Thomas,
Try the library for a copy of Kodak's "Joy of Photography".
It is a good basic primer on cameras, lenses and how to use them.
As to 35mm cameras, you have to ask yourself what features you need/want. AF/MF, motor drive or crank. Prices are all over the place depending upon condition.

You might try sites like Keh or B&H to see what the price ranges are for used cameras. Be sure to check the prices of the lenses you may want.

Quote:
Thomas,
Try the library for a copy of Kodak's "Joy of Photography".
It is a good basic primer on cameras, lenses and how to use them.
As to 35mm cameras, you have to ask yourself what features you need/want. AF/MF, motor drive or crank. Prices are all over the place depending upon condition.

What would you choose if you were a college student with a limitied budget for a camera? I know I want mf. Would you choose motor or crank? Why?

Thomas,

John Hedgecoe has written a number of excellent books on film photography, including one for the beginner like yourself. I can highly recommend Nikon and Canon cameras. I myself am a Nikon fan, but I don't think you can go wrong with either brand. There are many other good brands, like Pentax. But those three are the ones I am most familiar with.

Frans Waterlander
frans2001@netzero.net

Quote:

Quote:
Thomas,
Try the library for a copy of Kodak's "Joy of Photography".
It is a good basic primer on cameras, lenses and how to use them.
As to 35mm cameras, you have to ask yourself what features you need/want. AF/MF, motor drive or crank. Prices are all over the place depending upon condition.

What would you choose if you were a college student with a limitied budget for a camera? I know I want mf. Would you choose motor or crank? Why?

opps this was done by me .

Motor or crank?

the choice depends upon what you shoot and how. If one shoots landscapes, the auto advance/motor seems unneccessary, to me. If you are shooting sports or fast action, the motor may come in handy, but you can always learn to time your shots. Which is what was done in the olden days. Come to think of it, in the really olden days the sports guys used 4x5 Graphic cameras, not exactly known for fast handling.

So I guess I would forgo the motor. Not having one mAY help you to learn the nuts and bolts of photography faster.

Just as an aside, you can keep your printing costs down with film by getting it developed only with a thunb nail cintact sheet. the best part of digital is being able to learn from the pictures, but not having the expense of printing.

Ronk,

I will say what most people do not think of when starting into photography is printing and developing cost. Digital is a great learning tool before you make the choice to use film. If you have a computer and a 100 dollar ps program you can learn much from digital about exposure light limits and basic photography. I used digital before I invested into film. I shot a couple thousand images on digital and learned a lot. Most of what I learned came from working with the images in photoshop. Digital and film or two different formats,but a lot of the basic rules apply to both. As many know here at this time my choice is still film,but I have to admit a lot of my fun comes from working on them in PS. It is always hard to recommend any camera to someone because each of us have different needs. Sports photographers or wild life photographers have no use for an all manual camera,but a landscape photograher demands that kind of control.I think when starting out it is important to not start out with a camera that will be so difficult to use that you lose interest before you discover how creative you can be. Monte Johnson.

A little confussion on the last post. It was mine. We must of tried to post right at the same time. Monte Johnson.

I guess I see myself using the camera for taking pictures of landscaps mostly. I have been reading alot about cameras and Pantax K1000 seems to have everything I need. Like its fully manual, metal body, somewhat inexpensive, and a good camera. Does anybody have an opinion on Pantax in general and espically the K1000?

I learned photography on an older variation (SP-500) of the same camera. It's also the camera that schools have recommended for more than the past 20 years for students to work with to build a good photography background.

But a potential problem as I see it, is that you shouldn't shut yourself off to learning about digital photography at the same time. Or at least understanding that the best digital camera techniques are the best film camera techniques. Low ISO (film or digital camera settings), proper exposure and using a tripod will give you the best images that the camera is capable of capturing.

To learn about composition, you should look at every photograph in books and magazines and think about how and why the image was taken. Think about how they can be improved. Analyze the elements within the frame carefully.

