I'm looking to start shooting B&W on film for the first time. My research has led me to the Nikon F100 being a good balance of modern tech and affordability. My question is what advise can you give me on film selection and technique. Also open to any helpful suggestions.
>inb4 ZOMG NOOB ANY 35MM MADE SINCE 1960 CAN SHOOT B&W!!!
>>2799295
Gear thread, film thread, stupid questions thread...take your pick.
>>2799295
ZOMG NOOB ANY 35MM MADE SINCE 1960 CAN SHOOT B&W!!!
>>2799295
The Nikon is only a good choice if you already have a selection of Nikon lenses. Otherwise it's no better than any other SLR body. The body is much less important in film photography than it is in Digital. As long as it can mount the lenses you want and has an operational shutter (and optionally, meter) you're good to go. Lenses and film are where you should be discerning.
Film wise you'd be hard pressed to find a 'bad' b&w film these days. Only the good stuff remains on the market. T-Max, Tri-X, Across, HP5, Pan are all good choices. Most people find one they like and stick with it
Technique wise: expose for the shadows
>>2799321
Thank you very much, your advise is invaluable. I am currently looking at a used 50 1.8 fyi. :)
>>2799329
If you are looking at a used nifty fifty to put on an F100, you should really consider something different until you know you like shooting film at all.
K1000, ST605, or other older M42 mount manual SLR's can be found for like $20-50, with lenses.
Occasionally you can find N80's with a lens for under $50, too, but my track record with those is 0 for 3, so be careful buying those.
Once you know for sure you like shooting film, buy into whatever body and lens system you want.
>>2799451
OP here, Thank you again for the advise you all have been great.
A little back ground on me. I have been shooting with a Sony A7II and a Zeiss 55 for a year now and wanted to get into 135 film (esp B&W) to help grow myself as a photographer. I was able to find a good used Nikkor 50 1.8D for $89 at a local store and purchased it as well as the F100 for $149 from KEH because I have all that awesome tax return money. So thats my situation :)
>>2799653
you paid way too much for a simple setup, but enjoy
>>2799654
>$240 for Nikon's best prime and Nikon's best film AF film SLR that isn't a single digit F
>too much
It's fine. He's got Nikon's best film setup. He can grow into it, or he can sell it all off. Just because you shoot film doesn't mean you have to shoot all manual B&W. He could go wild with slides, and that spot meter sure helps with that. He can shoot sports, because there's VR compatibility. There's all sorts of stuff you can do.
>>2799679
OP here. Thank you for the great post, I was almost starting to get discouraged by the negativity. :)
Nikon shooter here. Cannot decide between the F100 and F5. They are about the same price. The F5 is a huge honking beast, but it is my only option to own a large body pro-style nikon camera.
>>2799653
B&W film doesn't help you grow as a photographer. You can use your EVF on your a7ii to preview B&W and have the almost the same result without the added cost, time sink and frustration. I own an F100. Coming from high-end digital and after 50+ rolls I have nothing but regret. I'm now selling it. A basic knowledge of lightroom+photoshop is all you need to duplicate most of the film look. If anything, film made me a worse photographer since it stuttered my post-processing learning. Although I will admit that film was really fun at first.
One of the main benefits of film is the increased likelihood that you'll actually think about the shot, but the same effect can be achieved by simply becoming more experienced as a photographer. You'll learn to consider many aspects of the photo before you even lift the camera to your eye. You'll get all the bad, easily reproducible ideas out of your system and become much more choosy.
In conclusion, don't get into film unless you are the sort of person who takes great pleasure in being different, not for the end result, but for the hipster warm fuzzies.
>>2799693
Do you actually use your camera out and about? Get the F100. Nobody actually likes hauling a F5 around. You might as well shoot medium format for that kind of weight. Also the F100 won't eat batteries like candy.
Or buy the F5 so the F100 prices don't start jumping up.
>>2799702
>In conclusion, don't get into film unless you are the sort of person who takes great pleasure in being different, not for the end result, but for the hipster warm fuzzies.
I shoot film for fun, and this is correct. I don't shoot film because I think it's better in any part of the process except muh feels.
Regret's a bit much though.
>>2799693
I've never held the F100, but I would recommend it over the F5.
Carried my F5 daily for several months and although I love it still, when I bought my FM2, it went up on the shelf and has barely come down since.
F100 might have a slower AF system, lower shutter life, and slower film advance, but it's still one of the best auto SLR's ever made.
>>2799800
>F100 might have a slower AF system, lower shutter life, and slower film advance, but it's still one of the best auto SLR's ever made.
And that's why I chose the F100 along with the Nikkor 50 1.8D. If I want I can put it on P and go auto, if i want I can set it on M and change a custom setting and have my aperture on the lens and shutter on the camera, its the best of both worlds, with a little modern tech to boot. :)
>>2799963
Yeah I totally agree with your reasoning. It's just usually not a good idea to invest a couple hundred bucks on something you never tried, and no guarantee that you're going to like, hence my original suggestion of a cheap manual SLR.
>>2799702
Didn't see this post earlier.
It's full of bullshit.
Digital with some post processing can come close to the look of film in all but one of the most important areas: light and shadow rendition.
It's hard to blow out highlights on film, but very easy to lose the shadows. It's completely opposite on digital; shadows save a ton of information, but highlights go way too early.
Unless you're shooting a comparative scene with completely flat lighting, with everything well exposed, the light and shadow rendition will never be emulated by digital.
Before I shot my fair share of film, I used to believe that misinformation also. But it just isn't true. The fact you still believe it after shooting a decent number of rolls is just sad. Or you just never pushed the limits of contrast in your exposures...
>>2799963
I don't disagree, but since I just got back $1500 on my tax return its not a big deal. Plus my friend shoots Nikon and would be interested in the lens and to a lesser extent the body if i don't like it.
I just picked up an F90 with the MF-26 back for 14$ and 15$ shipping from Japan, arrived in perfect shape. Great camera but no aperture control on g lenses :-\ at least I can use p mode and keep toggling and get say f3.5 easy enough. It's a sexy camera though, I'd love an f100 even more
Just get a Spotmatic with a 55mm. Should cost you about $30-60 on ebay. http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=pentax+spotmatic+f%2F1.8+
Replace the battery in the Spotmatic with a Weincell MRB400.
Spotmatics are great to learn on, and solidly built.
