Lens compatibility with older film cameras

[moneypenny02]

Hi all,
I am considering taking a photography class at a community college this summer (really want to learn the techniques, but not sure if I'll be up for 2 hour mtgs 4 days a week after a full day of work). However they require a film camera for part of the work and all I have is a digital XTi. I don't want to invest a lot on a film camera, but I have seen a few cheap and supposedly functional canons on ebay (body only) and wondered if they would be compatible with any of the lenses I currently have.

I currently have a EF 70-300IS and a EF-S 50mm.
The cameras I am looking into are listed as 1) an EOS Rebel, 2) an EOS Rebel 2000, 3) an EOS Rebel XSN and 4) an EOS Rebel K2

The 4th one comes with its own kit lens, an EF28-90mm f4/5.6 III. If this lens would be compatible with my digital Rebel (and/or vice versa), then this might be worth getting. I don't have a lot of money to burn at this point, and I definitely don't want to invest a lot in a film SLR since I plan to stick with digital, but if I can find a film version for cheap that would be sufficient for the class (I need an SLR and lens that goes to 50mm) I might go ahead and get it (or at least try to bid).

Thanks!
Melanie

[moneypenny02]

As a follow-up question, if the EOS EF lenses for the film cameras do fit the digital rebel, how much would you say the 35-80 4/5.6 or the 28-90 4/5.6 III is worth by itself? I'm trying to figure out if it would be worth having and thus justify spending a little bit more on the auction.

Thanks!

[Mark_48]

I've got a 28-80 f/3.5-5.6 lens that came on a Canon Rebel 2000. It's not a lens I ever even considered putting on any of my digital cameras, but it was OK for the film camera. The 28-90 is probably similiar. If it doesn't cost too much, it would at least get you through the course you're taking and you could always ebay it later.

Take a look at www.keh.com/ for used film cameras also.

Mark....

[GaryS]

Melanie, check with the community college to be 100% sure, because many times the original course description just hasn't been updated. The college here just requires a SLR camera, as all they really want is manual controls, and interchangeable lenses.

[moneypenny02]

Melanie, check with the community college to be 100% sure, because many times the original course description just hasn't been updated. The college here just requires a SLR camera, as all they really want is manual controls, and interchangeable lenses.

I already did....unfortunately (or fortunately?) they require working with (and developing) film for part of the course to better understand the process of light on film, so I will have to use a film camera for a good portion of the course.

[GaryS]

Thats like having to drive a horse and buggy before getting your drivers license... Oh well. You do what you have to, right?

[JTL]

I already did....unfortunately (or fortunately?) they require working with (and developing) film for part of the course to better understand the process of light on film, so I will have to use a film camera for a good portion of the course.That's just dumb.

Regressive false purists are always the bane of society, no matter what form they take. It's fine to teach about light on film...as a history class!

The real lesson you should learn from this is about dogmatic indoctrination that tries to foist a "truth" upon you that is no longer relevant. Teaching about developing film is merely teaching a "curiosity" at this point. It has no practical value....except maybe as a misguided attempt at an ego boost or attempt at demonstrating some form of non-existent "superiority" by the instructor. It has the pathetically sad ring of the "Grumpy Old Man" character from SNL created by Dana Carvey, turning red-faced, shaking his finger and shouting "In my day we didn't have no fancy digital cameras...".

I'd write a well-argued letter to the Dean and "enlighten" them. Maybe you'll end up teaching the school something...:)

[24Peter]

I'm kinda with JTL on this: I'd look for another course which maybe adds Photoshop instead of film stuff.

[Mark_48]

These two well known New England photography schools still include film as part of their curriculum. I'm sure others do as well. They must be doing something right. Learning about film can't hurt and it can only make for a photographer that has a few more tools in his creative kit to work with.

http://hallmark.edu/courses/photography/traditional/

http://www.nesop.com/Programs/YearOneProgram.asp

I haven't retired my RB67 yet....

Mark......

[moneypenny02]

Its surprisingly difficult to find what I am looking for (which is basically what 24Peter suggests). I am looking to take a class in LA, but even with all of its universities & community colleges its so hard to find a course that is just a few days a week and teaches the basics of photography to non-mentally challenged adults who are not looking to pursue degrees in the area.

