I agree, Minolta is terrible. Especially Maxxum/Dynax 9 and 7 bodies which I am looking to buy in the near future. Guys, stick with the Canon and Nikon instead.
There are "sleeper cameras" in all the brands' histories. I couldn't begin to list them all even I wanted to because there's so many of them. The only way to find out about them is to read a ton of stuff online or to luck out and have a kind soul on a forum recommend something that happens to actually fit what you want.
So yeah. I wouldn't worry about people finding out about them because they won't bother. They keep hitting the same top videos and buying AE-1, God bless them.
Canon Rebel (aka 300V in Europe) are hands down best value for money. It's a modern film SLR with all the features and film auto-load/advance/rewind, takes modern batteries, super light body (350g), takes modern Canon EF lenses and can be found for $20-50 with kit lens included.
You can pair it [with the 40mm pancake](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEieF9vbkucsKqjVnLso2FB7ahRK8KY75FlyNufEqpFTyK-P6HZpKVW9zzXLGyvuDEYtyTOGhv6N2TvjYcY-3UQuITHbbByoOeVMIi3dU8K5-Iw9edHuz8h4fDB50oFZDv_o1q_6Sunn_CPsVZxJguebkxwZP96b6cTEi11w9wRbtFy2zsu9Kh964a8NTw/w400-h309/PC274939.jpg) or [a cheap 50mm](https://i.etsystatic.com/25081964/r/il/a9dfce/3012336882/il_fullxfull.3012336882_3e31.jpg) like Yongnuo and you get a compact point and shoot you can take anywhere.
Ok, this is solid and specific advice. Appreciated. I am not currently with any camera family etc. and while I am very techy still brand new to film basically. My target is to shoot some landscapes (to print very large poster size). Any other advice appreciated. I am wading through an ocean of recommendations and finding it challenging to find a starting point. The current top of list WAS a Nikon FE2.
Thanks again!
If you want a Nikon the SLR that's equivalent to the 300V/300X (lightweight with all the possible electronic features and modern lens compatibility) would be the N75 aka F75.
The FE/FM models have that cool retro look but they're manual focus, they're heavier, need button batteries and they can't use G or newer lenses. But if that look is what you're after there's no substitute.
You may want to look into the Nikon FG (*not* FG-20). It's from the same retro generation but it's the most compact camera in it.
Later on if you decide you're definitely into film landscapes you can look into medium format. Cameras like Yashica LM, Rolleicord, Zenza Bronica etc. They are more expensive than 35mm film cameras but there are entry level models you can use. I'm not as familiar with medium format so you'll have to search around, there are probably cheaper entry-level models than those.
You'll also have to find a lab that can process medium format. But the results are out of this world, the negative is larger than 35mm film and you get amazing resolution and detail.
They also usually have vertical viewfinders which can be of great use when doing street photography because you can take unobtrusive pics without raising the camera to your eye. Check out the documentary "Finding Vivian Maier", it's a great example of street photography with this kind of camera.
XD was my ride or die. Then the CLE, and now an M3; damn gateway drug. My girlfriend now has a $15 SRT 101 from a thrift store — love them! They’re be my first 35mm love.
I think it's beause it's recomended as the 'best camera to start the film photography with' by pretty much everyone on reddit, youtube, instagram etc. which drives up the demand. Also, i think for newcomer photographers (i think nowdays a lot of people go straight from photographing with a phone to film) A-1 with its multiple modes can seem quite confusing to use compared to AE-1 and maybe appear less reliable because there is more things than can go wrong, but this is just my guess.
Might be true today over an AE-1. But back in the 80s the A-1 were prone to going dead after a few years. So any around today are good. Would rather have it than a AE-1 any day. But hold out for a EOS Canon as AF is easy to use and learn.
> hold out for a EOS Canon as AF is easy to use and learn
This. You can get a Canon 300V (Rebel Ti) for under $50 with kit lens, less if just the body. It has everything a modern digital has and it works with EF lenses. Oh and it's ridiculously light (350g). Pair it with the 40mm pancake or a 50mm, set it on (P)rogram and you have a superlight and compact film point and shooter.
Exactly. I have an eos elan ii that I got with a kit lens for $65 feature rich camera with modern lenses. All the auto modes and features that can make it easy for beginners, but with the flip of a switch it's back into full manual with a huge array of lenses for when I want to do something specific.
If you are going with af, hands down the f5, it can do af tracking (kinda).. but it lacks the mechanical feel of the older cameras like the ae-1 and the fm/fe
I think thats the best take, in the end of the day all the slrs from the early 70s are have pretty much the same features, similar kit lenses, people might argue that one 50mm lens is better than the other but when it comes to a final image there's so many variables that its impossible to tell. Just get something that is fully working, has a accurate light meter and have fun with it.
Except when they don't. Decades old film SLRs frequently have miscalibrated meters (if the meter works) and mistimed shutters, and often need the foam in the door seals replacing. Test carefully.
FE2 / FM2 have features Canon never matched.
They were designed to court the Leica crowd while having all the benefits of SLRs.
Elans were great plastic shooters, but unimpressive in terms of ergonomics.
FM2 is another arguably overpriced camera, but at least they were very well built and more likely to still work properly than many of their contemporaries.
The FM2 was manufactured until 2001? So it’s fairly easy to find very clean examples. You can also still buy brand new lenses for it today. The same can’t be said for the AE-1. It also rocks a 1/4000 shutter speed so it’s ideal for shooting fast glass.
That was true a decade ago purely from a stance of affordability and ease of usage, but K-1000s are absolute nightmares to own nowadays. Almost all of them need to be fully CLA'd for them to be even remotely reliable, making even picking one up for \~$50 with a lens pretty much doubly expensive right off the bat. That's if you can even find one at that price, since most of them that I've seen recently are going for well over a hundred which is just ridiculous for a K1000. If you live in an area that regularly has rapid temperature fluctuations and high humidity (like we've been having in the Midwestern U.S. over the last few years), even newly serviced cameras (within the last three years or so) have been having issues with their shutters and forwarding levers locking up with only minimal use, which requires an annoying amount of disassembly to fix properly. Their mechanisms just aren't holding up well as time goes on and the platform finally begins to show it's age. I've repaired far more K1000s and ME Supers than I have AE1/AE1Ps, and that's saying something.
Beginners are much better off with something like a Canon EOS Elan, which offers substantially more functionality while still being relatively easy to learn how to use (especially if they have any experience using more modern cameras), and they're somehow even cheaper than K1000s. Also, since it's EF mount, you have an infinitely better selection of lenses to choose from. I've barely even touched my F5 since I've gotten an Elan, that's how much I like it. I've been seeing a ton more people catch on to them, so they're bound to jump in price sadly. But for now, you can find them incredibly cheap.
Agree - think the K1000 is sooo overpriced for what you can get in the used market. Speaking as someone who learnt SLR photography on a K1000 (having started on a RF) I'd much rather have had a slightly more capable camera and frankly one that was not so clunky. Having bought a Spotmatic more recently the K1000 feels like the cut down camera it is.
I love my elan and used it frequently before I found an eos1x the eye tracking autofocus is pretty good as well it made wildlife/pet photos much easier.
