Is the A-1 a good first film camera to buy?

[mood_lover]

<table id="post16931918" width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="3" align="center">

<tbody>

<tr valign="top">

<td id="td_post_16931918" >

I have a DSLR but am looking to supplement it with a film camera system under $500. I love the look of the portraits these cameras produce, check out this photographer who uses the A-1:<br /> <br /> <a href="http://www.holliefernandophotography.com/in-bloom" target="_blank">http://www.holliefernandophotography.com/in-bloom</a><br /> <br /> I am looking to recreate this film feel but have never used film before and don't know what I should know about it...I am assuming the way it works is I put in a roll (ASA400 for continuous lighting in studio?), expose and take my shots, then get it developed...and then scan the prints? I am not really sure how scanning negatives work.

 

Any recommendations, warnings, articles, etc. are really appreciated.

</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td ><img title="moodlover is online now" src="http://photography-on-the.net/forum/images/statusicon/user_online.gif" alt="moodlover is online now" border="0" /> <a href="http://photography-on-the.net/forum/report.php?p=16931918" rel="nofollow"><img title="Report inappropriate post or spam" src="http://photography-on-the.net/forum/images/buttons/report.gif" alt="Report inappropriate post or spam" border="0" /></a> </td>

<td align="right"><a name="vB::QuickEdit::16931918" href="http://photography-on-the.net/forum/editpost.php?do=editpost&p=16931918"></a><img title="Edit/Delete Message" src="http://photography-on-the.net/forum/images/buttons/edit.gif" alt="Edit/Delete Message" border="0" /></td>

</tr>

</tbody>

</table>

[JDMvW]

<p>My account of a 'new A1' at<br>

http://www.photo.net/modern-film-cameras-forum/00b82L</p>

<p>It's a complex camera with lots of bells and whistles.<br>

For film with AF and AE, you can do a lot worse than an early EOS camera (if you have a Canon EOS digital).</p>

<p>For non-AF, I personally found the AE-1P (Program) much easier to use, and with the same advantages with nFD lenses.</p>

<p>For the cheapest film experience - back to the basics and roots - the old M42 screw-mount cameras like the Praktica L series and others like the Pentaxes are great film cameras and top-rate lenses too.</p>

[flatulent1]

<p>The A-1 almost WAS my first film camera, back in 1985. However I delayed long enough that the T90 was released and I jumped all over that one, something I have never regretted. </p>

<p>Load the film into the camera. That roll of film is a combination of your digital sensor and SD card, with only one ISO option. Otherwise ISO is selected (by choosing a particular film) for the same reasons as with digital. Expose, develop, scan. Depends on your lab. I've been shooting film almost continuously since 1986, and I have no idea if my local lab can/will scan prints. Or what the difference would be. It wouldn't hurt to ask questions, I suppose.</p>

[SCL]

<p>Although I owned and used an A-1 for almost 10 years, I never really liked it. The T-90 I happen to love. I suggest, given your assessment of what you do with film and a film camera, that before you buy an A-1, you take a look at the owners manual (you can view it at www.butkus.org). If you want to download it, Mike would appreciate a $3 donation for all his work in making thousands of manuals available online. The best Canon FD lenses are outstanding, but of course, the results are dependent on the vision and knowledge of the photographer, and the lenses used - very little is attributable to the camera body itself. As far as processing....your local lab probably doesn't process traditional films any more, so you will need to either find a lab to send your film to, or learn how to process it yourself, so you have control over the process rather than trusting somebody else's judgement. It's not like the old days when you dropped it off at the corner drugstore and a few days later got outstanding (sometimes) analogue prints, and the guy who worked the darkroom was usually pretty good. BTW JDM's suggestion of a 42mm screwmount is a good idea...something like a Pentax Spotmatic with a Super Takumar 50 or 55mm lens.</p>

[Lou_Meluso]

<p>Cameras don't take good pictures. Good photographers do.<br>

That said, Canon FD cameras and lenses are good tools. The T-90 I feel is a superior, top-of-the-line camera although somewhat bigger and heavier. It's a pretty sophisticated machine. A FTbn is older, would be more basic and somewhat easier to learn with. Shoot 400 or 100 ISO speed color neg film and take, or send, your film to a good lab that will scan it for you at high resolution. You'll pay a bit more but you'll save yourself the time and trouble of scanning. You have a decent budget, get a few good prime lenses and save some money to have a shop clean, lubricate and adjust (CLA) all your gear so it's in good working order. KEH is a good source of used FD gear.</p>

[Bill C1664885404]

IMO they're an outstanding camera...at my peak in film days I had 3 A1's, with Motor Drives.

