A Tale of Two Cameras (and Fuji Superia 200)

In recent posts (here) and (here), I've talked about starting to shoot film again - with a Minolta Dynax 7 and a Canon EOS 300V. I've been able to put a roll of Fuji Superia 200 through each camera in the last month, and recently had the film developed during a trip to Christchurch. Let's have a look at the results....

Cobden Lagoon. Minolta Dynax 7 with 35-70mm f/4 (@ 35mm). Fuji Superia 200.

First things first - both cameras work! Yay!! Of the two rolls I shot, under varying lighting conditions, the exposures were bang-on. So that's the first hurdle out of the way. Two fully functioning camera bodies.

Second, how do the images actually look? And again - no problems there. All the photos are sharp (or at least sharp enough for 35mm film scanned on a flatbed scanner) and have good colour rendition. In terms of the colour, I did find that all the photos tended towards a blue tint with the Fujicolor Superia. With almost all of the scans I removed some of the blue from the midtones and shadows to get the colour a bit more 'neutral'.

Lagoon Reeds. Minolta Dynax 7 with 70-210mm f4.5-5.6 (@100mm). Fuji Superia 200.

Since having decided to shoot some film this year, I have been thinking about how to digitize the negatives. As mentioned above, the photos here have been scanned on a flatbed scanner (Epson Photo V700). I just happened to have one, and so that's what I have used to digitize almost all of my 35mm negatives. But there is a lot of buzz on the interwebs about using your digital camera and a macro lens to 'scan' your negatives. This is, they say (whoever 'they' are), the better - and quicker - way to go.

I just happen to have a full frame 24MP digital camera, and a Sigma 105mm macro lens. So this is definitely something that I will be giving a go in the near future. I may even do a 'comparison' with the flatbed scan and the digital camera scan.

Brunner Mine Bridge. Canon 300V with 28-80mm f4.5-5.6mm (@50mm). Fuji Superia 200.

If I'm honest, I'm not quite sure of what I think about scanning 35mm film with a digital camera? You might argue that if you are going to do that, why not just shoot with a digital camera in the first place? And you might have a point.

But (playing devils advocate), if you want to show your photos on a digital platform, then you are going to have to digitize your negatives at some stage. So why not use the best re-productive system available to you? And if that happens to be your digital camera, then so be it. Having used a film scanner over the years, I have to say that they are a bit of a faff to use, and don't always produce the sharpest results - especially with 35mm.

Cobden Pigeons. Canon 300V with Canon 28-80mm (@80mm). Fujicolor Superia 200

Speaking for myself, the 'fun' of shooting film is in the actual process - and in the cameras I get to use. I enjoyed using both the Minolta Dynax 7 and the Canon 300V. Both very modern cameras - and yet both very different shooting experiences. The Minolta has a more 'pro' feeling about it - with a rugged magnesium-alloy body and lots of dials, whereas the Canon 300V is certainly a more consumer-grade shooting experience.

I didn't really 'prefer' one over the other - although if I'm honest I liked more of the photos I shot with the 300V. But that probably has more to do with the places I went to photograph rather than the camera's themselves.

Taylorville Bus. Canon 300V with Fujicolor Superia 200.

Thoughts of scanning aside, my first rolls of film through my two film cameras was definitely a success. I got images that I really liked from both cameras - enough to want to repeat the experience. I have a trip away to Nelson for a holiday coming up, and I'm deciding whether to shoot it all on film or not. The only thing that really gives me pause is the film stock situation. I have a lot of black and white film, but no more colour. I'm not sure I really want to shoot everything on black and white, so I may end up just taking the digital and leaving the film cameras at home until I can find some more cheap colour film? Anybody know where I can get some cheap colour film from?

The film journey continues...

I have run a roll of Fuji Superia 200 colour film through my Minolta Dynax 7 over the last couple of weeks, but haven't processed it yet. I will probably wait until I have a few to develop all at once, since I will dev-only and then scan the negs myself.

Since my last post talking about getting back into film this year, I have purchased a few more items to add to my Minolta and Canon film kits. One is a Minolta 75-300mm f4.5/5.6 D lens. Yes, I know I already have the 70-210mm f4.5/5.6. But it was a great price ($40.00NZ), and I wanted to see if it was worth getting the extra reach over the 70-210mm.