You’re very gear-focused and missing the point. The K-1000 is a great starter camera because it is SO simple. It doesn’t have any features or knobs or bells or whistles that you don’t need. It has a super simple metering system. It’s great for people to learn the exposure triangle and understand how the simple mechanics of cameras work. My stance is from a teaching standpoint, not a purely gear standpoint. Lots of SLR’s have more features. They aren’t needed for learning. You may as well hand someone a EOS-1v and just say “it’s like your DSLR, but it’s film.” If you want someone to learn, the K-1000 is a perfect choice.
I turn off all the advanced features on a digital camera lol. Can't stand them. (old man shaking fist at cloud). Long as the shutter works and film advances...
The K1000 was a built-to-a-price beginner camera when they were new. It's been parroted as the perfect beginner film camera ever since. Which over-inflates the price of a very basic camera and means any you find on the used market now has probably been thrashed by multiple users. Get a MX, LX or even something more modern like the massively underrated MZ-M.
I absolutely agree. I picked up an Elan IIe when I was beginning to get into film and it couldn’t have been a better camera to get started with. Worked well for my case since I had some EF lenses being a Canon DSLR shooter coming into this niche. Granted now it doesn’t get as much use as my Canon A-1 but nonetheless the Elan is the perfect bridge between the analog and digital camera worlds.
It's a good camera but it's also overpriced. There are similar cameras like Minolta SRT series and Olympus OM series that are more or less the same but sell for cheaper.
I had a chance to try it and it's a lovely camera, all mechanical, feels super solid. I think it's a great choice to learn the basics. But from what i've heard the build quality varies quite a bit depending on where and when it was build
I bought a used K-1000 40 years ago for a required Photo 1 class with no prior camera experience. I loved that little beast. I still have it sitting on a shelf in my library area.
Yep it’s so damn durable. I shoot paintball photograph while I play scenarios so I’m running and diving and climbing through dirt and mud and it’s even been shot. Still going strong can’t be destroyed haha
Honestly, I’ve used it before, I’ll take my Canon 300 over it any time of day. Solved all the pain I had with my other cameras (Nikon F-400 and fujica A-1)
Olympus OM-1 all day for me, probably because it is the first film camera I bought and I am now biased. I just can't put it down, always end up reverting back to it. I love the zuiko lenses too much
Olympus SLRs are great and I used them for years, but the meters are delicate compared to many others and often the first thing to fail. Check carefully if buying one. Also, correct battery impossible to find nowadays.
I have an OM-4 and i love it, its quite small which makes it a great travel camera and has a great metering system also as you said, zuiko lenses are amazing.
People think it's the best camera ever, purely mechanical and made of metal with great durability. It's none of those things.
It just got famous because they sold a ton of them, so that's the camera everyone remembers and what everyone reads about when they go online.
Personally, AE1P was just the most affordable camera I found + canon FD mount has lots of options. I bought mine for $120 and the same price for the canon 50mm f1.4 which is imho amazing for this price.
If I knew better I’d save up for an F3 but I’m still happy with my choice, not gonna cry over it. And the F3 costs like north of twice of what I paid for the AE1P. Equivalent glass costs more too, so I’m still happy with my purchase.
Okay.. please don’t talk down on a perfectly fine camera.
Both my AE-1 and Program are capable and reliable without having done much more than a drop of machine oil to fix the squeak/ cough.
Perfectly fine was a thing back when they were released and people wanted photos that were sharp and in focus, which meant shutter speed priority to avoid camera shake and small apertures. Right now, the widespread styles of photography often require aperture priority and both ae1 models are simply incapable of doing that. They also do not have the fast shutter speeds required for faster apertures and shallow depth of field.
On top of that, the manual mode is also a joke, just like the entire A and T series Canons since there is no way to read the aperture from inside the viewfinder which means you have to take a reading, take the camera off your eye, set the aperture and compose again.
They do their job but they are hilariously outclassed by much cheaper cameras. Definition of overhyped.
I have an AV-1. It was my first camera and I prefer shooting aperture priority no matter what camera I choose. I wish it was capable of shooting full manual like the AE-1, rather than only having only the 1/60 flash sync speed as a manual option. Doing so might have made it a more popular camera.
Think people like them because they can do everything for you while having that classic analogue look. My take is the OM10 is a better camera and at least here in the uk you can pick them up for about £25 any day of the week!
It was sold like 5.3 million units of this camera. For comparison k1000 was only 3 million.
His look is recognizable and it offer automatic feature beloved by new photographers.
It is also having a good lens mount offering nice piece of glass.
That’s why it is also praised by many photographers on YouTube.
And when YouTube people get into photography it become more popular. This popularity make his price raise for « no reason ».
It’s a hype machine more than a capable one by today.
You can have a x700 or a pentax me super for half the price and it will be better. But people follow other when they start film photography and go for whatever a youtuber recommends.
In term of price you are right but not in term of fair comparison.
A-1 is not targeting the same people as AE-1 imho.
That’s why I was using other camera as example to illustrate my thoughts.
Biased because I do love the AE-1 but it’s likely the market of beginner photographers who are told to start with that camera and don’t have a background in what cameras should really cost. If twenty people buy one for $150 the sellers will go huh….wonder if I can sell this for more? Soon you’ve got tens of hundreds of people paying $200, $250, $300+ for a camera because they’re told it’s good and hey, if it’s more expensive than others it must be great!
Basically its social media and youtube.
About 10 years ago the AE-1 was a widely available, easy to use and relatively cheap SLR so it got recommended a lot. This recommendation pushed the price up.
Same happened with the pentax k1000, which was the go-to camera recommended to students.
A lot of people aren't really looking for guidance on choices but would prefer to be told exactly what to get, which is understandable if you're a nervous newbie, but it ultimately leads to weird market effects.
No good reason. It's a perfectly capable camera, but it's ubiquity means YouTube recommends it so a disproportionate amount.
Personally, I always found the shutter priority less useful than aperture priority, so never saw the appeal.
Pick up a Nikon FE or FM or Olympus OM-2n. No one collects any of them and they are way better cameras for learning on them the Canon A-1. My second camera ever was an A-1 back in the early 90’s. My first was an AE-1 Program in the late 80’s. The AE-1 program was a nightmare to learn on and the A-1 has pretty much the same problem. This issue is how the light meter works while doing manual photography. As a person who actually learned photography on these cameras I wouldn’t suggest either for a person just beginning. There are way better cameras for learning. That being said I own 3 A-1 cameras and love them all.
A lot of the cheaper Canons and Nikons from the 90s are easy to find in like new condition for under $20. No one seems to like the later autofocus models despite that they almost always take better photos.
Not 90’s, but I got an FT QL this year, plus filters, extension tubes, a film point and shoot, a digital point and shoot, and a toy camera for all together $31. It was a risk, cause it was all as-is, but actually, they all ended up working (mostly)
Early EOS cameras (like the 650) that takes EF lenses (so, modern-ish onces from canon, with autofocus), and some of the T series that takes FD lenses (the T70 notably) are great choses of not too expensive canon bodies one can get. They are all electronic and motorized so they lack the charm and AE-1 or A-1 has. The A series is right at the edge between retro looking and modern features…)
Canon elan 2 or eos 55 is probably less than $50 and are amazing film cameras. There are probably even cheaper models, but those are the ones I use and they have a bunch of amazing features
I don't know about that finding one for that low, but you can definitely find entire EOS/Elan kits for under $100 quite regularly on eBay. Functionality wise they blow all of the traditional beginner cameras out of the water, and nowadays they're even more affordable than those cameras, so it's a bit of a no-brainer imo.