Kept them all these years along with a good size inventory of Canon FDn lenses.

Finally resigned myself to the fact that I wouldnt be getting back into film and put the A1's up for sale earlier this year...couple have already sold so the demand says something about them as well.

[User_502260]

<p>This kind of question has come up many times before. I will first say that the A-1 is not my favorite Canon manual focus camera. It has center weighted metering. The FTb/FTbN has 12 degree metering. It's easier to tell what you are metering off of. The FTb/FTbN has an easy to user depth of field lever. The A-1 has a balky depth fo field lever. The FTb/FTbN has mirror lock-up. I don't remember the A-1 having that feature. The A-1 has "factory" interchangeable focusing screens. Strictly speaking, the FTb/FTbN does not have interchangeable screens but I have heard of late FTbN split image/microprism screens being transplanted into earlier FTbNs and even older FTbs. There are accessory winders and motors for the A-1. The FTb/FTbN cameras accept neither. In a situation where the lighting is controlled, the various automatic exposure modes of the A-1 are not needed. The FTb or FTbN is easily repaired/serviced. With the A-1, if you have trouble with the electronics you may not be able to get it repaired. I have two A-1s, many FTbs and FTbNs and a lot of other Canon manual focus cameras, mostly the mechanical ones and the two hybrids, the F-1N and the EF. The FTbN shws the shutter speed in the finder. The FTb does not. Either would be a good start. The T90 is a whole different discussion but you would consider it if you needed a top shutter speed of more than 1/1000. With studio lighting you probably would not use the T90's top shutter speed and with flash you wouldn't be able to synch at a speed that high. </p>

[mark_pierlot]

<p>While I prefer using the T90, F-1, and F-1N, the A-1 is a fine body with many features, not least of which is its switchable exposure modes.</p>

<p>Louis is right about the photographer being more important than the gear. I have gotten good (and not so good) images with all of my FD bodies, including the lowly AE-1.</p>

<p>If I were you, I'd just pick up the body that's in the best shape, get a few FD primes, such as the 35/2, 50/1.4, 85/1.8, 135/2 or whatever, and focus on developing your craft (pun intended!).</p>

[Bill C1664885404]

What timing for this thread...my last Canon A1 just sold.

[pmind]

<p>The AE-1p was my first Canon SLR—but the A-1 was (and still is) my favorite, having used many bodies for many years. For what they cost now, I'd say you can't go very wrong with the A-1. However, I also agree with Louis' recommendations above.</p>

[rick_janes]

A fully operational A-1 will give excellent results, and if you can "fly" a DSLR that film camera should not be too

troublesome...get the manual and READ IT, of course! I also enjoy and prefer the smooth rendering of reality that analog

can produce.

 

Scanning? I find color negs very time consuming personally, with much more fiddling of settings to obtain satisfactory

images...if the money is there, save that work for a lab that does quality scans! Color transparencies for me are a breeze

by comparison...

[User_4136860]

<p>Hi Holly,<br>

I've had an A1 for about thirty years and it's been very reliable, but you need to remember that Canon ceased producing this model around 27 years ago and like all the A series cameras they are prone to the Canon Cough. <br>

http://www.ebay.co.uk/gds/Buying-a-Canon-A-1-What-you-should-know-/10000000000135587/g.html<br>

I would recommend that if you intend to use it professionally you have it serviced before you use it on anything important.</p>

[User_4136860]

<p>I spelt your name wrongly Hollie, I'm sorry.</p>

[mood_lover]

<p>@Ben: I am not Hollie I was just referring to her work because I love her work. Thanks for the advice though!</p>

[robbz_fotoz]