I have also branched out and made my very first purchase on AliExpress! As a hobbyist getting back into film, I shudder at the prices being asked for film here in New Zealand. One roll of standard Kodak Gold 200 is about $40.00NZ in camera stores - $40.00!!! Bugger that. So after a quick look an AliExpress, I purchased 5 rolls of Lucky Black and White 400 film for just under $48.00NZ delivered. That's basically five rolls for the price of one! 

I'll see how it goes shooting and developing it, but at that price, you can't really go wrong?

And speaking of what can go wrong.... you know that Canon EOS 5 I purchased (see last post) for $35.00? Turns out there was a very good reason for it going so cheaply. Yep, it doesn't work. Pop a fresh battery in, turn it on, and press the shutter... and nothing (except a very weird electronic grinding noise). Oh well, it was worth a shot I guess. Although having said that, these EOS 5's seem fairly dodgy, reliability-wise. All sorts of things can go wrong with them (a very weak command dial for a start). So that's it with me and the EOS 5. I'm done with them.

That's not it for me and Canon though. Far from it! Canon and me go way back with film. In fact, when I think of film photography, I really think in terms of Canon. My first camera was a Canon T70, followed by the Canon T90, and then a procession of Canon EOS cameras (100, 10, 50, 30, 1), until I changed to digital in the early 2000s and switched to Nikon. I only really shot film on Canon cameras, so to not have a Canon now that I'm giving film a serious look again would be sacrilegious!

The EOS 300v is one of the last film cameras Canon produced (the 300x was the last), and is jam-packed with modern features and up-to-date autofocus from the digital era. It's a bit of a plastic-fantastic (although it does have a metal lens mount), and because it's not a trendy, all mechanical, traditional-looking film camera, it tends to be ignored by the hipster film community. Suits me. I'm old, and so are my eyes. I need all the help I can get. So modern auto-focus with modern EF lenses will do me nicely thank you. 

It's also a bit of a love it or loath it looking camera. And actually, I quite like the look of it. If you are going to go modern, then by Jove's go all-out!

At the moment I have an early production 35-70mm EF to go with it, but I hope to rectify that in the not too distant future. It will take all Canon EF lenses (including L Pro glass), although of all the brands, Canon's EF lenses seem to retain their value the most. So it might take a while to get some truly decent glass for it.

Fun in the Snow, Arthur's Pass. Kodak Gold 200.

I thought I would finish this post with a photo shot on film - taken about 20 years ago! I don't remember what camera I used, it could have been any number of different options - but to me it brings back so many memories, and has the unmistakeable 'look' of film.

For our kids 21st, my wife and I put together photo albums of their life for them (up to 21yrs obviously). We looked through boxes and boxes of negatives and prints to fill the albums, and probably 95% of the images we used were shot on film. Yes, that's partly because digital only really became viable around 20 years ago, so a lot of their early life was documented on film. But it also had to do with how easy it was to go through them and choose the images we wanted to use. We didn't have to find x,y or z old hard-drive and go through hundreds (if not thousands) of files to find images. We literally picked up a box and flicked through the prints.

Archiving of memories is very important. And I think it could be argued quite seriously that the best way to archive images is with film. How many of us have 'lost' photos to corrupt cards/drives/computers? And how many will continue to do so? Every digital photographer will tell you it's a matter of when, not if. Sure, you can 'loose' film negatives. But baring fire (heaven forbid), if they are kept in a box in the dark, they will last forever. And will print up as good as the day they were taken. Worth thinking about...

2025 - The Year of Film!?

I love black and white photography. Always have. It's what I cut my teeth on when I first started learning all about photography (way back when). It's classic, the images often have a timeless feeling and there's something 'evocative' about monochrome that color doesn't match.

Perhaps that's why I enjoyed shooting the Fujifilm cameras and playing around with the film recipes so much? At least half of the recipes I programmed into the cameras were black and white (mostly trying to replicate Acros - my favorite b&w film). And shooting with all these 'film stocks' on a digital camera was a heap of fun (and a huge rabbit-hole it turns out).