On the first roll of (black and white) film I ever shot, I put the heads in the center of the frame and didn't think about composition until I tried to make a print. I learned right away to pay attention on how the image was composed in camera so the rest of the process became easy. Do it right in camera and it will simplify your darkroom work, whether chemical or digital.

The Pentax K1000 is a great camera. If you go to KEH you can pick one up in EX condition for under 200 with a lens. The Minolta X370 is another camera I used and it can be had very cheap. center weight metering which is pretty good. Nikon FE2 can be had pretty cheap. Which ever camera you decide on you want to make sure the camera meter works. I understand the budget thing. You are on the right track if you are just doing landscape photography. The one thing I might add is if you have no experience with cameras you might look at one of the newer canons or nikons. I perfer Manual focus and manual control, but it is nice to have a camera with some of both. Monte Johnson.

Sorry THomas, I did it again. I was not logged in when I posted the last post. I also would like to know if your interest is BW or Color. When shooting BW the older lens work good for that, but for color the newer coated lens produce better color. If you are doing BW I think the K100 would be a great camera. I have never owned one but know people who do. I do not know but you might want to check and make sure the batteries can be still had. Monte Johnson.

If you had a choice between a Pentex K1000 SE and Minolta K700 which would you choose and why? I went to a camera store and the guy selling the camera said the Minolta had a better prism which made makes taking pictures alot easier than the K1000 SE because its was a lot darker. This guy said Minolta had a better and wider selection of lens comparied to the K1000SE, is this true? Basically, the sales man said the only reason to buy 1 k1000se was out of Nostalga(sp) like if you grew up with the camera and now you want one again as a adult...

Do you think anything this salesmen said was true about the k1000se and k700? Which camera do you think is better? Why?

If I had to choose between any two cameras, I'd pick them both up and see which felt better in my hands. That may not be the easiest thing to do in this Internet mail order age. So I'd suggest checking return policy of the store you're considering purchasing from.

The X-700 was a system camera. The X-700 had PROGRAM, APERTURE PRIORITY, and MANUAL MODES. It utilized an OFF-THE-FILMPLANE FLASH SYSTEM with the 280PX and 360PX flashes. The flashes could be used off camera via cords, limited to 3 flashes, and still maintain flash control at the film plane. It could use a motor drive (MD-1) and also a auto-winder. It also had a data back, an IR-1 remote controller, Power Grip II, and last but not the least around 50 someodd MD lenses. Oh yes, at the time it was Minolta's top-of-the-line camera I believe until the autofocus series started.
While it wasn't a pro grade camera it was a very good performer. Some of the MD lense can still be bought new.
As for the view finder it was brighter than most, I did compare it to Nikon's FG and Canon's AE-1. I still like it better than my FE2, FM2N and my EOS 10D.
I did not own the K1000 camera but it was a very popular camera. The K1000 was Pentax's base camera. It was built for years like the X-700 was and will probably go down in history as a classic. Maybe someone can state some of the K1000s features for you if you have not had the chance to study the camera.
As for which camera is better, the better camera is the one that fits you and your needs. You may very well end up with several different types and makes to fit your needs as I and many other have done.

The K1000 is a very simple camera and mechanically controlled. If the shutter isn't wornout they tend to be very reliable. Not much in the way of advanced metering, as I recall to turn off the meter you had to replace the lens cap each time. Pentax eventually stopped making them only because the tooling wore out!

The Minolta X-700 is electronically controlled and has much more sophisticated metering. As a tradeoff it has had its share of reliability problems, particularly with leaky capacitors and a somewhat lightly-built film advance mechanism. X-700 always needs batteries to operate and will not hold its shutter open without them, so it's not a good choice for night photography. I wasn't aware they were still being made.

Sorry to hear you've had problems with your Minolta. I haven't had any prtoblems with the four I've owned of which I still have two. My XK still work great wish my eyesight did. I had to switsh to Minolta's 800si's of which I have two because I have a hard time focusing. Thinking about giving the XK anf X-700's to my son he'll be 12 next summer. I did buy him a Kodak digital with printer dock for Christmas. Sorry I didn't catch your name?

