a meter, or you can get one that’s electronic with a meter. The F1 is what a lot of photographers used
in, like, the ’60s and ’70s if they’re going to, like, Antarctic or something like that. Because it’s mechanical, and you don’t need
battery and you can just shoot it whenever, but it’s also still lightweight. You can get winders for it as it goes really
fast. You’re gonna get that for around $300 or $350
if you wanna go for something a little more robust than this. Jay: All right. I seem to be leaning towards the vintage cameras. My favorite camera ever made, bar none, is
a Speed Graphic. I think the Speed Graphic is the coolest camera
ever made. You see, any film from the ’50s, ’60s, everybody
shot new stuff on Speed Graphics. It’s a 4 by 5 camera. You shoot 4 by 5 negative film… Wait, you shoot 4 by 5 film in this thing. So you got the big film backs that go in the
back. It collapses… And it’ll take me too long to… Collapses into just a little box here, but
this is a great camera. I know several universities that I have spoken
at that are still learning on this camera. They buy them and they are very… They’re worker’s cameras. They’re great to carry around. They’re pretty light. Kenneth: That 4 by 5 negative too, is amazing. Jay: Huge. Kenneth: In my opinion, you’re gonna get more
quality out of your 4 by 5 negatives than any digital camera will ever be able to get. Jay: Oh, yeah. I mean, that’s an incredible image size. But it’s pretty expensive. You’re now costing you… Kenneth: Twenty dollars for one exposure. Jay: You’re getting up there. Is it really $20 for an exposure? Kenneth: Oh yeah, yeah. Jay: So, when you calculate the film and the
processing? Kenneth: Oh, yeah. When you calculate the film it’s gonna be
like $23 for an exposure. Jay: Oh, my. Well, I was shot this a long time. I actually have four of them. I just love the Speed Graphics. I think they’re the greatest camera ever. They’re just the coolest looking camera. Kenneth: All right. My next recommendation is the Pentax 645NII. So, this is the last medium format, digital
camera that Pentax made before they moved to digital. This was started manufacturing, I think, 2001. And the great thing about it is very shootable,
very friendly. For people that are used to shooting digital,
you have all the bells and whistles on this. You can choose spot metering, evaluated metering,
spot focus, interface focus. Jay: So you got a meter in that, unlike my
Speed Graphic which has nothing. Takes a picture. Kenneth: This shoots three films per second. You have exposure compensation. You can go… Like, all the bells and whistles in a camera. Jay: It’s a great camera. Kenneth: It’s a great camera, very good for
shooting, like, weddings and events. I would say this is the best wedding or event
film camera that’s on the market right now just because it’s so fast. The one downside is you don’t have removable
backs. So you can’t… Jay: So the whole back come out slow there…yeah. Kenneth: Yeah. You have to pull it out and load. You can’t swap out black and white and color
at will. You have to shoot through your whole roll
and then change it back. Jay: Which is the advantage of the Hasselblad. You can have a back for color… Kenneth: For sure. For sure. Jay: …back for black and white. Kenneth: But other than that, great camera. The lenses are really nice, and this whole
thing is gonna run to you about $1,000. It shoots a 6 centimeter by 4 and a half centimeter
image, so you’re gonna get 14… Jay: So you got a vertical and horizontal? Kenneth: Yeah, it’s vertical and horizontal. You get 14 images per roll. Jay: Well, I’m gonna step up to the camera
that I shot everything that’s in my book called “The Slanted Lens.” I mean, I shot 4 by 5 forever. This is a Sinar F camera, which is their basic,
bottom of the line. Sinar was the king of 4 by 5 view cameras
in the ’60s, ’70s, ’80s, ’90s. I mean, it was really the master. The P… I can’t remember the name now, P or P2. Kenneth: P2, yeah. Jay: P2 was like a $4,000, 4 by 5 view camera. This is much cheaper than that. You can buy these now, just the body, for
$300 or $400, then the lens, you know, even less for the body. So you can get in to this set up here for,
I don’t know, $500 or $600, maybe $800 at the most. Kenneth: I love this. I love this for portrait. If you have the time, you have the setting,
I just love using it for portrait. The lenses are awesome. You get the nicest back in the background
for the 4 by 5. And it really just makes you slow down and
work for your image, which is a great thing in a world where it’s just like click, click,
click, click, you know, adjust, adjust, click, click, click. Jay: The back of the back flips up vertical
or horizontal so it can go either way, and it’s easy, you know. It’s not considered a field camera as in you
can haul it up on top of a mountain. It’s a little heavy for that. There are some more 4 by 5… [crosstalk 00:06:57]… Kenneth: …would do it. Jay: Yeah, he probably would. Probably take an 8 by 10 up there. So there you go, the Sinar F. Kenneth: All right. So my next recommendation is not with us. It’s the Pentax 67. So the 67 is a little similar to this, but
it’s much older so it doesn’t have the bells and whistles. It has a really cool wooden handle. That’s probably my favorite part about it. No, just kidding. It looks cool. The thing I like about the 67 is its very