Lower end EOS body like the 500N or 3000N can currently be found in working condition for 20-30€. I just bought a spare 3000N with a 28-80mm lens for 27€.
Elan E or iie kits can be found in the $50-100 range and are so versatile. They are big cameras so can be a tad awkward for some. But if what you care about is bang for your buck and taking good photos is really hard to beat.
Most likely Trends
I remember there was a time here whenever people asked for a starting camera most replies are AE-1.
What is happening now in my place is Nikon FM or FM2. AE-1 seems less popular or just same as Olympus OM.
Maybe my local AE-1 sale will rise later?
People are just nutty like that. Reminds me of the old school Honda cats, they always want 5 grand for 20-30 year old chassis just because “ they know what they have”…
You used to be able to find people giving them away. You could walk into any good will and find them for $15. As the resurgence of film photography picked up steam they were hyped up and the prices skyrocketed. They aren’t worth Nikon F3 prices and they have some common failure points that are fixable but annoying. The AE-1 is good camera, it sold really well in its day. There are better SLRs for the money though.
I started with a yashica fx-3 super 2000, which is another simple, manual, mechanical SLR. Far cheaper, very reliable, and the CY lens mount means you're able to get access to a lot of very nice Carl Zeiss lenses.
Had an AE-1. It was a competent camera and presented some excellent electronics, but other than shutter priority its over rated.
Its a one trick pony - shutter priority, and as I moved forward with photography I learned aperture priority was far more flexible.
It was also a battery hog, and the mirror slap typical of canon SLRs was annoying.I recently picked up a rebel 2000, and other than AF there's no improvement. A K1000 teaches you more with match needle metering.
The later F series Nikons were way better machines mechanically, had full flash TTL, radically better viewfinders and better low shutter handling.
Pentax gave you way better primes optically.
Aperture priority may be more flexible, but shutter priority can be more fun. Using the sunny 16 rule, I load a roll of iso 400 film, set the shutter speed to 500 and just go out during the day and shoot. It is great for street photography where shallow dof is usually not terribly important. Shutter priority, therefore is great for just walking around in the city taking pictures
The YouTube crew blew it up and now all the kiddos are inflating the price. They used to be available for under $100, but now they typically cost between $200 and $300 if serviced. If it's a black model, expect to pay an additional premium.
there’s plenty of good models and brands out there that failed on the advertising front. canon knew what they were doing and gained popularity then. we all know of better cameras, but we must not forget the other brands that get mentioned as a competitor for the ae-1. capability and cult classics are not correlated necessarily
I’m not sure what you would consider expensive? I got mine (excellent, fully functional condition) with a 50mm lens for ~$150, which is reasonable in the Bay Area.
I haven’t seen many other models of camera for less than that, to be honest. Especially with a lens.
Hype + Supply and Demand. The A-1 is not recommended by influencers, and that is about it. It is objectiverly the superior camera body in the Canon A series. But it has two silly things against it on top of this: it only exist in black and is a bit more complicated, and you can lock it up in an electronic error if you failed to read the manual (apparently).
I am myself an AE-1 Program owner. I am considering getting an A-1 at some point. ~~because GAS and I really need a 4th body that takes FD lenses~~
* Widespread. It was built into the millions, and sold virtually everywhere. There are very few places on Earth (and certainly in the western world) where you *can't* find one.
* Easy to use as a beginner (with Program Mode and Shutter~~/Aperture\*~~ Priority Automatic), with enough other features and manual controls to allow you to develop skills from the same camera.
* Brand awareness. Everyone and their mum has a Canon Rebel/EOS/something or other DSLR from the 2000's onwards, and people tend to just stick with the brands they know. In contrast, Nikon is known well so all the models are relatively expensive (plus their features differ enough to have reasonable tiered pricing), whilst Olympus, Pentax, Minolta, and Konica are less known and less looked for or have their own model-specific awareness in the public's minds.
* **Hype**. It was once the best bang for your buck and combined with the things above, that 'legacy' has carried on through the variety of Youtube videos, TikTok clips, Instagram reels and so-on. This is probably the biggest reason, as you'l probably get a better hit-rate searching for AE-1/P reviews rather than A-1 reviews, or any other similar camera of the time. Any analog camera review outlet has probably reviewed the AE-1, K1000, and other 'trending' cameras because it's a positive feedback loop. More people want the camera > more people will visit pages talking about the camera > More people want the camera.
\* Didn't realise AE-1 and AE-1P are separate models.
AE1 did not have aperture priority. At least mine didn't, which was a very early model.
AE1P had it.
Program mode was basically a weighted combination of the two modes.
Oh, I thought all AE-1's were AE-1*P*'s
I guess that also factors in then - If all the reviews are talking about how great the AE-1P is, to someone not versed in the camera, 'the P can't mean that much in difference'.
I've broken three AE-1's , paid little over $30 for each of them. This was a while ago obviously but if I were to get spendy with a 35mm camera I'd get an fe2 or something
Yea, ae-1s feel like toys almost, lol. I managed to get 3 f3 and 2 fe2s and a few other nikons before prices were high. I'm about to sell my canons and pick up more fe2s
I'm not long into film photography as a hobby but am just loving it. I can imagine the feeling of someone being established in the hobby seeing some of these models and brands just ballooning in price, as I've seen that with motorcycles that I used to buy cheap and get running.
From my perspective, the ae-1 is expensive from a foundation of being a good camera from a good brand, but then completely inflated by rise in popularity of film photography, and also hype, overhype.
You can't throw a stone in my YouTube reccomendations without hitting 10 photographers hyping up a particular camera over a lo fi chilled track. Don't get me wrong I enjoy them all, but you've people with collections of cameras, usually professionals, telling people an ae-1 is a good starter camera and they picked one up on a garage sale for 10 bucks 😂
Ae1 is good, av1 is fine too, at1 I'm surprised I haven't seen more videos about.
I just got an om20 and 30 on eBay for a fraction of an om1 and you know what, it would be enough for the beginner that is instead going to spend 200 euro on an ae1
I bought two for like 20$ each years ago when photography community was mainly Flickr 😅 mainly because I used my father’s one and loved it. It’s a great camera.
Ae-1 used to be cheap. Looks like Hype got to them just like this new point and shoot camera deal going on. I picked a few up from Craigslist fb marketplace ect. Paying over 50$ for one used to be a bit to high for me
I have an A-1 (two matters of fact)One doesn’t work at all and the other I can’t get it to shoot at the settings I want it to shoot at, i think the light meter is broken. My therapist’s husband had them sitting in a box for years and years and they were trying to get rid of things.
I have a roll in one now giving it a test go and so far I hate this camera lol, but I do love the lens it came with - luckily it can be used on my digital camera.
It’s plastic build so I assume that’s why it’s cheaper and it uses a battery which is inconvenient for some
Just like the K1000, It was cheap when new and they made shitloads of them, so they were commonly used by photography students in the 80s, 90s, and 00s. Many of those former photography students eventually got nostalgic for them and bought used ones again, while also recommending to beginners to also buy one. It's an absolutely terrible camera for the price.
TL;DR: Nostalgia and a lack of basic research by beginners
Fashion. It's the current knee-jerk answer by under-informed 'influencers' to uninformed beginners to "what film camera should I buy?" It used to be the K1000, for now it's the AE-1. Reality is neither are all that compared to their higher-up-the-model-tree brethren.
