Hey, so I'm just looking to get into 35mm SLR photography. I found, what I believe to be, a decent camera for a decent price. It's a Pentax MZ-10 for $40 with ten rolls of film and two lenses: a standard 35-80 lens and a zoom Pentax 28-200 (with lens hood). Would you guys mind enlightening me if this is a good deal?
Also, has anyone every used this camera before?
Tips for getting started with 35mm would be great too, as I mainly use a point and shoot digital right now.
Just my own take on the situation: If you want to use film and want different results from a P&S, avoid (most) zooms and, especially, something like a 28-200 (though some have the reputation of being almost decent).
Again, Why do you want to use film? What kind of pictures do you want to take?
If you want to enter a different world compared to your P&S, look for some good non-zoom lenses to start with...
The rest, again, depends on the kind of pictures you want to take.
While I don't have this particular camera, I am, as my name suggests, a Pentax owner. If the MZ-10 is in good condition then with the extras, $40 is a great price. I'd get it in a shot if it were me. You can pay the equivalent of $40 for 10 rolls of film here in the U.K. !
Well, my main interest with film photography lies in the darkroom. I really hope to get familiar with developing black and white film as it is a topic which really interests me. I just figured that this Pentax would be a decent way for me to get started with film, I really like the idea of experimenting with all the different features of an slr as my point and shoot is about ten years old now. Alternative processing and photography techniques also seem very interesting and a lot of fun.
Originally Posted by Rol_Lei Nut
The first lens I listed wasn't a zoom though, right?
I just figured two lenses, a camera and a ton of film was a pretty decent deal.
My thoughts exactly. I figure just the film itself may be worth it, though I don't really know if it is a very good brand/type. If it matters, the film is as follows:
Originally Posted by pentaxuser
1. 7 200iso Kodak GB
2. 2 800iso Kodak GT
3. 1 1600iso Fujichrome Super HG
Both lenses are zooms.
For $40. it's really a no brainer for someone just getting involved in the hobby. The advantage to a prime(not zoom) lens is they are smaller, lighter & usually sharper.
I can pretty much guarantee you wouldn't see the difference in picture quality between them for a long time
unless one of the zooms is really bad.
So a lens like this would be preferable?
Originally Posted by John Koehrer
Originally Posted by addies
There are almost as many takes on preferable or ideal lenses as there are photographers.
There are also two main schools of thought on what a "normal" focal length should be: Lenses around 50mm or wider lenses around 35mm (a third school likes the convenience of zooms which include 50mm).
But start with the 50mm.... If after quite a while you feel constrained by it, then look further.
About the film being offered: A lot of it seems to be pretty specialistic high-speed film. If long expired, could be practically useless.
Also not B&W.
If you are planning to shoot a lot, you could consider buying a bulk loader and the B&W film in rolls.
This is a very good lens and usually they go pretty cheap being 'slow' in 1.4/1.2 madness going a bit on with Pentax dslr people.
Originally Posted by addies
Ok, thanks for the helpful advice guys!
So, I guess I'll pick up this camera and mess around with it for a bit. If I find that I really enjoy photography I'll probably invest a bit more into it. If not, well I guess I'll be able to get a somewhat decent resale value on the camera :P