large exposure. So you’re larger than the Hasselblad because
you’re a little bit wider… Jay: So you’re doing 10 frames on a roll. Kenneth: You’re doing 10 frames on a roll. Jay: That’s right. So this is like the RB or the RZ. Kenneth: Yeah, exactly. So you do have a horizontal or vertical, but
it’s just a mass of negative. But it’s not quite the Hassel that like a
4 by 5 is. I like it because it’s like as big as you
can get with your negative before you have to, like, really jump into this. Jay: It’s a massive camera, actually. Kenneth: Yeah. It is really big. Jay: It’s like a big whale on your hand. Kenneth: So the downside to the Pentax 67
is the weight, and the size, and the limit of exposures, and it’s much more mechanical. It doesn’t have all the electronics and stuff. So it’s not a speed camera, but really great
for beautiful imagery. Jay: In the day of film though, compared to
a Hasselblad, when you went to the RB or the RZ, you just got this almost…it’s a 3×4
almost, and so it’s just a really big negative and a compact, compact, and a… Kenneth: It’s relatively compact. Jay: Yeah, relatively compact body. Kenneth: You could travel with it. You could travel with it. And in some ways it’s a little bit flatter
than this, which is nice, but those are gonna run you around $1,000 too. Jay: Okay. My next one here is the Nikon. This is the F3, and I shot a million things
on the F3. This is a great film camera, and this is an
excellent camera to carry when you are on a trip along. Kenneth: The nice thing about these old Nikon
film cameras is you can use your same lenses. So if you’re shooting Nikon right now, go
buy a Nikon body for $300 bucks, and you can use all your lenses. That’s great. Jay: And you’re on the go. You’re right. It’s fabulous that way. Yeah. Oh, that’s excellent. Kenneth: So this is like Nikon’s equivalent
of the Canon F1. They’re like the…yeah, very similar. Jay: Yup. Similar world, but better, so. Kenneth: My last recommendation is a Leica. So I love range finders, and… Jay: Leave the Ferrari for last. Kenneth: The sad part about digital photography
is there are no digital range finders except Leicas. Jay: Leicas. Kenneth: …which cost $3,000, $4,000, $5,000,
$8,000. Jay: $10,000, yeah. Kenneth: So, this is a Leica M2. People consider this to be the most classic
Leica. It wasn’t their first one. The M3 was their first one. But the M3 didn’t have any frame lines for
35 millimeter. It was 50 millimeter or tighter. So this has 35 millimeter, 50 millimeter,
and 90 millimeter frame lines. It’s a range finder so you’re not seeing through
the lens, which means you have to use a little prism to make sure you’re focused. It’s a really different way of working, but
I personally love it. I love the fact that you have frame lines
because you can actually see what’s going on outside of your frame, so you can anticipate
things a lot better. It’s very quiet. So between those two things, it’s really good
for street photography. The body alone, for like a good one that you
can count on, probably gonna be about $1,000 unless you get lucky. Jay: Still $1,000. Kenneth: And then I bought, like, a cheap
knock off lens. I bought a Voigtlander Nokton 1.5, so it only
cost me $450. But a Leica 50 millimeter lens is gonna cost
you minimum, $600 for like a 2.8. If you wanna get like an actual nice Leica
lens, it’s like a Summicron or something, you’re looking at $1,600 to $3,000. So, not for the faint of heart. If you wanna get into film at a cheap price
point where you can still shoot lots of exposures and not spend a lot of money, 35 millimeter
cameras are great to look at. Maybe not necessarily the Leica, but I mean,
Nikon and Canon both have great budget offerings. Jay: And if you look around, your grandma
has one of these at her house, like, probably right now. Kenneth: Yeah, that’s probably true too. Or in a thrift store. Jay: Yeah. They’re everywhere. So a great entry point, those walk around
cameras to shoot 35. I think when you step up into weddings, I
think you’re better off into the Hasselblad or into the 645. Kenneth: Yeah. I would say most professional applications
these days if you wanna shoot medium format, unless you’re really looking for a gritty
feel. But yeah, I love the Pentax for its, kind
of, auto capabilities, I guess, but I really love the Hasselblad just for the lenses and
for their square format. Jay: Although, if I were shooting weddings
and I was a hybrid shooter, I would probably shoot digital, obviously, hybrid shooter. And I would just hang a 35 on my hip, and
I would just click off couple of shots every so often, and you would get some pretty interesting
things in that. It feels very candid, very interesting. So there would be an application there, for
sure. But if you really wanna get in to, like, great… Kenneth: Serious film photography. Jay: …serious…yeah. And great scenics, very staged portraits,
the 4 by 5 can’t be beat. It’s just a beautiful, beautiful look. And I think it’s worth stepping into and playing
with, so. We need to do that. We need to do some 4 by 5 portraits here on
the Slanted Lens. Kenneth: We should. So, post your photos on our Facebook group,
and tell us what you’re using. Tell us what cameras you like, and keep those
cameras rolling. Jay: Keep on clicking.