<p>just my two cents ... the A-1 was an original, intuitive camera and complete with easy to read digital settings inside. The A-1 Program was nicely accessorized, the screens could be changed by the user, but still had that dang needle inside. Definitely NOT as progressive as the A-1. My current daily user has no brassing, was recently re-furbed with new mirror foam and had the squeak removed (it's an age thing - remember this cameras was issued in 1978) -- price of the camera with nifty fifty 50mm 1.8 (I do prefer the 1.4 though) with a refurb ? 139.00 and worth it IMHO. Btw, I have the AE-1 Program, and it's a good alternative. If you can swing the cost of both, go for it, if not, make it the A-1.</p>

[robbz_fotoz]

<p>oh, and one more thingie ... the AE-1 program is available in a plethora of silver and black bodies, all black bodies are hard to come by. The A-1 was always black. If that's an issue for you, just saying.</p><div></div>

[jochen_busch]

<p>No, it is no good first film camera buy!<br /> It has to many bells and whistles and handling is so much different from any other camera, that you cannot find any help in the net or books without the original manual.<br /> <br />And be aware: lots of them have a major battery killing problem.</p>

[jamie_robertson2]

<p>The A-1 is not what produces those wonderful pictures. It's the type of film, the photographer and the way the film is processed. Buy just about any 35mm SLR with a 50mm lens and the results will be indistinguishable. A $5000 Leica uses the same film as a $10 Canon EOS 500.<br>

Lens quality is obviously a factor but 50mm primes are all good.</p>

[david_carroll4]

<p>Not sure why you're focusing on the Canon A-1. Even if you're currently using a Canon dSLR, any FD glass you invest in will not be compatible with with your digital system, so pick any film camera you like and get some lenses for it. IMO, if you want to learn film photography, buy a basic manual SLR, a couple of lenses and a notebook. Shoot, record your settings and learn from your mistakes. Any camera will give you good results. If you can find them on line, check out Gene Smith's "Minamata" series, shot with a Minolta SRT - as basic a camera as you can find</p>

[glen_h]

<p>I think an A-1 and lens should be closer to $100. Maybe $200 for three lenses with it.<br>

<br />There are plenty of affordable Canon SLRs and FD lenses on auction sites.<br>

I recommend shopgoodwill.com, find a nearby store and save on shipping.</p>

[robbz_fotoz]

<p>no matter what price you pay factor in the camera body may need a general re-furbishing ... new light seals, new mirror foam, mirror assembly may need lube to stop the "squeal" that comes from age and that which eventually will kill the camera if left un-attended. I recently had a nice A-1 body re-furbed it cost about 62 dollars with tax. The camera will now outlive me and I will continue to enjoy my Canon FD lenses. The A-1 was made from 1978 to 1985 so most of the available ones are pushing 30 years old.</p>

[craig]

<p>The A-1 was my first "REAL" camera, and I purchased it in 1985. I still use it as my primary camera, even though I own several FD varients. I like my T90 but I don't love it. The A-1 just feels like a solid tool, like grandpa's wrench. The T90 has these flimsy doors that just don't cut it for me. </p>

<p>As a first camera, I am absolutely for getting a Canon A-1. Just get one that's well-sorted and has recently been CLA'ed. You'll spend an extra few bucks in the beginning, but you'll save a lot over taking it to a repair place (if you can find one). The ebay squeek kit is a joke; I wouldn't even consider going that route. What I love about the A-1 is that for as many features as it has, it can be a minimalist camera as well. Full manual is perfect, and the control wheels are as intuitive as anything you'd find on a modern EOS. </p>

<p>I take my A-1 everywere and am amazed at how many people come out of the woodwork to talk about the good old days when cameras like these were the norm. I'm not a big fan of plasticky cameras. I got rid of my EF gear save for the EOS5 (A2E international) and a couple basic lenses. I never shoot digital and pretty much only shoot with my FD gear now. I've always felt that people who learned on film are better photographers because they don't get the instant gratification of seeing thier photo on a tiny screen, and they have to work to compose their shots and think about exposure and of course, you can't just fix it in photoshop. You have to work for your shots because film isn't cheap.</p>

[robert_hill11]

<p>I have both the AE-1P and A-1...the T90 was called a tank for a reason...heavy. I really enjoy my A-1...in any mode. You can be as creative or "programmed" as you like, small package, light and a ton of lenses and accessories are still available for it at good prices...except for the 24mm 1.4 lens I have been wanting...pirates!!! ;-)</p>