File :-(, x, )
Ren
Hey /p/,

are there any pros to analog SLR's? and cons? I just found my father's old Canon AL-1, and i would like to start using it once i get better. He also had a few lenses if i remember right

pic related

thanks
>> Anonymous
>and i would like to start using it once i get better.

you've got to use it to get better
>> Anonymous
Please don't call them analog. It's technically correct but you're just using that term to differentiate from digital. dSLR's have a bit of analog in them too. It just gets converted to digital as the image is processed.

Anyway, pros - the equipment is cheaper and sturdier. Certain films have nice effects though that can be replicated to some extent in photoshop. The idea of limited shots encourages you to take good shots.

Cons - film is expensive, again, limited shots, effort in developing

There's a lot more than I've listed here I'm sure.
>> Anonymous
>>223564
If you want to get that technical due to the concept of the planck energy theres no such thing as analog. Everything is digital.
>> Anonymous
>>223560

Pros:
You can get a lot of quality old 35mm SLR equipment cheap.

You don't know what you get until you process the film, so you try harder. Developing a roll only to find out your favorite shots didn't come out right is a bummer, but then you study what went wrong and learn from the mistake.

Cons:
Old cameras eventually die and are not cost effective to repair or parts or no longer available. When your favorite vintage camera dies you'll be more sad than breaking a (now obsolete anyway) DSLR.

Learning by trial and error can be costly. This can discourage experimentation.
>> Anonymous
From my personal experience, I learned much better on film than I did on digital. Especially when I made myself use an old camera. Having to put in the extra effort to focus and properly expose each shot made me slow down and get better images.

I've gone back and forth between digital and film since then, but I still lose shooting film. Plus, grain looks infinitely better than noise, so film is my choice when high ISO is needed/wanted.

If you want to get some beautiful color scans, try shooting a roll of slide film. just make sure you can get it processed...
>> Ren
thanks for all the input. i was planning on practicing with my point and click, and move on once i get past noob level
>> Ren
also, quality-wise, what is the best route to take when developing film? im assuming going to the pharmacy isnt the best option.

also, are camera & lens cleaning services provided? the camera and the lenses are pretty old

thanks all
>> Ren
another noob question, sorry

im checking out the prices of lenses and im wondering if there is a term I can use to filter out the dSLR lenses, thanks
>> Anonymous
>>223593
For black and white, develop your own. For color, find a decent lab in your area. If you're using cheap drugstore film, you might as well develop it at the drugstore. If you're using quality film, find a quality lab to do it.

There are camera and lens cleaning services, but you camera probably doesn't need it. First shoot a roll of film to check for light leaks, if there are none you're probably OK. I believe that camera has an electronically timed shutter, so it shouldn't ever need an adjustment. You can clean the lens yourself unless the inside is full of crap.

>>223595
If it's for that camera, look for Canon FD lenses. EOS lenses will not fit.
>> Anonymous
>you can drive nails with that camera
>> Anonymous
>>223593
1)Develop it yourself
2)Yes, go to your local camera shop and they should offer a service like that. (they'll probably call it "CLA" Or clean lube and adjust)

>>223595
Search for manual focus lenses, or just FD mount (as far as I know FD mount lenses were only manual focus)

>>223581
My 30 year old FM Is still alive and kickin. Even if it does die I can just buy a new one for around $50. I Doubt that any dSLR cameras will be working 30 years from now.

>>223564
Film is relatively cheap if you roll it yourself. 36 exposures is about 5 feet, so I get about 20 rolls per 100 feet, I spend $21 for $100 feet, and I get around 650 exposures. It cost me about $.05 an exposure.

It takes me about 2 months to use up 100 feet, so I spend about $10 a month on film. Thats nothing.

As for chemicals you could just buy some diafine for $15 and never have to worry about chemicals again.
>> Ren
>>223598
yes, its that exact camera, Canon AL-1 QF. thanks for the useful info

>>223598
What is the cost of developing at a lab? Im a college student and dont have alot to spare

>>223602
i really dont feel like handling chemicals, and my dorm situation prob wouldnt allow it

Is tripfaggotry encouraged on this board?
>> Ren
another.

can i just use compressed air to clean out dusty, old lenses?
>> VF-19
>>223604

Depends where you go. Up here in Canada, the lowest I've seen was about 4 bucks for devloping a 24 shot film (1 hour), and it goes up to around 8 bucks (1 hour).