100 Replies to “The BEST Film Camera to Buy Right Now”

  1. I know we forgot to mention a bunch of great options in this video. There's just so many! Leave a comment with some of your favorites ⬇️

  2. Seriously – you didn't mention the Nikon F? Are you kidding? it's a tank of a camera (I am still shooting with mine that I acquired used in 1970). I'll never forget being in line at Marty Forscher's Pro camera repair shop and hearing the guy in front of me ask Marty what 35mm camera he'd recommend; Marty went in the back, came out with a Nikon F body and SLAMMED it down on the counter. No harm to the body – it was fine! 'nuf said…

  3. I consider myself a "hybrid" shooter, digital for weddings, but analog for all else (portraiture, landscapes, etc.). I love my RB67 (even though it weighs a ton), and the 6×7 images can't be beat (even by full-frame digitals…Medium-Format digital is another story, but I doubt I can ever plunk down $15 grand for such a setup). There are still commercial photographers using film (especially 4×5), as large format offers more precise perspective control, which can't be achieved otherwise.

  4. I don't care what film camera you use you hit the nail on the head. It makes you slow down and think of the image your creating.

  5. You can’t really use modern Nikon glass on old film cameras because the G series lens doesn’t have aperture ring . But you can actually use those old lens on your modern Nikon digital cameras as fully manual lens

  6. I started a couple months ago on a Nikon F2. It's been a blast. I just need to buy a proper scanner for negatives and I'm set.

  7. Best manual focus Nikon film camera; FE2 with MD12.Superb balance with 100% metering and impressive sound from the serious motor drive.
    Best AF film camera would be the F5.

  8. I still use a Rollei 35S for color and Rollei 35T for black and white. Superb build quality – Singapore version just as good as the original German. The Sonnar lens on the 35S is extraordinary. The Tessar on the 35T is no slouch either – sharp as a samurai sword. Not a rangefinder but zone focusing. Great for street photography. A poor man's Leica.