Aailyah. Lumix S5 with Panasonic S 50mm f1.8. 1/60th sec @ f2.8, ISO 100. 

Shooting black and white with digital is a simple matter of choosing a monochrome profile instead of color. Then, if you shoot RAW, you get a b&w image in the viewfinder (if you're shooting with a mirrorless system), but the RAW image still has the color information attached if you change your mind.

You can also choose to shoot in RAW + JPEG, in which case the jpeg will have the b&w profile 'burnt' into the file, while the RAW will still retain the color. The best of both worlds. 

I don't shoot Fujifilm cameras anymore, having moved to the Panasonic Lumix S5 full-frame camera. But when I did shoot with Fujifilm, I would often only shoot in JPEG - meaning that the resulting image would only be monochrome. No color info - no going back. It was a bit like shooting film, but with digital. 

Some are very happy with this work flow - creating 'pretend' film images on digital. Heck, you can even add grain to the image at the point of capture to further enhance the film look. 

Say 'Cheese'. Lumix S5 with Panasonic S 50mm f1.8. 1/60th sec @ f2.8, ISO 100.

The portraits in this post were all taken on the Lumix S5 using the Monochrome S profile. The S5 has a variety of monochrome profiles you can choose, with the 'S' profile seeming to give the best rendition of skin colors. But since they were all shot in RAW, they were infinitely 'tweakable' in post-processing anyway. And as much as I do like the final look, there is a part of this jaded old photographer that thinks to himself "If you want the film look to your images, just damn well shoot film"!

Storytime with Grammy. Lumix S5 with S 50mm f1.8. 1/60th sec @ 4.5, ISO 1000.

So that's exactly what I've decided to do in 2025. Shoot some film.

Early last year, a very good friend gifted me a Minolta Dynax 7 film camera body (thanks Stew) and I've meant to shoot it ever since. The time for thinking is over, and it's time to get doing! 

First step was to actually get some film for it. Given all I've said in this post so far, I was only going to be looking at monochrome film - for two reasons. Firstly for all the reasons I've given in this post 😁(didn't I just say that?), and second - the cost. B&W film is cheaper to buy and, if you have your own processing tanks and chemicals (which I do), cheaper to develop. Much cheaper. 

I brought some Rollei APX 25, 100 and 400 ISO film, and then actually scored some cheap expired color film online, just for giggles. Don't know when I'll use the color (especially since one of them is a slide film which is horrendously expensive to develop), but it's there just in case.

I then decided to get a 'standard' lens for the Dynax 7, and I knew just which one to get; The Minolta 35-70mm f/4 macro. It's a lens I've owned before and used with Sony A-mount digital cameras. It's a great performer, very sharp wide open, with a constant f/4 aperture.

The 35-70mm f/4's come up reasonably regularly, and are a fairly cheap price for such a good lens. The one I bid on was actually attached to a Dynax 7xi, so I got another film body as a back-up to the Dynax 7.

When Stewart gifted me the Dynax 7 it came with a 50mm f2.8 macro lens, so I decided my new film kit would be complete with a telephoto lens. Enter the Minolta 70-210mm f/4.5-5.6. I had actually purchased a 70-210mm f/4 'beercan' but had to send it back because it wouldn't focus to infinity! Damn... I might get another one later, but for the meantime the f/4.5-5.6 will do.

With the Minolta in the bag I thought I was now sorted for a film kit. Turns out I was wrong! Since I was looking through all the listings for film cameras on our New Zealand auction site (TradeMe), I was seeing other cameras that were catching my attention. I had my eye on a Canon EOS5 body that looked like it might go cheaply, so I put in a 'low' bid and left it at that. And yes, I won it (for the princely sum of $35.00NZ).

Film cameras (and film) have experienced something of a resurgence in the last 5 years, which has seen the prices go up considerably. Film itself is eye-wateringly expensive (which does give pause when looking at getting back into shooting film), while old film cameras that used to be given away (or thrown out), are now going for more that older digital camera bodies. Crazy...

But there are still bargains to be had (can't complain about $35.00NZ for a Canon EOS5) if you look out for them and are patient. Strangely enough, it's the older, more manual film cameras that are the most popular. The more 'modern' looking film cameras tend to go for cheaper prices. Suits me.

