Absolute Beginner's Camera

[james_turner6]

<p>I posted a question a month or two ago (<a href="../canon-fd-camera-forum/00Wo68">http://www.photo.net/canon-fd-camera-forum/00Wo68</a>) looking for tips for a camera for my son, who had made good progress with a no-frills manual camera (Pentax K1000 in his case). Now I need a recommendation for a good no-frills manual camera (the light meter on the K1000 having now decided to stop working altogether).<br>

I am after something pretty reliable and uncomplicated - not just so that I can pick it up quickly enough to be able to teach my 9 year-old daughter how to use it, but also in terms of being able to buy batteries for it without having to rewire the camera. And, yes, preferably with working built-in metering, too (I am not going that far back to basics. Yet.)<br>

Many thanks in advance.</p>

[SCL]

<p>Try a T50 - they're cheap and really work surprisingly well.</p>

[james_turner6]

<p>Thanks, Stephen. But the T50 is auto-everything (unless I've missed something). I'm after auto-nothing!</p>

[barryreid]

<p>In the FD world I think you'd either be looking at an FTb, which will work without batteries or an AT-1 which won't.</p>

<p>Personally, I'd suggest the AT-1 as tends to be very cheap and, given the age of the intended user its more compact and lighter than the FTb. Batteries are same as the A-1 and other A-series bodies (Except the AL-1 which uses AAAs).</p>

[User_502260]

<p>If you are looking specifically for a Canon FD type camera then you have many choices. The FTb, FTbN and EF cameras are all old enough that if you buy one you will need to spend $100 to $125 to get it overhauled. The FTb and FTbN both have depth of field preview, which the K1000 does not have, mirror lock-up, which the K1000 does not have and limited area metering, which the K1000 does not have. There is no need to rewire either camera. There is the MR-9 adapter which will allow you to use regular MS-76 or 386 silver oxide batteries. I will stop here to say that you could send your K1000 in for service. In most cases when the meter stops working it's because the wire which connects the battery chamber to the meter mechanism. That's an easy repair.<br>

The EF is harder to find and more expensive. It will accept alkaline 625 batteries so no rewiring is needed there either. The EF has a more sensitive and faster acting silicon meter but it is center weighted and not limited area like the meters in the FTb and FTbN. The EF also offers shutter priority automation and a hybrid shutter with slow speeds battery dependent and other speeds not battery dependent. The EF allows you to see both the selected shutter speed and the recommened f/stop in the finder. The FTbN allows you to see just the shutter speed and the FTb allows you to see neither. The EF also has a flash synch speed of 1/125 rather that the 1/60 speed of the FTb and FTbN.<br>

This week I got a second EF and also a Vivitar V3000S. The Vivitar is very different. It's much lighter, made with a lot more plastic, but still has a vertical shutter, flash synch at 1/125, a top speed of 1/2000, a self timer, a real glass pentaprism and a sensitive meter. I paid $20 for it along with a 50/1.7 lens and a Vivitar 2800 flash, all in good working order. The Vivitar has the plain K mount. I tested both cameras with film and they both work. The only thing I could find fault with was the spacing between frames. No frames overlapped but spacing did vary. Cameras like the V3000S offer a lot of shooting ability for the money, especially if you get them used, but are more lightly built. In my inexpensive SLR collection I have K mount SLRs with the Vivitar V4000S, V4000 and Promaster names. All other things being equal I would rather use an overhauled FTb, FTbN or EF than one of these other cameras but all of them are capable of good results. The Vivitars were made more recently and are less likely to need work. They are also very inexpensive. Even an advanced 9 year old should be able to learn using one of them.<br>

Some other cameras to consider if you are willing to have a camera overhauled include the Nikkormat FT2 (MS-76 battery), Nikkormat FT3 (MS-76 battery), Minolta SRT 100, 101, etc (MR-9 adapter), Canon TX (MR-9 adapter), Canon TLb (MR-9 adapter). I always thought that a depth of field preview feature was helpful for teaching purposes and this is the main thing missing from the K1000. My only inexpensive SLR with that feature is the Promaster 2500PK Super. </p>

<p> </p>

[richard_cook2]

<p>I would get an AE-1 because they are cheap and plentiful and use a readily available battery and then use it in manual mode.</p>

[steven_endo]

<p>I would go with an F-1N with the FN finder. It fulfills all of the requirements of the OP: simple full manual, easy to find battery, reliable, and uncomplicated (as long as you don't bother with the system accessories, at first). AND it has the added bonus of being a camera a beginner can "grow into". They are readily available and prices range from $200 ~ $1000 depending on condition plus $100 for a CLA. I realize it sounds almost blasphemous to suggest a "professional level" camera for a "beginner" but for the prices you can get a nice used copy, it makes good sense to me.</p>