  9. I have a 500CM.  Also two RB67's, four Rolliflexes, three Yashica-mat 124. the original Canon F-1, six Nikon F2's all with motors, three F3's, three F's, many Nikkormats and FM's, Fujica 6×7 and 6×9 and 6×45, and a hand full of point and shoots, including by beloved German made Rollei 35's.  Konica!  Their lenses are fantastic!!  The best camera is whatever is in your hand.  Thank you for this video!

  10. why not comment about the Olympus cameras? those cameras like the om 1 for example where the best 35mm cameras of the 70s being super small and light with a amazing viewfinder. can still get them really cheep and the amazing lenses that are also super cheap.

  11. Nice video, guys. But you should have mentioned that the AT-1, unlike the AE-1, has no auto exposure modes. It is a manual exposure only camera. Which is a good thing, I think. But still, you should mention the difference between the AE-1 and the AT-1.

  12. I'd prefer a Mamiya C330 instead of the Yashica-D…and I've used both. Good range of lenses on the Mamiya.
    The Hasselblad 500CM stands out for me as its a total system camera, that allows you to swap film mid shoot..not forgetting polaroid backs if can still get the film.
    In the UK at least. the Nikon F and F2 were the workhorses you'd take to the north pole.

  13. Very limited amount of cameras. Loads of cheaper options that are just as good. Someone is getting ripped off along the road

  14. Fun video….SinarP2 and X, along with RZ67Pro2…All replaced by my iPhone X…JK! ya right! 😛

  15. 67 is not really much heavier than the 645Nii, and I'd argue it handles better (though that's clearly subjective). Glass become heavier, but they can share lenses with an adapter and auto-aperture is even preserved on the 645. Huge weight and bulk savings if you shoot both (clearly, I do) and eliminates any issues one might have with a lack changeable backs. Both cameras on site, sharing lenses, two different films in each for each situation. It's not massive or bulkier, it's just a completely different shape.
    If you want the 645Nii bells and whistles (many of them anyhow) the 67ii is the clear choice.

  16. For what it's worth (regarding the Leica and RF cams in general) I've just never understood the oft-touted "you can see and anticipate outside the frame". I've used many rangefinders and many SLRs and other, and I've never felt limited by any of them. Most any photog has both eyes open much of the time and can see things entering the frame that are outside. I understand the sentiment, but I've never felt it deserved the repetition it gets. RFs are great in some ways but that one is reaching. You mileage may vary.

  17. I scored a Minolta XD11 in perfect working order at a recent garage sale for only $2! I spent an hour cleaning it up, and I need to replace the light seals, but what a good find. It came with the Minolta 50mm f/2 MD lens. Can't wait to start shooting it.

  18. I picked up a black Nikon FE body on craig's list, in pristine condition, for $50. The AI prime lenses are a bargain, too, but I have a full complement from my newspaper days. I love shooting rich b/w images and color slides with this. The meter is excellent and it will go to more than 1/2000 second if you put it on auto.

  19. Love the idea of the video and the cameras.
    I love shooting film and using the rz67proII, yashica mat 124 and Leica r.

    Some remarks.
    Prices are very high. And probably store prices. Just go to any fleamarket and you buy cameras including lenses for 10-15 euro. (20 dollars).

    I mostly advise m42 cameras to starters. You have awesome lenses for less than 50.00 a piece. I have a series of zebras which are razor sharp and amazing in quality and bought them for anywhere between 5-60 euros.

    Zeiss and takamur are highly recommended.

    The nice thing if you're shooting sony is that you can mount these lenses also on a techart module and make them autofocus (did a review recently on that one on my channel)

    Prices of developing are too high in the video.
    In the Netherlands we pay 3-4 euros per roll and I developed one in the USA at unique photo (New Jersey) for I believe $5.00 took them 700 seconds 😉

    If you shoot film scanning yourself is key. An ok scanner will set you back less than 200.00 and a great scanner nowadays is around 500-900. I use a reflecta mf5000 and it's literally amazing what it pulls out of film.

