Is this good anymore ?

[Flintlock1776]

I have a Minolta SRT200 35mm SLR Rokkor-x 50mm. :eek:

I bought it off a co-worker back in the mid 80's. I really did not use it much. I don't know why I did not use it as much, maybe it just ate those PX625 battery it used.

It is very heavy compared to today's cameras.

Is this worth keeping and doing the film photography bit? It only goes up to 1000 ISO.

I do have the original manual it came with.

What say ye?

Thanks!

[Prospero]

Here's some information on the camera you own:

http://www.rokkorfiles.com/SRT%20Series.htm

I'm not going to read all the text for you, but it seems the camera was a budget model at the time (which means it probably doesn't have many fancy features). Also, it seems the camera can work with film up to ISO6400, but that doesn't matter much since film at such ISO values looks like crap and is probably expensive.

Personally I doubt if you would get a lot out of it should you try to sell it. I don't think it's old or special enough to be worth much for a collector, and since it's manual focus and you only seem to have the 50mm lens to go with it, I don't think anybody would pay a lot just to shoot film for a bit.

In other words, I would just keep it and start shooting with it. I think playing with old cameras and shooting film from time to time can be fun.

[SpecialK]

With all the progress in digital camera equipment, I can't see a reason to shoot film - unless you like the "film" look, whatever that is.

Some careful shopping can get you started in digital for under $500 new, and probably $300 used.

Once you get the equipment, the cost of shooting is essentially free, and results are nearly instantaneous.

[Prospero]

With all the progress in digital camera equipment, I can't see a reason to shoot film - unless you like the "film" look, whatever that is.

Some careful shopping can get you started in digital for under $500 new, and probably $300 used.

Once you get the equipment, the cost of shooting is essentially free, and results are nearly instantaneous.

Even the film look would not be a real reason, since you can basically get that out of photoshop.

For me the only reason to keep it would be because I like using old equipment and having to set everything manually.

[cdifoto]

For me the only reason to keep it would be because I like using old equipment and having to set everything manually.
I can set everything manually on my digital SLRs. I just don't get to deal with the costs and annoyances of buying and processing film.

[fotogmarc]

It's always fun to have old film cans laying around.
Even if you use the Minolta once a year, that's worth more than selling it for $50?
I'm waiting to start using my father's Rollei Twin Lens Reflex.
I like to compare cameras to cars. Sure it's great to have a new car with A/C, 250 hp, a great sound system, cruise control and everything else, but it sure would be a pleasure to drive a 1929 Studebaker. ;)

[Csae]

I can set everything manually on my digital SLRs. I just don't get to deal with the costs and annoyances of buying and processing film.

I put up with the hassles occasionally by sending it to a lab, and then scanning the negs, for MF. (I especially like B&W)

MF is still pretty awesome, but its a fun thing for myself, i wouldn't really use it for business.