I wouldn't let my ego get bruised over a camera, Warren. If you like your X-700s and they work well for you, fine. But this is a mass-produced camera and there is a history out there of problems with this camera that potential buyers should know about, yes? The X-700 and some other X-series Minoltas had problems with leaky electrolytic capacitors that are well-known among camera repair techs and their owners, so it's rather useless to pretend otherwise. They last about 5-10 years and then leak out over the circuit board, resulting in camera lockup. Often ruin the board as well. The film advance and transport uses more plastic than some other cameras, even the film rewind arm is plastic. Plastic gets old, brittle and breaks.

The Chinese and Malaya built models (later X-700 production) have more electrolytic and fewer tantalum caps.
Also, per Mike Linn there is some shutter curtain detachment on the Chinese-built models due to locally subcontracted glues to adhere the cloth curtain.

EG:
"I have a Minolta x-700 that has a problem. Film advance lever will not operate. (Moves only about 6 degrees and stops.) Installed new batteries, no life in camera. No led's, nada. Where to go from here? Received thiss camera as a gift. No batteries in at the time. Installed batteries (correctly), turned camera on, no life.

Sometimes, it helps to remember that you never hear from all the happy campers, just the relatively few who have had problems. And even with those few, there's no way to tell how many of the problems resulted from abuse by the present or previous owners. This isn't just about the X-700, or my EOS 20D, or any camera, but about everything - TV sets, washers and dryers, cars, you name it. If everyone gave too much credence to the complaints, no one would buy anything! If what you have works and you're happy, ignore the paranoia and keep on keepin' on......

Have a good day, whomever you may be. I know that I shall.

We'll have to disagree. I think people who would look at cameras objectively would want to find out if any parts or design flaws makes them susceptible to malfunction, so as to determine the validity of such complaints. By actually opening up a camera or two and finding the reasons that one camera model in particular suffers from parts failure, one can help others to repair it, or from getting the same problem when making a purchase. That's what I like to do. I never can figure why that irritates people so much, unless they've got something of themselves invested in a old used camera. I find it troubling that those who dismiss the listing of a camera's warts as minority criticism never actually open up a broken camera or two themselves to investigate the issue.

So I'll turn Bill's argument around: If no one ever honestly bothered to investigated problems with mass-produced items for unusually high repair rates, how would anyone ever tell when anything was amiss, until the item broke down on them?

But since no one has done a recent objective study on old Minolta camera failure frequency, or is likely to take the time to speak with any camera repair shop techs, all I can do is point you to an X-700 message board for X-700 owners and enthusiasts: www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/ messageboard/minoltax7007kimsg/index.php3

There are 52 PAGES of comments. Normally, these would be statements like 'great site' or suggestions for improvement. Instead, on page after page there is "My X-700 locks up, won't work with fresh batteries, what can I do?" Wonder why that is?

Anonymous,

Unlike automobiles there is no government mandated recall program for cameras. To some extent you make a valid point. Mass produced products sometimes have inherent weaknesses. If they are severe they usually effect customers in significant numbers and the company gets the message and makes either design or manufacturing changes as quickly as possible. With some weaknesses they only show up after a long period of time. Most cameras purchased by enthusiasts do not get a lot of use, so it may not fail until it is several years old, which seems to be the situation with this model Minolta issue.

However the other side of it is the internet now with all of the photography forums, which is like a magnet and funnel, sucking in all of the problems and making an issue seem to be a significant camera model problem. But when you actually look at the number of complaints even though they take up pages of commentary on the web, what percentage of all the products of that kind sold does it represent?

In mass manufacturing there is a margin of error involved. A certain small percentage of examples of any and probably most products will just barely meet the minimum performance standard and pass inspection. So if a thousand individual products turn up faulty or even fail, is it significant if 100's of thousands have been manufactured and sold. Does that thousand that were manufactured and only met minimum standards really reflect on the 100's of thousands that exist in a way you and I should be concerned???