    Another great camera btw is the minolta series. It has autofocus and sells really cheap. The nice thing for Sony shooters is that you can use the same lenses on your digital body. It's an incredibly cheap way to.get into shooting sony. The minolta glass is very good and often auto focus.

    Love the channel but wanted to add this.

  20. Post processing is a wonderful thing. I've noticed film has her in a white dress, while digital has her in a cool blue toned dress.

  21. Pentax K1000.
    In the long run these are going to cost more than digital because a good film will run you £8, $10 and developing another £8,
    I think there is a nostalgia phase at the moment for the 30+ year olds but once people realise why digital took over so fast they will drop the film and let those cameras gather dust.
    I've done more photography in two years with my digital than I did in 20 years with my film camera.

  22. Smart guy….. Nikon better that Canon F-1 -…. oh come on, if smashing out statements, tell why you say it, and just dont talk BS.

  23. $20 to $30 for 30 images?! Who is developing your stuff? You’re getting ripped off if you’re dropping that much cash on one single roll of film.

  24. That was the NEW Canon F1 (different model than the Canon F1) and compared to others of the same generation it was a footnote, eclipsed by even the lowly Nikon FM and FM2. It is/was a painful camera to carry and operate. Before I'd haul that weight, I'd tote a Pentax 645 or even 6×7 and blow your images away.

    WTF, $20 for a 4×5 exposure? On what planet. Pentax 645N2 is nonsense, the standard 645 sacrifices nothing except the price of the lenses double. I guess if you are blind and can't focus and need the camera to do your work for you, OK, but most people are served much better by the standard 645. S-aye-Nar, repeat it after me, There is no "E" in the name, lameoids. The one you are showing is an F (field model) and no better than any other 4×5. Move up to a P or higher model and the tilts are geared so they stay in parallel, THAT is what made them special. I can guarantee you I've shot more 4×5 through a Sinar than you have 120 film and probably more than your 35mm total and speak from experience.

    Rangefinders SUCK. Why would you want something that gives you lines in a viewfinder (but only for specific lenses) over an SLR which actually SHOWS you what is in the frame? Oh, want to see what's OUTSIDE your frame? Why, its irrelevant, its OUTSIDE your frame! If you really care, use an SLR with zoom, zoom out, check, zoom in, take your shot. Infinanetly better. Not to mention you are not GOUGED for the lenses.

  25. I'm confused about something here. When I started the video, the first thing I noticed was the Graflex camera. As an aficionado, owner, and user of a '49 Pacemaker Speed Graphic I was excited. I said "Oh nice, they have a Speed– wait, that looks like a CROWN Graphic." Then when Jay picked it up he called it a "Speed Graphic," and I said "wait, it IS a Speed Graphic?" But no, it's not:

    https://i.imgur.com/7Xtw1PJ.png

    I'm curious why the Crown was referred to as a Speed. Was the Crown a stand-in? Or was this just a simple mix-up?

  26. $20-30????? WHO IS ACTUALLY SPENDING THAT MUCH ON PROCESSING!!!???? I spend MAYBE $9 a roll at a lab if I have to, but usually less. Process it yourself and you'll be spending maybe 30-50 cents on a single 35mm exposure max. Even the 4×5 sheets I have processed at my local lab don't run me more than $7 after you include the cost of the sheet!

  27. Great dynamic between these two because they're each missing what the other brings to the palette! Awesome guys thanks

  28. The Hasselblad was built to perfection by hand, one at a time, but the coolest part is definitely that square view. If I remember correctly each camera was built start to finish by one worker. No, I’m not saying only one person built all of them I just mean that the worker who started it would be the only hands assembling it.

  29. Actually I like my Makina 6×7 rangefinder with a Nikon lens (105mm). It's super sharp and I also have a Fuji 6×9 rangefinder with a 65mm lens. It, too, is very sharp; it has a Fuji lens and between those two I don't need to carry the 4×5 Zone VI field camera everywhere. But I have to admit I still like the Rollieflex I learned with and that is the easiest to carry around because it is so light and the optics are superb for black and white which is what I shoot now.