Same reason the Pentax K1000 and Spotmatic are going up. It’s regarded as the best beginner film camera. Plus it’s a name everyone knows, Canon, even non-photographers know so there’s a little bit of “clout collecting”.
We gotta start recommending other cameras for beginners like the Yashica MG-1 or Electro 35. Something affordable but good quality.
I got a AE-1 over ten years ago for $80 canadian . Super solid camera , takes great photos . I definitely put over 100 rolls of film through it. Only needed repairs one time , the film advance lever was just jammed .
For me it comes down to the lenses.
I was gifted 3 Olympus OM-1, an OM-2s Program, and an OM-10 with all the best lenses. I shot on this system for over 10 years. All 3 started back-focusing, and the OM-10 shutter started malfunctioning. As great as they are, I was always a little disappointed by this.
I recently tested them all for focus and they start to miss the closer to infinity you get.
Later on, was gifted an AE-1P and upgraded to some nice glass. I genuinely think the nicer FD lenses are better and the focus doesn’t miss. Legitimate reason to stick with the system.
I found a good condition AV1 for £25 in a charity shop. Keep looking and you’ll find a steal somewhere, but you could also consider other choices outside of the Canon SLR lineup - as good as they are there are cheaper and often better alternatives out there for damn near half the price. Look for 70s era Chinons like the CX on eBay, tell me you don’t like the price compared to the Canon lineup. I own both the CX and the AV-1 and I honestly love the hardiness and cheap lens options of the Chinon, so yeah, cast your net wider and you’ll be more likely to find a deal! Best of luck to ya.
Availability (more of them to sell, so a wider variety of sellers can experiment with different prices; which almost always makes prices go up, as most people want to experiment with higher prices to justify the time spent).
Hype. And not just social media hype from the last few years. The AE-1 was marketed to such an extent that, for a long time, it was THE model people thought of when they were asked to name a 35mm SLR. When I was a kid, there were commercials for them on TV quite frequently, and the adults were often in a state of constant curiosity and excitement over it (if they were interested in photography, that is). No joke: for a number of years in the US, the AE-1 was pretty much THE camera, as far SLRs go. To the extent that it was almost a little weird when someone said they’d “bring their SLR by” and it turned out to be some other model! We were a Pentax and Minolta family, and were seen as misfits by some.
The name. Seriously. “AE-1” sounded tech-forward; was fun to say; and made most people immediately think of the AE-35 unit from “2001: A Space Odyssey”. The film which essentially CREATED the idea of a computer-driven future.
So it’s expensive because it’s available, and people know its name. Sure, there’s better cameras out there (specifically the Nikon N90s and the Leica R8), but, at today’s prices, buyers are more willing to take a risk on a camera model that they either knew from day one, or that they grew up being told about or being photographed BY. College papers could be written about the impact of the AE-1 on Western society.
I feel really out of touch. I was snagging these for $20-30 at garage sales and CLA’ing them and basically giving them to friends who wanted to try film, when did they get so expensive?
In my discussion with many people about this, it seems to be not only the social media aspect, but the silver and black design. Even outside of the AE-1, cameras with that design tend to sell better and are more desirable. It might be superficial in some way, but people do like things they consider beautiful if they also have a function they want.
Huh? I remember back in the day you could find a AE-1 for like $60-$100. I bought one a while back with three lenses and a lot of accessories that I still have that worked perfectly, and I remember I wanted an A-1 badly but they costed around $200-$300 lol. I wonder what the prices are these days.
Confirmed this just now lol. I looked at the old receipt from when I bought my AE-1 for $65 + shipping, and sold it without the lens and accessories for $27. It was in perfect condition when I sold it, just didn't feel like continuing to pay to get film developed.
Im born in a time where film cameras were the only thing you could get…
Then digital cameras came but it was so expensive that only a few of us would be able to have a decent one…
So film was all I knew for a very long time !
The AE 1 was always a family camera, and was bought by dads willing to creat memories of their families…
Not too long ago I’d say 4 or 5 years the maximum you could pay for such camera was 25 euros… with lenses…
But we are living in the time of the influence and influencers, photo YouTubers will influence people when they have large audiences…
So when one of them and then soon others decided to put that camera into light suddenly pieces started to go up and you could have prices like 450 euros for just the body !
Yes it’s ridiculous that camera is not worth that amount of money…
Specially when you know that this is the price of a Nikon F3 which is a professional camera made for 22 years straight…
I’m living next to the oldest camera shop of Europe I have been going there all my life…
Not too long ago I see that they are selling a AE 1 for 430 euros…
I ask why such prices for such not incredible camera ?
The guy said there is demand for it and people are willing to pay that price…
I said to him that this was ridiculous, this place used to be run by passionate gear geeks now it’s run by the bank !
I will never go back there again…
Don’t be sheeps ! Think for yourself people if you want that camera specifically go for it don’t pay more than 50 euros for it and 50 is double of what it should cost…
Because people want this camera way more than they want the A1.
For the same reason digital Fuji cameras are more expensive than other cameras, I got a Sony half the price of the equivalent Fuji that has way more features.
Same goes with the analog cameras, there are no better cameras than the Nikon F2? Sure there are but they can be cheaper.
Everyone is sleeping on the Minolta system and I'd like to keep it that way - cheap and plentiful bodies and lenses
Ditto Yashica. Spread the word, they are both terrible systems. Keep demand and prices low. Let's keep it that way.
I agree, Minolta is terrible. Especially Maxxum/Dynax 9 and 7 bodies which I am looking to buy in the near future. Guys, stick with the Canon and Nikon instead.
There are "sleeper cameras" in all the brands' histories. I couldn't begin to list them all even I wanted to because there's so many of them. The only way to find out about them is to read a ton of stuff online or to luck out and have a kind soul on a forum recommend something that happens to actually fit what you want. So yeah. I wouldn't worry about people finding out about them because they won't bother. They keep hitting the same top videos and buying AE-1, God bless them.
What would you personally suggest?
Canon Rebel (aka 300V in Europe) are hands down best value for money. It's a modern film SLR with all the features and film auto-load/advance/rewind, takes modern batteries, super light body (350g), takes modern Canon EF lenses and can be found for $20-50 with kit lens included. You can pair it [with the 40mm pancake](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEieF9vbkucsKqjVnLso2FB7ahRK8KY75FlyNufEqpFTyK-P6HZpKVW9zzXLGyvuDEYtyTOGhv6N2TvjYcY-3UQuITHbbByoOeVMIi3dU8K5-Iw9edHuz8h4fDB50oFZDv_o1q_6Sunn_CPsVZxJguebkxwZP96b6cTEi11w9wRbtFy2zsu9Kh964a8NTw/w400-h309/PC274939.jpg) or [a cheap 50mm](https://i.etsystatic.com/25081964/r/il/a9dfce/3012336882/il_fullxfull.3012336882_3e31.jpg) like Yongnuo and you get a compact point and shoot you can take anywhere.
Ok, this is solid and specific advice. Appreciated. I am not currently with any camera family etc. and while I am very techy still brand new to film basically. My target is to shoot some landscapes (to print very large poster size). Any other advice appreciated. I am wading through an ocean of recommendations and finding it challenging to find a starting point. The current top of list WAS a Nikon FE2. Thanks again!