[t._kim]

<p>I can't see a 9 year old girl happily lugging around an F1N or EF.<br /> I cut my teeth on the AE-1. I believe Canon sold a few hundred billion :) of these so it shouldn't be too hard to find. It's cheap, light, takes readily available batteries, is solid state, and reliable. For manual operations, my preference is to go with the original, not the program model. I believe there was a post here about handling the A-body "squeak" if yours ever gets afflicted. In over 25 years, none of my AE-1's have ever squeaked btw. Even with gummy seals, they still work well. YMMV of course.</p>

[mfophotos]

<p>A Pentax ME is a better camera than the K1000, and in the hands of a 9 yr old, a better choice, and not all that different from an AE-1, but smaller. FD-wise, I would go with the Canon AL-1.</p>

[james_turner6]

<p>Thanks all for your very helpful comments and suggestions. Forgive my ignorance, but what is the difference (if there is one) between an FTb and an FTb QL?</p>

[User_502260]

<p>The QL or Quick Loading system was introduced in 1966 with the FT QL. It carried over to the FTb and FTbN. All FTb and FTbN cameras have the QL system. When you open the camera back a mechanism which draws the film into the take-up spool pulls out from the right side. You pull the film across the fim plane and over the sprockets and then close the back. With a few click and advances the film loads properly. The FTb is from 1971. In about 1974 an improved model called the FTbN was introduced. It added a window for the shutter speed in the viewfinder, a plastic tip on the film advance lever, a black plastic self timer/depth of field preview lever and a few other changes. The FTb has a microprism focusing aid while the FTbN offered an optional split image focusing aid. Both models are marked FTb and QL but it is easy to tell them apart.</p>

[thomas_ryan2]

<p>James, I own the FTb, there is no difference, there is only the FTb, QL is short for quick load. As far as I know every FTb is quick load, it lets you put film in the camera simply by laying it across to the spool then closing the back, a piece of metal on a spring holds the film against the gears where it will be wound. </p>

[steven_endo]

<p>T.Kim-<br>

Yeah, I guess I forgot about the weight aspect.</p>

[Lou_Meluso]

<p>James, look at the Canon T70. I just got one for one of my students in good shape, with a third party zoom, for $30 from eBay. Light weight, bright finder, uses regular AA batteries. Body is plastic but seems rugged enough. It has different metering and exposure modes and an on-board motor winder. A built in molded grip makes it easy for small hands to hold. For the money, it's a perfect student camera. Of course, it uses all the Canon FD lenses and a slew of third party lenses as well. </p>

[h_s1]

<p>For manual cameras that are reliable, economic and simple to use, I would go with FTb QL.</p>

<p>The A series cameras have this little problem that one cannot switch between lens' "A" mode and DOF view mode and back without making sure that the aperture is fully open once. This quirk can create confusion in young minds, especially when one sees "EEEE EE" in A-1 viewfinder's display, for example. It is a bit simpler to fix in a T-90, but that is a heavy camera. AE-1 is even worse IMHO, there is no feedback that the exposure won't be correct if that quirky procedure is not followed.</p>

<p>The T-50 is auto everything, but it is one heck of an auto-everything camera. I was very skeptical at first, but after having shot a roll or tow several weeks ago, I was pretty impressed. I haven't used T-70, but perhaps that might be a better option, since it has manual modes.</p>

<p> </p>

[james_turner6]

<p>HS, thanks for the heads-up on the EEEE problem with the A-series cameras: I had been wondering why my A1 (bought after I last sought buying advice on this forum) did that from time to time.<br>

Louis, thank you for the suggestion of the T70. For two reasons, though, I am still leaning FTb-wards: (i) my daughter is inclined to be idle: it'll be GOOD for her to have to wind on herself! and (ii) if I am honest, the collector in me just likes the idea of an FTb more than the T70. She'll graduate in time to an A1 and then a T90 (as and when I get around to getting one), and eventually (of course) to a modern makes-the-toast-too digital camera, by which time she will hopefully have gained the understanding of DOF, metering, shutter-speed and focus - not to mention taking time and care over her composition before she presses the button - which this exercise is all about. And then I'll be left to look at whatever I bought her in the first place ...<br>

Many thanks again to all for your input - valuable tips all round!</p>

[barryreid]

<p>The FTb is a decent choice but big and heavy. I still think you should consider the AT-1. I know it's not much loved around this forum but it works well and as a fully manual body. It also has match needle metering in much the same way as a more compact K1000, but with the added benefit of DOF preview. It's also as far as I can recall unaffected by the stop down issue mentioned above.<br>