There are some courses for teens which seem to be exactly what I am looking for, but I am about a decade too late for those. The "adult education" classes I've found are pretty much for adults who have probably never seen a microwave let alone a digital camera, and spend the majority of the class teaching them how to select the correct camera or scan pictures (check out this online class that keeps coming up on multiple sites--I don't even know if it involves taking a single picture!!! http://www.ed2go.com/cgi-bin/oic3/newcrsdes.cgi?name=bcae&aw=ggg&course=dph).

The classes, such as the one that is requiring a film camera seem to cover more of what is required to understand the science (or math) of photography and the compositional elements. The historical discussion of photography would actually be quite interesting to me, so I actually don't mind that (although I do mind having to buy a whole new set of gear just for this class)--but they are very intense and meet at least 4 days a week, ranging from 2-4 hours, b/c they are part of a larger degree program that is understandably more rigorous.

This has been such a difficult process to find something that I was initially so looking forward to doing--but the thought of having to go to class 4 days a week, after an already full day of work is a bit much for me right now. I was really looking forward to cutting back on my 18-hour days since this past semester was so exhausting.

An internet course may be the only way to go (although NOT the one I linked to above), but knowing myself, that is definitely not the ideal way for me to learn, nor will it keep me accountable on a weekly basis to actually produce/learn something. :-\

This sucks!!

[Mark_48]

Throwing some ideas out....

How about something like this... http://www.juliadean.com/

Found it in a seach of photography workshops around LA..
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=photography+workshop+la&btnG=Search

From the link you provided...
"Dr. Beverly Schulz is a freelance photographer and a graduate of the New York Institute of Photography's Professional Photographer's program. She teaches a number of classes in digital photography and has more than 25 years of classroom instruction experience."
Would the New York Institute of Photography offer something that would work for you? http://www.nyip.com/ PM me if you have questions on this avenue.

From the images on the flikr site you've got linked you don't need alot of help. Great shots!!

Mark.....

[Clyde]

Check eBay for cheap pentax k1000 kits. They are the old photography students manual camera, and you should be able to find a great working version with a 50mm lens, or even a cheap zoom and a 50mm lens for around $75.

Practically worthless, but nonetheless first rate stuff (go figure). It does give you an exposure meter, but learning how to shoot with the k1000 would let you learn how to go from Av and shutter priority to Man.

Good luck,

Clyde

[JTL]

These two well known New England photography schools still include film as part of their curriculum. I'm sure others do as well. They must be doing something right. Learning about film can't hurt and it can only make for a photographer that has a few more tools in his creative kit to work with.

http://hallmark.edu/courses/photography/traditional/

http://www.nesop.com/Programs/YearOneProgram.asp

I haven't retired my RB67 yet....

Mark......Why must they be doing something right? Please explain what makes teaching irrelevant information "right"?

I haven't retired my film cameras completely yet either. But that doesn't mean that requiring people to learn about film...except from a historical perspective...is relevant in any way whatsoever to learning about photography today. Just because some schools are stuck in the past (as most are because all they have teaching in them is old farts with old "knowledge") doesn't make it good teaching. Holding up bad examples of bad educational practices presents a fallacious argument at best! Better to listen to the words of someone who actually has real knowledge, such as world renowned photographer Tim Fitzharris (a smart old guy), who has shot covers for Life, Audubon and many major publications:

------
"Digital Takeover. The photographic world is dominated by digital photography for many reasons; Top-of-the-line SLR digital cameras produce images in quality to comparable film cameras; you save both the considerable expense and time involved in buying and processing film; a digital image can be checked at the time of shooting for exposure accuracy, sharpness, and composition and retaken on the spot if necessary, eliminating the uncertainty inherent in shooting film; picture can be ready for printing right from the camera; professional digital cameras are the standard for producing images for commercial use in magazines, books, posters and many wall and engagement calendars; you can easily adjust digital image color contrast and sharpness with near infinite control; ISO settings on digital cameras can be changed at any time to suit the circumstances, even for a single frame; digital offers complete artistic control over the photographic process from initial capture through to print production – no need to rely on film manufacturers, film processors or commercial fine art printmakers. Film's Last Refuge. View cameras using sheet film continue to be used for making large-scale prints for the fine art market. Medium format cameras are also popular with professionals shooting landscape imagery, mainly for wall calendars. However, medium format digital backs made by Leaf, Phase One and Imacon produce images of comparable quality and are replacing film use even in these larger formats…”
------

For all PRACTICAL PURPOSES...FILM IS DEAD. These "educators" need to get over it and move on. Learning about film today is the equivalent of taking a pottery class.