I'm looking forward to getting a bit more 'hands on', a bit more 'tactile' with my photography this year. Not in a hipster, 'look-at-me-aren't-I-cool' sort of way (I'm middle aged, bald and fat - hipster I ain't) - more in a photography as 'craft' kind of vibe. I'll let you know how it goes....

Minolta Dynax / Maxxum / Alpha 7 - The ultimate film camera?

Canon F1. One of my earliest objects of desire...

There have been many (many, many, many) cameras I have lusted over in my 35+ years as a passionate photographer. As a Canon film shooter in the 1980s I dreamed of owning an F1 - and was lucky enough to own a T90 (it's a long story). A friend of mine had an autofocus Nikon F801 which I lusted after. And of course there were the flagships - the Canon EOS 1 and Nikon F4, that were always way beyond my meager budget.

But times they are a changing (thanks Bob), and most of these film cameras - even the top professional ones, can be had for peanuts today (at least that used to be the case). I've now owned many of the cameras on my wish list, including the aforementioned EOS 1 and F4. And yes, they are every bit as amazing as I knew they would be.

I also took my time moving over to digital, waiting until 2006. By then, digital cameras had been around for a few years, and we had seen the introduction of the 'affordable' Canon 300D (Rebel). Followed by the Nikon D70, the camera I ended up 'converting' to digital with.

Even as early as 2003 film cameras were quickly loosing their value, yet it would be a few more years before digital images truly surpassed those taken on film. I used those few years, in the early 2000s, to pick up some very good film gear for very reasonable prices. The system that I settled on, before switching to the Nikon D70, was Minolta. Specifically the Minolta Dynax 600si Classic. A brilliant camera, and a joy to use.

Minolta Alpha/Maxxum/Dynax 7

But as brilliant as the 600si was, the camera that I really wanted - the one that I really lusted after, was the Minolta Dynax 7. It was, to me, the ultimate expression of what a film camera of the 21st century could (and should) be. Beautifully designed, gorgeous to look at, and absolutely jam-packed with as much technology as you could cram into a camera without it actually being digital; the Minolta 7 was the height of film camera tech. But even back then, it came with a hefty price tag. 

And as I've already said, it was as close as you could get to shooting digital, without actually 'going' digital. Which, of course, everyone was. Much like the recent mirrorless vs DLSR debate (where mirrorless is obviously the future), it was obvious that film cameras were 'old tech' - even one as sophisticated as the Dynax 7. You would have been crazy to invest heavily in a film camera in the early 2000s. So I didn't. I moved over to Nikon, and never regretted the decision - even when Minolta released their digital version of the Dynax 7 (the aptly named 7D) a few years later.

What's that? A rear lcd screen on a film camera!? Yep.

I love using digital cameras, and was hooked from the moment I got the Nikon D70. The Olympus E-M1 I use now is a superb image making tool, as are all the cameras being released in the digital era.

But I will always have a special desire for film cameras. I wrote an opinion piece for an analog website a long time ago stating that; digital might be the 'heart' of photography, but film is the 'soul'. A bit pretentious maybe, but for someone 'raised' on film photography, it's in my blood (and, dare I say it, soul). 

I know, however, that there are photographers who couldn't wait to be rid of film, and have absolutely no intention of ever using it again. Not me. For me, it's a time capsule linking me back to my youth, and connecting me to the passion I felt when I first picked up a camera all those 35+ years ago. I'm not a film user because of some hipster, retro aesthetic that it can give my images. Far from it. Although if that's why you like film, then good for you. Have at it. Personally, it's more about the toys - the cameras themselves - and the possibility of fulfilling youthful dreams of actually owning and using these amazing cameras.

Which brings me back to the Minolta Alpha/Maxxum/Dynax 7. And which, from now on, I will refer to only as the Dynax 7 - since that is what it was called in Europe. Maxxum was used for the American market, and Alpha was the Asian designation (don't ask me why, and don't get me started).

Dynax 7 cutaway from Minolta brochure

So why am I writing a blog post about a camera I wished I'd owned 20 years ago? Well, long story short, a very good friend of mine has just given me a Minolta Dynax 7 as a gift (thanks Stew)! To say that I am blown away is something of an understatement. 

