I've been digging this thought a couple of days now and i have no one to turn to so, here i'am.

Err, as most of you are aware(maybe not), i've been posting regularly in the digicam section. Partially because of my increasing interest to become a good photographer. Currenlly i own an Fz5, a megazoom camera that i use for my shots. I post most of them at my photoblog or deviantart.

I was reading bio of some featured photographers in my country and some of them started off with SLR(film) cameras before moving to DSLR's.

It got me thinking on whether its a good idea to get myself a 2nd hand SLR camera.

Because firstly, im just a student, and i got no source of income aside from the $250 i get from my parents a month.

Secondly, it'll take me probably after i graduate, serve national service(abt 2 years), start work and in 5 years time before i can get a DSLR, which would probably cost me $2000.

I've been reasearching prices of old SLR's and they've been pretty good, ranging from $200 to $500 and come with bundled items such as lenses and etc...

So, what do you think? Is it a good idea if i purchased and old SLR to start sharpening up my photography before finally moving on to DSLR? Or is it just pure waste.

Many thanks folks.

Pentax K1000 fo lyfe.

i'd say it's worth it. you can learn many basics of photography with a 35mm slr before moving on to a d-slr. plus if you buy the same brands, you'll probably already have lenses that you can use on the dslr. that's what i plan on doing at least...

You can get a used but fresh Canon 10D at fredmiranda.com for under $650 and a 50mm 1.8 for around $60 that will get you started pretty well. just sign up for the forums and watch the buy/sell thread for a week or so. The guys there really watch out for each other and the deals are incredible.

many thanks again. i dont think posting links of prices will help as i live in singapore and theres very little online sites that has SLR prices.

however, i do appreciate if you'd recommend me some models! preferable canon...

i was looking around and found a few of this camera around in my country. a Canon Eos 66 / 3000N.



I dont think i'll buy it immediately, but what do you guys think?

Heres what id reccomend. Pick a brand you would end up buying your DSLR in. Such as Nikon. Get a Nikon Film SLR because when you go DSLR you can still use the same lenses and it saves you money in the long run

yup yup
but personally, I think it's a waste of money to buy film

my 2 cents

i don't mind about the film really, since i still have aplenty. i would most probably buy a canon though...

Its not the film were talking about, its the lenses. So get a canon SLR with canon lenses

well Pink Floyd said something about film anyway, yeah, i will be getting canon slr lenses when i get when i buy my slr camera...they are not many models left out there, so i have to take my time in finding a good and working one...

If you want to learn the basics of an SLR most digital compacts come with creative controls so you can set the aperature, shutter speed, ISO and things just as you could on a DSLR. Much cheaper too. Canon A80/90 for example.

you really havent read this forum now have u?

imo just save the money and get a dslr will be way cheaper for urself and u can practice with that dslr instead so just wait ur panasonic will be fine for like 2-3 years so dont bother

man i thought you were talking about the car!!!!

gl

i already have a compact camera which does that...my Fz5....

Eh? The point is perfectly valid either way.



Getting an SLR won't teach you much more then if your current compact has manual controls. You will learn about lenses and looking through a proper viewfinder, metering modes, and through the lens is much nicer than a lcd screen. But the basics of photography ly in aperature and shutter control.

If you do want to get a cheap SLR, like from ebay for £30, then get one that has a good DSLR upgrade path. Get like an old Canon EOS 500 or 50 or a Nikon. That way if you decide to get a DSLR you're lenses should work with it and you won't have to buy new ones.

I've recently bought a 2nd hand SLR, a Nikon F60 to be exact. Set me back 100 euro's and the camera was definitely worth more then that if you ask me.

I can tell that I shoot better pictures with the SLR camera then I do with my Canon A95, which I primarily use for the point-n-shoot stuff these days. For other photography I exclusively use the SLR.

It's a bit crap you can't see the preview like on a dSLR and you have to get used to that, simple solution to that is bringing both cams and taking a snapshot with your digital one beforehand

About the film - a local developer, develops my film directly to a digital format. He scans in the film using some sort of high-tech machinery and I end up with a cdrom with high quality pictures. It costs me 6 euro for a full film - if I'd develop it to actual photographs it'd cost me more then that. You should ask around if anyone is able to do that for you, saves you money and you can edit right away

I'd say, if you want to learn more about photography and you don't want to spend a whole lot of money on a DSLR straight away, go with an "ancient" SLR.

alright guys. thanks for the info! i dont think i can get an SLR, cuz im spending some cash to get some accesories for my Fz5, so it'll be awhile more i figure...

good boy good boy

Buy the cheapest working SLR you can find. I'd stick within anything beyod a '98. If you want to practice your aperture and shutter speed skills, etc. You won't need anything more than an old Rebel.

I used an old Pentax as my first camera (from the 70's) and was soo excited to pick up a new Rebel. I got it home, opened it up, and realized there wasen't much difference. Shoulda stuck with the Pentax :-P

If there is anything any experienced photographer can agree on, its that the camera generally doesn't matter. Sure if you are taking high speed shots or somethign with sports you might need something a little more high end. But for what you are doing, stick with the cheapest one you can get.

Hell, I'll give you my old Pentax.

heh. thanks for the offer. but for now, i'm spending some cash to get some macro-stuff.

I have to say I disagree with Pink Floyd.
I started with a Fuji F610, took me 4 months before I got my first SLR, for £35 (OM-10 with 3 lenses and flash, have since added a few new lenses and extension tubes) , Big quality hike, all manual, that was when I started learning a lot. Check out my deviantArt page.

Are you sure you cant afford it, just check out eBay and you will be surprised how cheap they can be had.

i think there might be a real chance i could get an slr, because i could use the lens in reversed for macro photography on my Fz5

OK check out this if you were any doubt about the quality hike, thanks to my scanner I couldnt acuratelly show the difference in the 9x6" prints in the scan, because it is far more obvoiuse when you have the prints in your hand, The Digital picture on the left was taken taken with a 6MP compact with a sensor 1.7x bigger than the sensor in your camera, Sensor size is a real clincher, the 2.7MP Nikon D1H would put both our cameras to shame and probably give my Film camera a run for its money.