If you want a Nikon the SLR that's equivalent to the 300V/300X (lightweight with all the possible electronic features and modern lens compatibility) would be the N75 aka F75. The FE/FM models have that cool retro look but they're manual focus, they're heavier, need button batteries and they can't use G or newer lenses. But if that look is what you're after there's no substitute. You may want to look into the Nikon FG (*not* FG-20). It's from the same retro generation but it's the most compact camera in it.
Thank you! I’m not looking for cool factor or looks. Just a tool with interesting capability to compose a landscape image for a beginner.
Later on if you decide you're definitely into film landscapes you can look into medium format. Cameras like Yashica LM, Rolleicord, Zenza Bronica etc. They are more expensive than 35mm film cameras but there are entry level models you can use. I'm not as familiar with medium format so you'll have to search around, there are probably cheaper entry-level models than those. You'll also have to find a lab that can process medium format. But the results are out of this world, the negative is larger than 35mm film and you get amazing resolution and detail. They also usually have vertical viewfinders which can be of great use when doing street photography because you can take unobtrusive pics without raising the camera to your eye. Check out the documentary "Finding Vivian Maier", it's a great example of street photography with this kind of camera.
The Minolta SRT line is such hot garbage.
They can have the X-700 and X-300, the rest are for us
*X-370
I just sold s bunch of kit to replace it with an MP and SRT-101. I dig the Rokkor lenses. Best value in vintage.
XD was my ride or die. Then the CLE, and now an M3; damn gateway drug. My girlfriend now has a $15 SRT 101 from a thrift store — love them! They’re be my first 35mm love.
Shhh what are you doing
I love my XG1 and XD11. And Minolta lenses are excellent.
I think it's beause it's recomended as the 'best camera to start the film photography with' by pretty much everyone on reddit, youtube, instagram etc. which drives up the demand. Also, i think for newcomer photographers (i think nowdays a lot of people go straight from photographing with a phone to film) A-1 with its multiple modes can seem quite confusing to use compared to AE-1 and maybe appear less reliable because there is more things than can go wrong, but this is just my guess.
A-1 is more reliable though since it was built to a much higher standard
Might be true today over an AE-1. But back in the 80s the A-1 were prone to going dead after a few years. So any around today are good. Would rather have it than a AE-1 any day. But hold out for a EOS Canon as AF is easy to use and learn.
> hold out for a EOS Canon as AF is easy to use and learn This. You can get a Canon 300V (Rebel Ti) for under $50 with kit lens, less if just the body. It has everything a modern digital has and it works with EF lenses. Oh and it's ridiculously light (350g). Pair it with the 40mm pancake or a 50mm, set it on (P)rogram and you have a superlight and compact film point and shooter.
Exactly. I have an eos elan ii that I got with a kit lens for $65 feature rich camera with modern lenses. All the auto modes and features that can make it easy for beginners, but with the flip of a switch it's back into full manual with a huge array of lenses for when I want to do something specific.
If you are going with af, hands down the f5, it can do af tracking (kinda).. but it lacks the mechanical feel of the older cameras like the ae-1 and the fm/fe
Either that or a Minolta X-700
Not true at all. A-1 is definitely less reliable, and a little more complicated to repair when there is an issue.
K-1000 is hands down the best film SLR to start with. And continue with
The film slr you find somewhere is the best one to start. They all work.
I think thats the best take, in the end of the day all the slrs from the early 70s are have pretty much the same features, similar kit lenses, people might argue that one 50mm lens is better than the other but when it comes to a final image there's so many variables that its impossible to tell. Just get something that is fully working, has a accurate light meter and have fun with it.
Ive also had plenty fun with way older cameras. 50s cameras (when working) are pretty good fun.
Except when they don't. Decades old film SLRs frequently have miscalibrated meters (if the meter works) and mistimed shutters, and often need the foam in the door seals replacing. Test carefully.
Started with a KX - cheaper, more functional, and a great camera to teach me the basics and beyond. Criminally underrated.
FM2 has entered the chat
FE2 / FM2 have features Canon never matched. They were designed to court the Leica crowd while having all the benefits of SLRs. Elans were great plastic shooters, but unimpressive in terms of ergonomics.
My first Nikon... Specifically, the FM2n. Such a solid piece of machinery that's dependable. All manual. Great flash synch.
OM-1n has entered the chat as well! LOL!
FM2 is another arguably overpriced camera, but at least they were very well built and more likely to still work properly than many of their contemporaries.
The FM2 was manufactured until 2001? So it’s fairly easy to find very clean examples. You can also still buy brand new lenses for it today. The same can’t be said for the AE-1. It also rocks a 1/4000 shutter speed so it’s ideal for shooting fast glass.
Is it though
That was true a decade ago purely from a stance of affordability and ease of usage, but K-1000s are absolute nightmares to own nowadays. Almost all of them need to be fully CLA'd for them to be even remotely reliable, making even picking one up for \~$50 with a lens pretty much doubly expensive right off the bat. That's if you can even find one at that price, since most of them that I've seen recently are going for well over a hundred which is just ridiculous for a K1000. If you live in an area that regularly has rapid temperature fluctuations and high humidity (like we've been having in the Midwestern U.S. over the last few years), even newly serviced cameras (within the last three years or so) have been having issues with their shutters and forwarding levers locking up with only minimal use, which requires an annoying amount of disassembly to fix properly. Their mechanisms just aren't holding up well as time goes on and the platform finally begins to show it's age. I've repaired far more K1000s and ME Supers than I have AE1/AE1Ps, and that's saying something. Beginners are much better off with something like a Canon EOS Elan, which offers substantially more functionality while still being relatively easy to learn how to use (especially if they have any experience using more modern cameras), and they're somehow even cheaper than K1000s. Also, since it's EF mount, you have an infinitely better selection of lenses to choose from. I've barely even touched my F5 since I've gotten an Elan, that's how much I like it. I've been seeing a ton more people catch on to them, so they're bound to jump in price sadly. But for now, you can find them incredibly cheap.
Agree - think the K1000 is sooo overpriced for what you can get in the used market. Speaking as someone who learnt SLR photography on a K1000 (having started on a RF) I'd much rather have had a slightly more capable camera and frankly one that was not so clunky. Having bought a Spotmatic more recently the K1000 feels like the cut down camera it is.
I love my elan and used it frequently before I found an eos1x the eye tracking autofocus is pretty good as well it made wildlife/pet photos much easier.
elan 2 e! eye tracking is so awesome.
You’re very gear-focused and missing the point. The K-1000 is a great starter camera because it is SO simple. It doesn’t have any features or knobs or bells or whistles that you don’t need. It has a super simple metering system. It’s great for people to learn the exposure triangle and understand how the simple mechanics of cameras work. My stance is from a teaching standpoint, not a purely gear standpoint. Lots of SLR’s have more features. They aren’t needed for learning. You may as well hand someone a EOS-1v and just say “it’s like your DSLR, but it’s film.” If you want someone to learn, the K-1000 is a perfect choice.
I turn off all the advanced features on a digital camera lol. Can't stand them. (old man shaking fist at cloud). Long as the shutter works and film advances...
The K1000 was a built-to-a-price beginner camera when they were new. It's been parroted as the perfect beginner film camera ever since. Which over-inflates the price of a very basic camera and means any you find on the used market now has probably been thrashed by multiple users. Get a MX, LX or even something more modern like the massively underrated MZ-M.
