AdamF
Member
Ok so now it's time to choose the SLR camera. I've decided that my DSLR camera in the future will be something from canon (5d or 7d) so the wise move would be to buy a SLR from Canon because of lenses compatibility but I heard that the older lenses from manual Canons are not workind with the new Canon DSLR cameras.
Generally what do you think of buying better SLR with better lenses system that I can use in the future on my DSLR instead of cheap one just for learning purposes? If I buy something better like Nikon FM2N I can start collecting lenses for my next DSLR from Canon (with use of adapter). Are the Nikon F mount lenses much better then M42 mount lenses?
Generally what do you think of buying better SLR with better lenses system that I can use in the future on my DSLR instead of cheap one just for learning purposes? If I buy something better like Nikon FM2N I can start collecting lenses for my next DSLR from Canon (with use of adapter). Are the Nikon F mount lenses much better then M42 mount lenses?
aizan
Veteran
so you want to eventually use manual focus nikon lenses on a video capable canon? hmm...
i would buy the last film body, nikon f6 or canon 1v, and current lenses. that, or save tons of money by getting very cheap, unpopular slr bodies and lenses that are in good, working condition.
i would buy the last film body, nikon f6 or canon 1v, and current lenses. that, or save tons of money by getting very cheap, unpopular slr bodies and lenses that are in good, working condition.
AdamF
Member
Nikon F6 and Canon 1v are quite expensive. I thought that Nikon FM2N is compatible with the new Nikon lenses?
Benjamin
Registered Snoozer
New AIS lenses yes. Others, sadly no. Few lenses designed for digital bodies have focus and aperture controls on the bodies of the lenses themselves.
Then again, who cares. There's plenty of excellent and affordable AI and AIS Nikkor lenses that work with the FM2n.
If I were you, I'd take a look at either the FM2n or perhaps even a manual Olympus OM body if you like smaller cameras, though my advice would be to take the former. Something like a 50mm or 35mm lens to start, and a load of 400 ISO speed film.
B+W film will allow you to be more versatile should you decide to start printing your negs at school, for the mean time you should still be able to find a lab for development and contact. Check the internet if you can't find anything in your town.
Best of luck anyway.
AdamF
Member
Ok, but is there something that I will loose when I use Nikon AI or AIS with Canon 7D instead of Canon lenses?
I know that I can also mount M42 lenses on Canon 7D via adapter so is there big difference between M42 and Nikon lenses?
I'm thinking about FM2n because I heard it's quite reliable and good travel camera, so I can use it in the future and not only for learning purposes. It's true that my main goal is cinematography but having good stills camera that I can use for many years is also good idea I think.
I know that I can also mount M42 lenses on Canon 7D via adapter so is there big difference between M42 and Nikon lenses?
I'm thinking about FM2n because I heard it's quite reliable and good travel camera, so I can use it in the future and not only for learning purposes. It's true that my main goal is cinematography but having good stills camera that I can use for many years is also good idea I think.
lic4
Well-known
Hey Adam, I teach cinematography at a university in the US and also work as professionally as a DP/Director.
I also recommend to students to buy a manual camera, and I usually don't mean for them to spend more than fifty bucks on something. My own personal suggestion is that you work with film first and then move to digital later, and don't worry about planning what camera you will use when you upgrade (Canon / Nikon, etc). The most attractive camera brand and model will change every few years, and I think you'll find that it's much better to rent equipment. Shoot with a handheld light meter and grab a cheap camera that does all manual - the Konica Auto S2 is fine (around $30-50 in the US). I tell students they don't need interchangeable lenses; the first goal is to become very fluent in working with light, exposure, and color. This is my own advice and what was helpful for me when I started out.
I also recommend to students to buy a manual camera, and I usually don't mean for them to spend more than fifty bucks on something. My own personal suggestion is that you work with film first and then move to digital later, and don't worry about planning what camera you will use when you upgrade (Canon / Nikon, etc). The most attractive camera brand and model will change every few years, and I think you'll find that it's much better to rent equipment. Shoot with a handheld light meter and grab a cheap camera that does all manual - the Konica Auto S2 is fine (around $30-50 in the US). I tell students they don't need interchangeable lenses; the first goal is to become very fluent in working with light, exposure, and color. This is my own advice and what was helpful for me when I started out.
aizan
Veteran
when you use a nikon lens on a canon eos, there is no more shutter-priority ae, program ae, or autofocus, and you are limited to stop-down metering. these are not as important for video as they are for regular still photography, i guess.
there are no big differences between m42 and nikon lenses. some lens specifications may not be available, but you can get great lenses in any focal length. you'll have the same limitations when mounted on a canon. m42 is generally less expensive, though.
if you're considering the fm2n, the f3hp is only about $50 more. there are also many less expensive cameras that will meet your needs.
Last edited:
Particular
a.k.a. CNNY, disassembler
If I can chime in and agree with lic4. The most important thing is to learn to be economical with your images. Buy a simple camera and get really comfortable with it, so that you feel like you can produce images that you like (for me that is a rangefinder, but it doesn't really matter). Worry later about how to make it become cinema.
The worst thing about video is that it makes you lazy while shooting, because you can always shoot more. Shooting Super8 is a great antidote to that. If you can tell a story in three minutes, it will save you editing hours of crappy footage.
snausages
Well-known
My take is that if you want to shoot photos, awesome. Go for it. The camera doesn't matter. Even the worst digital p&s will be instructive, because as long as you're shooting, it isn't the camera that teaches it's the internal feedback process between the moment of exposure and viewing the image later. A RF would probably be unnecessary for your needs because you need to learn how to set-up lights, not just meter what's available. And if you want to shoot moving pictures, shoot moving pictures. Make movies. Make them with a friend or by yourself in a basement. This is why I agree with the advice to get a DSLR with video capture. Even a G11 would be a candidate. I shoot still photos all the time, and, sure, in a esoteric Platonic sense it's related to cinematography, just as painting and architecture are, but I'd be totally unqualified as a DP because I don't know how to light a set, especially when the actors and camera are moving. Also, I'm sure there are many exceptions, but not a single one of the DP's I've worked with shoots stills on a regular basis, other than generic location stills. I find that directors are more likely than DP's to to be still photographers. If you need stills for your application, then I guess it's unavoidable, but if you want to be a DP I think you should spend as much of your day as possible being a DP, and you don't need school to make that happen.