  30. I have a Minolta SRT 101 That I’ve had a lot of fun with over the years, and still shoot some with today. And, I have an Argus C3 that my dad gave back in the 70’s. I took it to New York in 1977 and got some really good shots.

  31. Fortunately I'm old enough to have had film cameras around growing up.( I'll officially be the big 50 this year) It forced you to think about the shot you were taking and get it right the first time. I would like to find a film SLR camera again and use 35 mm film again.

  32. Two cameras any film enthousiast might want to try out:
    Olympus Mju 2. Offers SLR quality level, but fits in your pocket. Prints up to 1m (3ft) wide get razor sharp, and the auto-everything works quite well.
    Agfa Box 33. Yes, box camera. No settings. It has something that resembles a viewfinder but hardly functions. Takes 6x9cm negatives. Objectively it is utter shit. But it is extremely satisfying when you make some contact prints in your light-proofed bathroom, without needing an enlarger. The 6x9cm prints are small enough to look sharp too. Aside from that, it is very relaxing to not be able to control the exposure, focus and such – or worry if the autofocus has chosen the right thing to focus on.

    Some people would include the Olympus Trip. I found it very disappointing. It is very easy to use, but it doesn't do anything better than average. The pictures it producers are a bit dull and muted, both sharpness and color-wise.

  33. Speed Graphic with a 90mm Schneider Super Angulon 90mm and a 6×9 Roll film back is my ideal or a Linhof Baby 6×9 with 65mm and 105 Schneider lenses. The Linhof is easier to find in Europe.

  34. Mamiya 6 and Mamiya 7.
    Interchangeable lens rangefinder cameras. 6×6 and 6x7Not cheap because David Bailey uses a 7.

  35. I still have my first serious 35mm camera: A 1938 Leica IIIa w/collapsible 1950's 50mm f/3.5 Elmar. The original was an uncoated Taylor-Hobson Xenon f/1.5-9, which is soft, fuzzy, and heavy. My first serious 35mm SLR was a Nikkormat FTN, and the modern version, Ye Olde Nikon FM-2 is still in the inventory. A Rolleicord V was my first serious 120 roll film TLR.

  36. did he actually say the f1 is still light weight ???? what prey tell is he comparing it to a , dumper truck ? 🙂

  37. I have dozens of great film cameras in my collection, but no way am buying a roll of good black and white film for 20 dollars and then developing and negs and a disc , not a chance, maybe with a medium format Pentax , but 35, forget it. You would need a lot of money to burn , and it is a burn. You are overpricing half these 35s.

  38. yawn. two hipsters talking about machines they learned about on YouTube themselves. Video is titled the best film camera to buy right now…but they don't say. To the young hipster…there is a reason rangefinders did not take over the market–they were inferior cameras. Period. Every hipster loves to proclaim their adoration for Leica. But Leica did not shoot most of the pictures in TIME or NatGeo or most other magazines. That was left to Nikon SLR's and Hasselblad for a reason–rangefinders were inferior. Leica makes beautiful lenses and the worst possible interface to use them in photography. The best film camera to buy right now is any 35mm manual camera from Minolta, Nikon, Pentax or Canon with a normal or 24-28mm lens. End of story.

  39. Wait, what did he say? $20-$30 to develop a roll of 35mm? It costs me £2.60 for a roll of film (or £5.00 if I want to push the boat out and use something special) and £3.00 to develop. If I could be bothered to develop myself it would be a lot less.

  40. if you want to learn real photography, you have to use a fully manual camera, the camera I still use and adore is the Zenit B, no light meter on it, just a very basic, yet rewarding camera, if you need a camera with a light meter go for the Zenit E or EM, and where possible, get the Hellios lens, I have the Industar 50mm f3.5 on mine and love it.