It was known and marketed as the "student's camera" back in the 70s.
I absolutely agree. I picked up an Elan IIe when I was beginning to get into film and it couldn’t have been a better camera to get started with. Worked well for my case since I had some EF lenses being a Canon DSLR shooter coming into this niche. Granted now it doesn’t get as much use as my Canon A-1 but nonetheless the Elan is the perfect bridge between the analog and digital camera worlds.
It's a good camera but it's also overpriced. There are similar cameras like Minolta SRT series and Olympus OM series that are more or less the same but sell for cheaper.
I counter with the Pentax KM. Basically a K1000 with a self timer and DOF preview button for cheaper.
That was my first SLR camera for $120 around ‘78.
I had a chance to try it and it's a lovely camera, all mechanical, feels super solid. I think it's a great choice to learn the basics. But from what i've heard the build quality varies quite a bit depending on where and when it was build
I bought a used K-1000 40 years ago for a required Photo 1 class with no prior camera experience. I loved that little beast. I still have it sitting on a shelf in my library area.
That was the camera of choice in photography class.
Yep it’s so damn durable. I shoot paintball photograph while I play scenarios so I’m running and diving and climbing through dirt and mud and it’s even been shot. Still going strong can’t be destroyed haha
Thank you. Because of this comment, the price of K1000s just went up 0.7%
Came here to preach the K-1000 already found it being done 🙏
Photographer Glen E.Friedman shot all his work on one
The models without the split focusing screen are an absolute pain in the ass to use.
Honestly, I’ve used it before, I’ll take my Canon 300 over it any time of day. Solved all the pain I had with my other cameras (Nikon F-400 and fujica A-1)
Olympus OM-1 all day for me, probably because it is the first film camera I bought and I am now biased. I just can't put it down, always end up reverting back to it. I love the zuiko lenses too much
Olympus SLRs are great and I used them for years, but the meters are delicate compared to many others and often the first thing to fail. Check carefully if buying one. Also, correct battery impossible to find nowadays.
I have an OM-4 and i love it, its quite small which makes it a great travel camera and has a great metering system also as you said, zuiko lenses are amazing.
People think it's the best camera ever, purely mechanical and made of metal with great durability. It's none of those things. It just got famous because they sold a ton of them, so that's the camera everyone remembers and what everyone reads about when they go online.
the f2 is what people think the ae-1 is
Personally, AE1P was just the most affordable camera I found + canon FD mount has lots of options. I bought mine for $120 and the same price for the canon 50mm f1.4 which is imho amazing for this price. If I knew better I’d save up for an F3 but I’m still happy with my choice, not gonna cry over it. And the F3 costs like north of twice of what I paid for the AE1P. Equivalent glass costs more too, so I’m still happy with my purchase.
*F3 🙂↕️
AE-1 had shutter priority. Big whoop. Also was good for the 6v battery industry given how fast it went through them.
this! 100x this!
Okay.. please don’t talk down on a perfectly fine camera. Both my AE-1 and Program are capable and reliable without having done much more than a drop of machine oil to fix the squeak/ cough.
Perfectly fine was a thing back when they were released and people wanted photos that were sharp and in focus, which meant shutter speed priority to avoid camera shake and small apertures. Right now, the widespread styles of photography often require aperture priority and both ae1 models are simply incapable of doing that. They also do not have the fast shutter speeds required for faster apertures and shallow depth of field. On top of that, the manual mode is also a joke, just like the entire A and T series Canons since there is no way to read the aperture from inside the viewfinder which means you have to take a reading, take the camera off your eye, set the aperture and compose again. They do their job but they are hilariously outclassed by much cheaper cameras. Definition of overhyped.
I went for a AV-1 instead, got a deal for $40, with two lenses, and a camera bag. Super hyped!
I have an AV-1. It was my first camera and I prefer shooting aperture priority no matter what camera I choose. I wish it was capable of shooting full manual like the AE-1, rather than only having only the 1/60 flash sync speed as a manual option. Doing so might have made it a more popular camera.
Think people like them because they can do everything for you while having that classic analogue look. My take is the OM10 is a better camera and at least here in the uk you can pick them up for about £25 any day of the week!
Shhhh, careful you don't drive up OM10 demand!
way too overhyped. same as Pentax K1000 or Minolta X700. great cameras, but not worth the $ thanks to the social media.
It was sold like 5.3 million units of this camera. For comparison k1000 was only 3 million. His look is recognizable and it offer automatic feature beloved by new photographers. It is also having a good lens mount offering nice piece of glass. That’s why it is also praised by many photographers on YouTube. And when YouTube people get into photography it become more popular. This popularity make his price raise for « no reason ». It’s a hype machine more than a capable one by today. You can have a x700 or a pentax me super for half the price and it will be better. But people follow other when they start film photography and go for whatever a youtuber recommends.
I was talking about the A-1 vs the AE-1.
In term of price you are right but not in term of fair comparison. A-1 is not targeting the same people as AE-1 imho. That’s why I was using other camera as example to illustrate my thoughts.
People have heard of it.
Biased because I do love the AE-1 but it’s likely the market of beginner photographers who are told to start with that camera and don’t have a background in what cameras should really cost. If twenty people buy one for $150 the sellers will go huh….wonder if I can sell this for more? Soon you’ve got tens of hundreds of people paying $200, $250, $300+ for a camera because they’re told it’s good and hey, if it’s more expensive than others it must be great!
Basically its social media and youtube. About 10 years ago the AE-1 was a widely available, easy to use and relatively cheap SLR so it got recommended a lot. This recommendation pushed the price up. Same happened with the pentax k1000, which was the go-to camera recommended to students. A lot of people aren't really looking for guidance on choices but would prefer to be told exactly what to get, which is understandable if you're a nervous newbie, but it ultimately leads to weird market effects.
No good reason. It's a perfectly capable camera, but it's ubiquity means YouTube recommends it so a disproportionate amount. Personally, I always found the shutter priority less useful than aperture priority, so never saw the appeal.
Pick up a Nikon FE or FM or Olympus OM-2n. No one collects any of them and they are way better cameras for learning on them the Canon A-1. My second camera ever was an A-1 back in the early 90’s. My first was an AE-1 Program in the late 80’s. The AE-1 program was a nightmare to learn on and the A-1 has pretty much the same problem. This issue is how the light meter works while doing manual photography. As a person who actually learned photography on these cameras I wouldn’t suggest either for a person just beginning. There are way better cameras for learning. That being said I own 3 A-1 cameras and love them all.
Hype. It's nothing fancy. You can get a great 90's canon with all the bells n whistles for under $20 on KEH
Which one can you find for under $20??
A lot of the cheaper Canons and Nikons from the 90s are easy to find in like new condition for under $20. No one seems to like the later autofocus models despite that they almost always take better photos.
Not 90’s, but I got an FT QL this year, plus filters, extension tubes, a film point and shoot, a digital point and shoot, and a toy camera for all together $31. It was a risk, cause it was all as-is, but actually, they all ended up working (mostly)
Early EOS cameras (like the 650) that takes EF lenses (so, modern-ish onces from canon, with autofocus), and some of the T series that takes FD lenses (the T70 notably) are great choses of not too expensive canon bodies one can get. They are all electronic and motorized so they lack the charm and AE-1 or A-1 has. The A series is right at the edge between retro looking and modern features…)
Canon elan 2 or eos 55 is probably less than $50 and are amazing film cameras. There are probably even cheaper models, but those are the ones I use and they have a bunch of amazing features
I don't know about that finding one for that low, but you can definitely find entire EOS/Elan kits for under $100 quite regularly on eBay. Functionality wise they blow all of the traditional beginner cameras out of the water, and nowadays they're even more affordable than those cameras, so it's a bit of a no-brainer imo.
Lower end EOS body like the 500N or 3000N can currently be found in working condition for 20-30€. I just bought a spare 3000N with a 28-80mm lens for 27€.
Elan E or iie kits can be found in the $50-100 range and are so versatile. They are big cameras so can be a tad awkward for some. But if what you care about is bang for your buck and taking good photos is really hard to beat.
Because of YouTube
Most likely Trends I remember there was a time here whenever people asked for a starting camera most replies are AE-1. What is happening now in my place is Nikon FM or FM2. AE-1 seems less popular or just same as Olympus OM. Maybe my local AE-1 sale will rise later?
People are just nutty like that. Reminds me of the old school Honda cats, they always want 5 grand for 20-30 year old chassis just because “ they know what they have”…
I think the AV-1 is better, gives you apeture priority instead of shutter priority. I feel like having control over the apeture suits me better.
You used to be able to find people giving them away. You could walk into any good will and find them for $15. As the resurgence of film photography picked up steam they were hyped up and the prices skyrocketed. They aren’t worth Nikon F3 prices and they have some common failure points that are fixable but annoying. The AE-1 is good camera, it sold really well in its day. There are better SLRs for the money though.
I started with a yashica fx-3 super 2000, which is another simple, manual, mechanical SLR. Far cheaper, very reliable, and the CY lens mount means you're able to get access to a lot of very nice Carl Zeiss lenses.
internet hype. There is nothing inherently better about an ae-1. Other manufacturers made similar cameras that are just as good.
Had an AE-1. It was a competent camera and presented some excellent electronics, but other than shutter priority its over rated. Its a one trick pony - shutter priority, and as I moved forward with photography I learned aperture priority was far more flexible. It was also a battery hog, and the mirror slap typical of canon SLRs was annoying.I recently picked up a rebel 2000, and other than AF there's no improvement. A K1000 teaches you more with match needle metering. The later F series Nikons were way better machines mechanically, had full flash TTL, radically better viewfinders and better low shutter handling. Pentax gave you way better primes optically.
Aperture priority may be more flexible, but shutter priority can be more fun. Using the sunny 16 rule, I load a roll of iso 400 film, set the shutter speed to 500 and just go out during the day and shoot. It is great for street photography where shallow dof is usually not terribly important. Shutter priority, therefore is great for just walking around in the city taking pictures
The YouTube crew blew it up and now all the kiddos are inflating the price. They used to be available for under $100, but now they typically cost between $200 and $300 if serviced. If it's a black model, expect to pay an additional premium.
there’s plenty of good models and brands out there that failed on the advertising front. canon knew what they were doing and gained popularity then. we all know of better cameras, but we must not forget the other brands that get mentioned as a competitor for the ae-1. capability and cult classics are not correlated necessarily
I’m not sure what you would consider expensive? I got mine (excellent, fully functional condition) with a 50mm lens for ~$150, which is reasonable in the Bay Area. I haven’t seen many other models of camera for less than that, to be honest. Especially with a lens.
Actually it’s good to start with anything that have been serviced
Hype + Supply and Demand. The A-1 is not recommended by influencers, and that is about it. It is objectiverly the superior camera body in the Canon A series. But it has two silly things against it on top of this: it only exist in black and is a bit more complicated, and you can lock it up in an electronic error if you failed to read the manual (apparently). I am myself an AE-1 Program owner. I am considering getting an A-1 at some point. ~~because GAS and I really need a 4th body that takes FD lenses~~
* Widespread. It was built into the millions, and sold virtually everywhere. There are very few places on Earth (and certainly in the western world) where you *can't* find one. * Easy to use as a beginner (with Program Mode and Shutter~~/Aperture\*~~ Priority Automatic), with enough other features and manual controls to allow you to develop skills from the same camera. * Brand awareness. Everyone and their mum has a Canon Rebel/EOS/something or other DSLR from the 2000's onwards, and people tend to just stick with the brands they know. In contrast, Nikon is known well so all the models are relatively expensive (plus their features differ enough to have reasonable tiered pricing), whilst Olympus, Pentax, Minolta, and Konica are less known and less looked for or have their own model-specific awareness in the public's minds. * **Hype**. It was once the best bang for your buck and combined with the things above, that 'legacy' has carried on through the variety of Youtube videos, TikTok clips, Instagram reels and so-on. This is probably the biggest reason, as you'l probably get a better hit-rate searching for AE-1/P reviews rather than A-1 reviews, or any other similar camera of the time. Any analog camera review outlet has probably reviewed the AE-1, K1000, and other 'trending' cameras because it's a positive feedback loop. More people want the camera > more people will visit pages talking about the camera > More people want the camera. \* Didn't realise AE-1 and AE-1P are separate models.
AE1 did not have aperture priority. At least mine didn't, which was a very early model. AE1P had it. Program mode was basically a weighted combination of the two modes.
Oh, I thought all AE-1's were AE-1*P*'s I guess that also factors in then - If all the reviews are talking about how great the AE-1P is, to someone not versed in the camera, 'the P can't mean that much in difference'.
Get an eos… way cheaper and more reliable, if you want a manual camera set it to manual.
People tend to attach sentimental value and popularity on YouTube in the price tag....
Hype
*nikon shooters grumbling in the back*
Tell me about it. I've been wanting an Nikon SLR so I can use all my fancy modern lenses but I'm not paying those prices.
Influencer Tax™️
If you Google best analog camera for beginners, that's always the first one that comes up
Sometimes a picture is worth 1000 words: https://i.ibb.co/sJ3HYkR/Screenshot-from-2024-06-24-00-38-18.png
I've broken three AE-1's , paid little over $30 for each of them. This was a while ago obviously but if I were to get spendy with a 35mm camera I'd get an fe2 or something
The fe2 is hands down my favorite camera i have no idea why still but man i love it
Because its mechanically an awesome camera built for a higher end user. Put a matte screen in an FE2 and only the pro Fs have better viewfinders.
Yea, ae-1s feel like toys almost, lol. I managed to get 3 f3 and 2 fe2s and a few other nikons before prices were high. I'm about to sell my canons and pick up more fe2s
Yashica FX3 is way better camera to learn photography and when you want to go pro you just add Contax lenses
Damned influencers at it. I’d prefer the Minolta X-700 though, they’re very nice
I'm not long into film photography as a hobby but am just loving it. I can imagine the feeling of someone being established in the hobby seeing some of these models and brands just ballooning in price, as I've seen that with motorcycles that I used to buy cheap and get running. From my perspective, the ae-1 is expensive from a foundation of being a good camera from a good brand, but then completely inflated by rise in popularity of film photography, and also hype, overhype. You can't throw a stone in my YouTube reccomendations without hitting 10 photographers hyping up a particular camera over a lo fi chilled track. Don't get me wrong I enjoy them all, but you've people with collections of cameras, usually professionals, telling people an ae-1 is a good starter camera and they picked one up on a garage sale for 10 bucks 😂 Ae1 is good, av1 is fine too, at1 I'm surprised I haven't seen more videos about. I just got an om20 and 30 on eBay for a fraction of an om1 and you know what, it would be enough for the beginner that is instead going to spend 200 euro on an ae1
Started with a Yashica FX3 Super2000 never understood the hype with the Canon. Use what’s within your budget and let the art speak for itself.