It's not too bad, but if you bring in several rolls of film in one shot, the imediate cost is rather high.

Plus film itself is not too expensive. The best price I've seen was around $10 for a 5 pack (5x24 rolls).

I use a KX for my film shots. It's great.
>> Anonymous
>>223588
This is very valid. I have three rolls of Velvia that Vincent very graciously sent me and I haven't shot any yet because no where around here will process Slide Film. It's just sat in my fridge and I've longed to shoot with it. I've had to stick with shooting Kodak Gold and Fuji Superia.
>> Anonymous
>>223564

The word for "analog" in many languages is also the appropriate word used instead of "film" to mark a non-digital camera, because of the way different idioms arise in different languages and places. OP and most people who say that probably are fluent but not native English speakers who just aren't aware of the idiom used in English.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>223604

Diafine uses 2 chemicals, a developer and a fixer, there is no need for stop bath, and it takes about 3 minutes to develop and 3 to fix, any time over that doesn't matter. you really cant fuck up if you use this chemical. Also you can use it over and over, I've been using the same mixture for about 2 years now. Its dirty looking but that doesn't effect development at all.

You could spent $15 once, or spend $10 for every roll you get developed. You decide.

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Elements 2.0Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2007:06:04 16:20:44Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width125Image Height125
>> Anonymous
>>223654
Please elaborate. That sounds wonderful. I have so much film sitting around but I cant go shoot it because I can't afford to get it all developed.
>> Anonymous
>>223657

Its great, and gives good results, You can develop different speeds of film in the same developing tank because of the universal development time of 3 minutes. The film completely stops developing after 3 minutes. so you can't push process with this developer. You're kind of limited with what you can do, but it makes up for it with it's convenience and price.

Freestyle sells it for about $15 a gallon.
>> Anonymous
>>223661
Hmm... that sounds super neato but it doesn't help my problem of having no where to take slide film. I think I may look into that still though for my Superia.
>> des
>>223665
Use fuji mailers, they're the cheapest and will process any E-6 film. Doesn't have to be fuji.

Some people bitch about the quality, I haven't had any issues with slides coming back scratched or chemical burnt BUT they do use cardboard holders so they're dusty. What do you want for $5?
>> Anonymous
>>223618
Well, I know I have a lab nearby..
(Notice the subtle hinting?)
>> Anonymous
>>223560
If you shoot with SLR then bw film is the way to go.

Buy your film in packs of 10, that way one roll will cost at least 1-2$ less, at least here where I live.

For first few roll buy the cheapest developer available because you will not see any difference anyhow. Fixer and stop bath will last you forever if you dont shoot many rolls per month.

Developing tank is very cheap if you buy one used. If there are any real photo stores that are owned by old photographers you could always ask if they happen to own old developing tank that theyd be willing to sell. If not then head to ebay.

For printing your stuff you should ask local camera group if they have darkroom available for members to use. That way you dont have to spend huge amounts of money to print you stuff. Photo paper and developer are also quite cheap. Again, buy the cheap ones first, smallest paper size will do fine until you know that photos will come out good enough.

If you want to be pussy then go buy some standard drug store C-41 film and get it processed in one hour photo.

I would however strongly recommend that you start with black and white film if you really want to learn something about photography.
>> Ren
>>223811
Are you recommending for me to get B&W film and develop it myself or get it processed?
>> Anonymous
>>223871
If you're shooting black and white, process it yourself. It's cheap, easy, and gives you a lot more control over the end results. It will also teach you a lot about how exposure works.

If you're shooting color, processing at home is a lot more difficult and expensive, so it makes sense to get it done elsewhere.
>> des
I'd prefer D76 over diafine for more versatility. Tri-x+D76 is almost as foolproof if you're not being fancy. It's just personal preference though
>> Anonymous
>>223871
Develop it yourself, I was referring to color negative film when I said C-41 even though there are two types of black and white C-41 films available.

Processing your own film also makes you feel like you actually made those images from start to finish. Its very different feeling that you get by shooting digital and "developing" your images in lightroom or photoshop.
>> Anonymous
>>223939
True, but you'd need more chemicals and D76 can't be reused. I myself prefer D76 as well, though.
>> Anonymous
>>224523
D76 can be reused about three times if you really have to. You extend the development time about 20% (varies depending on many factors) each time.

Why you'd want to do that I don't know. Developer is really cheap.