  41. Mamiya RB 67 with KL and APO lenses is my number one . Large 6×7 or 6×8 negative wich make possible to use less sharp films but with a long tonal scale and still a nice darkroom print . A real film fan does not scan and print with a inkjetprinter , but enlarge in a darkroom on FB silver paper .

  42. First of your videos I have viewed. Love the background. Have started shooting film again with a Nikon F2. 50mm 1.4 lens which I purchased in early 70s. Have been shooting medium format with a Yashica Mat 124 and just purchased a Mamiya C330. Shooting B&W film.
    Now a subscriber.

  43. My Advices :

    Mamiya C (22, 220, 33, 330) are amazing portrait cameras easy to carry everywhere with no mirror shake so great for handheld medium format portraits.

    Bronica GS-1 67 is an amazing system with leaf shutter, the lenses are beautiful and well designed

    Mamiya 7 rangefinder : amazing for street photography

    Nikon F100 : one of the best 35mm cameras ever made, and every digital AFS lens works on it.

  44. I love my 2×3 century graphic, and my Yashica 635 . But really unless you're a rich person you don't shoot film. It's that simple'

  45. Why is this entitled "to Buy Right Now"? This gives the impression that you are reviewing contemporary film cameras, whereas all of the mentioned cameras were fairly old models. Manufacturers are still making film cameras and it might be worth reviewing those.

  46. СМЕНА (SMENA) is the best film camera. Fully mechanical and cost like 20-30 $ equivalent here.

  47. Someone may have said this already, but the Canon F1 does have a meter. It's a match needle type. The newer version, the F1n or New F1 also has a meter. You can operate both cameras without meter or batteries if you want.

  48. why would you put up the pentax 645 niii and not mention the original pentax 645? it has removable backs, tons of lenses and can be found with a lens for under 300 bucks

  49. 20 dollar for one 4×5 exposure? What kind of dollar are we talking? The most expensive sheet film is Fujichrome Velvia at US-$ 89.99 for 20 sheets ($ 4.50 per exposure) while you get Arista EDU Ultra 200 Black and White at $ 49.99 for 50 sheets ($ 1 per exposure). (Prices from B&H). The costs for the development are a fraction of the film price. — I find it a bit of a shame that you make such nice videos but then spread false information, which may confuse "newbies".

  50. “No digital rangefinders” oh yes there is! The Fuji X100F or Fuji XPro series are both high end digital rangefinders.

  51. I still have my old Pentax MZ something 35mm Camera, and have a Mamiya 645 Pro TL and a Mamiya RZ 67 Pro II, and I’m on the market for a field 4×5, but they’re still too expensive for me. Basically I’m buying all cameras I always wanted when I was young but couldn’t afford. I love shooting film but it’s expensive.

  52. The folding agfa record is a great camera. Very stripped(manual) but produces and amazing 6×9 negatives when you're dead on with exposure.

  53. Choose a format that fits your creativity, and print workflow. Also, the available lenses that give you the best distance to subject, and feel of lens (Fujinon soft-focus, wide angle, macro lens.) for portraits, or paint-like landscapes. Not every lens needs to be sharp. In choosing lenses, remember that vertical vignetting "might" be ok for portraits for lockettes, or mini-wallet prints.

    Rectangular formats 35, 120, 5×4, 10×8 formats will provide the most use in composition using the Golden ratio, or Fibonacci sequence.

    If you're thinking about getting a film camera, I recommend getting Polaroid, or Instax wide format to learn composition first. This way it prevents you from wasting money over the years thinking that you'll get better by shooting thousands of dollars of film. Learn composition on instant film!!

    Learn classic art composition, Golden ratio, Fibonacci sequence, meaning of color, shapes, posing models, body movements, positions, how light, and shadow is used in cinema.

    You could have the newest Press cam, best Hassalblad, or Sony A7 R4

    *If the Composition is bad, it doesn't matter what gear you have*

  54. I guess you are missing the iconic Spotmatics/K1000, the variety of 6×7 camera's and a whole host of other options, only to pick the most snooty expensive choices for beginners. Leica for a beginner? Really?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *