just got a new camera :D

[danni]

wow! :D I just inheritted a really nice camera this weekend, but the thing is that its about 20 years old... Will that affect how well my photos turn out?

btw its a Minolta X-700 MPS (which im told is an SLR), which also has its regular small lens and a vivitar macro 55mm zoom lens. :)

any good? i've always wanted a nice digital camera, but who can give up a free camera? :)

[Dave]

Lucky you .... get practicing and find out what you can do with it!

[PDG]

You're in luck. You've inherited a very good camera (http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/minoltax700/).

As for results...well, my experiences are unique. So far, I've achieved better results with all my 35mm based cameras as opposed to my digital ones. Why? Because film (with the exception of slide film) is rather forgiving. About 5-7 stops more forgiving to be exact. Frankly though, I place more value on film photography than digital. But that's cuz I'm an old-fashioned geek inside. Plus, negatives tend to capture more detail in shadows that can later be rescued with digital scans.

Just remember, it'll cost you $3-7 per roll to develop the film. Digital is free once you put forward the initial investment. As far as getting results, this camera is sure to please.

If you're looking to have some fun with typical over the counter film, try out Fuji Superia 400 and Kodak Black and White 400. Both can be developed anywhere (C-41 process) and produce pleasing results.

In a worst case scenario, there's always eBay.

Sample pics I took with a crappy point 'n shoot. A professional camera like yours will beat this point n shoot to a bloody death.
http://art.smugmug.com/photos/18909047-L.jpg
http://art.smugmug.com/photos/18909048-L.jpg

[burndog]

I can't comment on the upper end pro digital cameras, but as far as consumer digital cameras they would be blown away by even a decent 35mm with quality film and processing.

Film has so much more latitude than digital cameras. (record better in a march larger range of brightnesses, and as PDG said earlier with negative film you can be out on your exposure a bit and have very little quality loss...better to overexpose negative film than to underexpose...too much light is better than not enough)

More expensive for sure, but worth every penny. Digital is nice because it is so convenient and instant, but its quality can not match film in my opinion.

Sure the new pro cameras produce great images, but few hobbyists have 7 or 8 grand to spend on a camera.

Good luck! and have fun!

[danni]

wow PDG thanx so much for the info! :D greatly appreciated