All of which is missing the point entirely. You all seem determined to avoid a discussion of the known problems with X-700 components, and more interested in some speculative diatribe over statistical occurrence - which is unknown and unknowable since there are no recent objective surveys around I've seen that relate to individual camera models. Of course you could always ask someone who works on these older Minoltas for a living (hint, hint).

If you are just a person interested in purchasing a used camera, you probably aren't interested in speculation over repair percentages, but would want to know that the X-700 is a first-gen electronic SLR camera that has had problems with capacitors and certain parts of its internal construction, that it utilizes an older fabric shutter and sleeve bearings that require more maintenance over the years, and that Minolta isn't supporting the camera anymore. Knowledge is good, right? If nothing else, to perhaps have the camera checked out before purchase, so as not to end up plaintively haunting the camera repair forums, searching for a new main circuit board and 400uf capacitor replacements...

So a camera model that's over 20 years old sometimes has some problems. Gee, what a shock. What's that Latin phrase? Oh, yeah.....caveat emptor.

Actually, I guess the news isn't all that bad. Here's a website I stumbled across with posts from some of those "happy campers" I mentioned earlier. They even have names....

http://www.camerareview.com/templates/reviews.cfm?camera_id=158

"So a camera model that's over 20 years old sometimes has some problems. Gee, what a shock. What's that Latin phrase? Oh, yeah.....caveat emptor"

Translation: "I didn't like your comment on X-700 reliability, no matter how patiently you explain it or back it up with facts concerning the camera's design and parts. I own it, it works for me, it must be superior."

You still haven't grasped that all older manual electronic cameras do NOT all have the same frequency or severity of breakdowns. There are factual reasons behind that. It's pretty simple. If you are buying an older electronic SLR, it will go farther, longer if you get one with higher quality electronics, tantalum caps, all-metal film wind gearing and stress-bearing motive parts, bearing mounted metal shutter - it's going to last longer without breakdowns, and require less maintenance. If the camera is redesigned and offshored later on to cut costs, and quality further suffers, that's not good either. Simple as that. You may not care. That's fine. Someone buying an old manual SLR for the first time, like Thomas, might.

The comments I posted are from real people, with real names. The mir.com X-700 board has 52 PAGES of complaints about the X-700s locking up if simple numbers of malfunction reports matter to you, I see that facts don't.

The horse is dead, as they say, and it's time to quit beating it.

Bill,

Yes that horse is pretty dead indeed. I think Mr. Anonymous should maybe switch horses. He seems to think people have not understood his message. They do, but they have said OK that's good to know, now let's get on to something interesting.

Anonymous,

I have to agree with you that not all SLRs (and any other products) are created equal in terms of their long-term reliability. It is often very difficult to find this kind of information, especially for photo equipment. It would be nice to have a database for photo equipment like Consumer Report for cars. If I want to buy a used car, I look in the April Consumer Report issue and find detailed information about the reliability of cars based on thousands upon thousands of user inputs. If you are aware of something equivalent for cameras, be it on the internet or otherwise, please share that information. It is very much appreciated.

Frans Waterlander
frans2001@netzero.net

youve probably gotten a camera by now but the canon eos rebel k2 is good its about 200$ new with a 28 TO 90MM lense at target, walmart,etc.

I'm not trying to beat that poor ol' dead horse anymore, but this discussion does remind me of a funny X-700 story:

I was managing a small camera shop at the time the X-700 was released as the latest "gee whiz" program SLR. A kid who worked at the store bought one (brand new) and had it fail about 4 times, each time sending it to Minolta for repair under warranty. Each time it came back working (briefly) and each time Minolta told him they could find no problem and that the camera was functioning to spec. The last time he sent it in, SMOKE had been coming out of the camera! He still got it back with a message that it was functioning to spec! He quickly sold it while it was still working and bought a used Nikon F3. The Nikon was a non-smoker.