I knew he had found one at a local Op Shop (Thrift Store for my American friends) in a bulk load of cameras last year, and while it looked in good condition, it didn't actually work (broken shutter). We both had a good look at it to see if we could revive it, but both pronounced it dead. I commented to him at the time that it was a camera I had always wanted, and it was a shame this one was broken. He took it away with him, and to be honest, I didn't think any more of it. Until yesterday when Stew handed me the camera with a 28-105 lens attached and told me it was a gift! Mind blown.

Stewart is a professional photographer, and has been a Minolta shooter (now Sony) for as long as he has been using a camera. But he is also one of those photographer's who was very happy to see the end of film. So he is very happy to pass the Dynax 7 on to someone who will appreciate it, and actually use it. Which I most certainly will.

While one of his Sony camera's was away getting repaired, Stew sent the Dynax 7 in with it to see if it was salvageable (without pouring too much money into it). Turns out it was, and the service center managed to get the shutter mechanism working again. So now the Dynax 7 is working. Yay!

Stew also has quite a collection of old Minolta lenses - some rather exotic - which I am also fortunate enough to be able to avail myself of. Not only do I have a Dynax 7 with aforementioned 28-105mm Power Zoom, but also the use of a 50mm macro, a 16mm fisheye, and a 17-35mm which actually came with the Dynax 7 he found at the Op Shop. Quite an impressive kit - and I can't wait to use it all! 

There's one problem initially though - I don't have any film for it! I've recently sold off all my film stock, figuring that my film camera days were behind me. Damn! Now I wish I'd kept at least a couple of black and white rolls back, just on the off-chance that someone would give me my dream camera! Go figure....

I will get some film for it. And I will go out and shoot with it. Maybe with Stewart one day soon? He's just purchased a new Sony A7R 4 61MP beast, and I know he'll be itching to get out and use it when it arrives. I feel a road-trip coming on 😄 
 

I will definitely write more about my experiences with the Dynax 7, once I get around to shooting with it. There is so much ground to cover with this camera and the incredible technology Minolta built into it, that I'm sure it will span several posts and months of shooting. Can not wait. It's going to be so much fun!

And the Winner Is...

A few weeks ago I wrote about trying to decide on the 35mm film system that I would use going forward. I had decided logically to go with Canon – more specifically the EOS 300V. But what I really wanted was a Nikon F80 (which I eventually found two of). It all arrived a couple of weeks ago, I’ve shot with them, and the verdict is in.

What did I end up going with? If you’ve read my earlier posts, you can probably already guess the answer, so I’m not going to beat around the bush. I’m keeping the (black) Nikon N80 – surprise, surprise.

The Nikon N80

I did use both systems, side by side. And having done so, the clear winner – for me – was the Nikon F80. It’s a superb camera. It feels (and looks) superior to the Canon in almost every way, and most importantly, handles better than the 300V.

The Canon only has one command dial – that doubles as the on-off switch! So every time you turn the camera on, you have to rotate the dial to the mode you want to use. Seems like a small thing, but it drove me nuts. The Nikon, on the other hand, has the on-off switch separated from the mode dial, so you can simply leave the mode set all the time, and flick the camera on very quickly with one finger. Easy.

The F80 (or N80 in my case) also feels better (more solid) in the hand, and has the sweetest sounding shutter of any camera I’ve ever used – period! I’m not kidding. The shutter feel, and sound, on the Nikon F80 is just pure perfection. Again, maybe a small thing to some, but it all adds up to a superior user experience.

I also decided to get a 50mm f1.8D Nikkor lens to enhance the ‘classic’ film shooter experience. The 50mm f1.8 is a stellar lens, and can quite easily take the place of the 35-70mm if I ‘zoom with my feet’. So I sold the Nikkor 35-70mm without even taking an image with it – along with the black and silver F80 body that was surplus to requirements (I really only need one 35mm body), and the Canon 300V. So my auto focus 35mm film camera system going forward will be a Nikon N80 with 50mm f1.8D and 70-300mm f4/5.6G lenses. Nice.