Those schools who think that they’re teaching photography courses should try talking to and hiring real, working photographers who are in the CURRENT mainstream before they take peoples’ money and rip them off with yesterday’s irrelevant knowledge.

Caveat Emptor...even when it comes to supposed "education". ;):)

[moneypenny02]

Learning about film today is the equivalent of taking a pottery class.



What's wrong with pottery? (I took that one two years ago ;))



Thanks for the suggestion Mark_48, I hadn't tried googling "workshop" & I will check and see if I can find anything else with those terms. The JuliaDean workshops sound great (meets on weekends, covers basics for understanding exposure, lighting, and artistic composition) and the photos they show are exactly the types of photos I want to be able to take myself eventually! Unfortunately it is too pricey for me right now at about $625 for a class that meets multiple sessions (3-4 times) or $200 for the one-day class. :(

Given that I am only making about $5000 for the entire summer ($1000 of which is going to gas!!! #@*%-ing GW!), I don't think I can afford to spend quite so much in one pop. If I end up taking the class that meets 4 days a week, that should only be about $40 total for the 2 unit class (plus the cost of a 35mm camera, unless I can get a loaner from someone else). I could probably spend about $100 for a class (even if it only meets like 4 or 5 times) as long as I didn't have to buy any other gear.

Shoot :cool:. At this point, I might just end up trying to recreate a few pages out of "Understanding Exposure" every day and post the images here for critiques! (Be nice!! :))

[24Peter]

Thanks for the suggestion Mark_48, I hadn't tried googling "workshop" & I will check and see if I can find anything else with those terms. The JuliaDean workshops sound great (meets on weekends, covers basics for understanding exposure, lighting, and artistic composition) and the photos they show are exactly the types of photos I want to be able to take myself eventually! Unfortunately it is too pricey for me right now at about $625 for a class that meets multiple sessions (3-4 times) or $200 for the one-day class. :(

:))

http://www.smc.edu/photo/

[JTL]

What's wrong with pottery? (I took that one two years ago ;)Nothing! ;):)

But, just as learning how to make a nice crock won't make you a better cook, learning about film won't make you a better photographer! ;)

[Mark_48]

melanie,

If you're good at learning from a book the one below is one I'll recommend. Yeah, there's a bit of that "film" stuff going on within the pages (no pottery though), but the fundamentals of the camera/lens principles translates well to the digital world. The Amazon link below is for the 8th edition of the book which new is no longer available, but there are used ones on that page. Ebay has them once in a while also which is where i bought one. The 9th edition is about $110 and supposedly addresses the digital side of things more.

http://www.amazon.com/Photography-Barbara-London/dp/0131896091/ref=pd_bbs_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1209386858&sr=8-1

This link is a companion site for the book above. The menu bar on the top gives you access to the chapters and various self assessment quizzes to test your knowledge of photography.
http://wps.prenhall.com/hss_london_photo_8/


I threw the question of film or not film to a another forum where alot of pros hang around. Some interesting responses.....
http://www.pdngallery.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=007081

I'm looking for a school that teaches traditional art, but emphasizes using a Wacom tablet and Corel Painter rather than oils, pastels, watercolor, and other obsolete mediums. :D

Mark.......

[moneypenny02]

Mark_48:

Thanks for all your time & energy put into this!! I had actually avoided checking out the Santa Monica College offerings b/c it was kind of out of the way from where I will be working and living, although when I checked, the class they offered was pretty much exactly what I was looking for (digital only, 2 days a week, etc.) so I was considering biting the bullet & taking it....

UNTIL i got a response from the instructor that will actually be teaching MY class (instead of the Professor that runs the department) and he said that it would be okay if I just used a digital camera--although I would have to print out the images elsewhere b/c they do not have any kind of print station for digital images (since it is a predominately film department). He also said I could just attend lectures (one day a week) and then show up during the labs for just as long as it takes to show & critique my assignments. SWA-WEET. That will work perfectly, especially since its only about 15 mins away from my house. (instead of 1 1/2 hours in rush hour).

Thanks again!! And it was interesting to see the responses of the pros on that other site. I think it would be cool to learn the techniques of developing your own film, etc. but that's for another day.....


PS: I do have that London, Stone & Upton book--it was highly recommended from some other photo students--but I hadn't had the chance to try it out during the school year. That was my otehr back-up, which I might end up doing if the class doesnt work out (but i'm confident that it should!!).