PS in spite of being a long standing FD user (20 years +) I reckon the best beginners manual only body ever is the Pentax MX but that's probably because that's what I learned on back in the day.</p>

[james_turner6]

<p>Thanks, Barry. I PROMISE I'll check out the AT-1.<br>

I've always fancied a Pentax MX, y'know ... so who knows ...</p>

[h_s1]

<p>As Barry mentioned, you definitely should consider the weight of the FTb as an important factor. It is heavy indeed! It is one thing to take pictures around the house when you pick it up only for a few minutes. It is totally different to take it around on a trip.</p>

<p>Edit: I think Barry is correct regarding the "A" <-> DOF switching problem not being there in the AT-1. The reason is simple: AT-1 does not have Tv (shutter priority program) mode and the FD lenses cannot be used in "A" mode at all. No switching between "A" and DOF mode on the lenses possible. Fully manual camera!</p>

<p>I wonder if, apart from not having the auto exposure modes, the AT-1 is same as AE-1 or A-1 mechanically?</p>

[h_s1]

<p>When I wrote above that AT-1 is a fully manual camera, I meant that it does not have any auto exposure modes. It still requires a battery to function though.</p>

<p>Regarding the Pentex option, I think Pentax lenses can be used on all of their cameras, i.e. their lens mount has not changed. So the same lenses may be used on old manual SLR cameras or on newer digital SLR cameras without problems. Please correct me if I am wrong.</p>

<p> </p>

[paul_de_ley]

<p>I wouldn't hesitate to give a 9-year old a T70 as a starter camera. It autoloads and autowinds with even the plainest of AA batteries, covers all the essential modes from pure manual to pure auto so leaves room for growth & exploring its functions past the absolute basics, is well built so will survive some accidental rough treatment, and is cheap enough that it's no tragedy to replace if it does get terminally dropped or such. Kids these days expect lcd screens and buttons on just about anything, so with a little help they have no problem figuring out a starter camera that is not purely mechanical.</p>

[t._kim]

<p>The AT-1 and AE-1 are almost exactly the same. Two notable exceptions are the AE-1 has AE (shutter priority) and a more sensitive meter (EV 1-18 versus EV 3-17). Specs taken from the Canon museum. They were both release in 1976 to different markets.<br /><br />I would otherwise suggest one of the T-series bodies, but c'mon, they truly are ugly beasts ! I would imagine a 9 year old photographer would be swayed by how a camera looks. At least the A-bodies look nice, don't you think?</p>

 

[paul_de_ley]

<p>Well I would respectfully agree to disagree on both points :)</p>

<p>Having grown up with an AT-1 I would not rate it as particularly close to the AE-1 in operation, not least when it comes to the viewfinder. The needle matching of the AT-1 was simplicity itself to me while manual setting of the aperture with the AE-1 always seemed a bit clunky by comparison. On the other hand the AT-1 provides little or no room for quick impulse shooting whereas the AE-1 allows for spur-of-the-moment shots with minimal preparation, or quick shooting with impatient people or groups with short attention spans.</p>

<p>In terms of esthetics I often have the impression that ugly for me is pretty/cool for the younger generations. The T70 looks like it might come out of a remade scifi movie or pc game.</p>

<p>Plus it took me quite a while as a 12 year old to learn to load the film correctly AND to consistently check that it really is properly loaded, to wind after each shot so as not to be caught out "clickless" after careful composing, to rewind the film roll immediately when finished etc. Forgetting any of those was often annoying and sometimes discouraging, especially when I forgot to rewind before excitedly opening the back!</p>

<p>I think the easier loading and autowinding of a T-series body is more likely to keep a young novice enthused until they are really familiar with the actual photography side of things, and if you want to make it more attractive to her you could easily let your daughter embellish the plastic surfaces of the body to her own taste with stickers etc.</p>

[rick_janes]

<p>Does this 9 year old girl have strong arms and big hands? I'm thinking "no", so why not something smaller and lighter for her...an Olympus OM for instance? Something a little more proportionately sized...</p>

[james_turner6]

<blockquote>

<p>Does this 9 year old girl have strong arms and big hands? I'm thinking "no"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Er, yes, actually: she's at least the size and strength of your average 11 year old. But it's a fair question, to which the answer is that I have a fair amount of FD glass, so that maintaining interest by varying focal lengths etc. will be a tad easier than it would if I went OM. <br>

I showed her pictures of the AT-1 and the T70; she did prefer "the silvery one" ...<br>

I agree that loading and unloading film and forgetting to wind on and all that stuff is frustrating (I feel frustrated even now every time I forget to reset the exposure correction dial), but I also think that's part of the learning process.</p>