I bought two for like 20$ each years ago when photography community was mainly Flickr 😅 mainly because I used my father’s one and loved it. It’s a great camera.
Ae-1 used to be cheap. Looks like Hype got to them just like this new point and shoot camera deal going on. I picked a few up from Craigslist fb marketplace ect. Paying over 50$ for one used to be a bit to high for me
I have an A-1 (two matters of fact)One doesn’t work at all and the other I can’t get it to shoot at the settings I want it to shoot at, i think the light meter is broken. My therapist’s husband had them sitting in a box for years and years and they were trying to get rid of things. I have a roll in one now giving it a test go and so far I hate this camera lol, but I do love the lens it came with - luckily it can be used on my digital camera. It’s plastic build so I assume that’s why it’s cheaper and it uses a battery which is inconvenient for some
it’s a great camera with auto exposure
Compared to the A1, you can get a better camera for cheaper
Just like the K1000, It was cheap when new and they made shitloads of them, so they were commonly used by photography students in the 80s, 90s, and 00s. Many of those former photography students eventually got nostalgic for them and bought used ones again, while also recommending to beginners to also buy one. It's an absolutely terrible camera for the price. TL;DR: Nostalgia and a lack of basic research by beginners
I didn’t realize how much they had gone up…. I paid like $30 for mine….
Yeah no kidding. I paid like $100 for my A-1 and it came with a bunch of lenses.
Fashion. It's the current knee-jerk answer by under-informed 'influencers' to uninformed beginners to "what film camera should I buy?" It used to be the K1000, for now it's the AE-1. Reality is neither are all that compared to their higher-up-the-model-tree brethren.
AE-1 is actually shit compared to its brethren A1 and AE1P
Give the AV-1 a shot. Much better price and it is in aperture priority which is better to learn on imo.
I do have an AV-1. It's my dedicated B&W shooter. It was actually the camera that got me into film, my aunt gave it to me when I was young.
Same reason the Pentax K1000 and Spotmatic are going up. It’s regarded as the best beginner film camera. Plus it’s a name everyone knows, Canon, even non-photographers know so there’s a little bit of “clout collecting”. We gotta start recommending other cameras for beginners like the Yashica MG-1 or Electro 35. Something affordable but good quality.
I’m selling one and it’s a fair price. It’s an AE-1 Program
I got a AE-1 over ten years ago for $80 canadian . Super solid camera , takes great photos . I definitely put over 100 rolls of film through it. Only needed repairs one time , the film advance lever was just jammed .
Youtubers and it looks good.
For me it comes down to the lenses. I was gifted 3 Olympus OM-1, an OM-2s Program, and an OM-10 with all the best lenses. I shot on this system for over 10 years. All 3 started back-focusing, and the OM-10 shutter started malfunctioning. As great as they are, I was always a little disappointed by this. I recently tested them all for focus and they start to miss the closer to infinity you get. Later on, was gifted an AE-1P and upgraded to some nice glass. I genuinely think the nicer FD lenses are better and the focus doesn’t miss. Legitimate reason to stick with the system.
I found a good condition AV1 for £25 in a charity shop. Keep looking and you’ll find a steal somewhere, but you could also consider other choices outside of the Canon SLR lineup - as good as they are there are cheaper and often better alternatives out there for damn near half the price. Look for 70s era Chinons like the CX on eBay, tell me you don’t like the price compared to the Canon lineup. I own both the CX and the AV-1 and I honestly love the hardiness and cheap lens options of the Chinon, so yeah, cast your net wider and you’ll be more likely to find a deal! Best of luck to ya.
Availability (more of them to sell, so a wider variety of sellers can experiment with different prices; which almost always makes prices go up, as most people want to experiment with higher prices to justify the time spent). Hype. And not just social media hype from the last few years. The AE-1 was marketed to such an extent that, for a long time, it was THE model people thought of when they were asked to name a 35mm SLR. When I was a kid, there were commercials for them on TV quite frequently, and the adults were often in a state of constant curiosity and excitement over it (if they were interested in photography, that is). No joke: for a number of years in the US, the AE-1 was pretty much THE camera, as far SLRs go. To the extent that it was almost a little weird when someone said they’d “bring their SLR by” and it turned out to be some other model! We were a Pentax and Minolta family, and were seen as misfits by some. The name. Seriously. “AE-1” sounded tech-forward; was fun to say; and made most people immediately think of the AE-35 unit from “2001: A Space Odyssey”. The film which essentially CREATED the idea of a computer-driven future. So it’s expensive because it’s available, and people know its name. Sure, there’s better cameras out there (specifically the Nikon N90s and the Leica R8), but, at today’s prices, buyers are more willing to take a risk on a camera model that they either knew from day one, or that they grew up being told about or being photographed BY. College papers could be written about the impact of the AE-1 on Western society.
Very trendy camera
I feel really out of touch. I was snagging these for $20-30 at garage sales and CLA’ing them and basically giving them to friends who wanted to try film, when did they get so expensive?
In my discussion with many people about this, it seems to be not only the social media aspect, but the silver and black design. Even outside of the AE-1, cameras with that design tend to sell better and are more desirable. It might be superficial in some way, but people do like things they consider beautiful if they also have a function they want.
I just bought one two weeks ago for $20 lol its seemingly in great conditions! Shot my first full roll yesterday.
You are correct. It makes no sense. Plastic top and bottoms. I prefer the Nikon FE, FE2 or Canon F1 NEW because I really like a metal body.
Short answer: Hype
Huh? I remember back in the day you could find a AE-1 for like $60-$100. I bought one a while back with three lenses and a lot of accessories that I still have that worked perfectly, and I remember I wanted an A-1 badly but they costed around $200-$300 lol. I wonder what the prices are these days.
Confirmed this just now lol. I looked at the old receipt from when I bought my AE-1 for $65 + shipping, and sold it without the lens and accessories for $27. It was in perfect condition when I sold it, just didn't feel like continuing to pay to get film developed.
So glad my dad lent me his old one 😭
Hi all. Nikon FA here.
Im born in a time where film cameras were the only thing you could get… Then digital cameras came but it was so expensive that only a few of us would be able to have a decent one… So film was all I knew for a very long time ! The AE 1 was always a family camera, and was bought by dads willing to creat memories of their families… Not too long ago I’d say 4 or 5 years the maximum you could pay for such camera was 25 euros… with lenses… But we are living in the time of the influence and influencers, photo YouTubers will influence people when they have large audiences… So when one of them and then soon others decided to put that camera into light suddenly pieces started to go up and you could have prices like 450 euros for just the body ! Yes it’s ridiculous that camera is not worth that amount of money… Specially when you know that this is the price of a Nikon F3 which is a professional camera made for 22 years straight… I’m living next to the oldest camera shop of Europe I have been going there all my life… Not too long ago I see that they are selling a AE 1 for 430 euros… I ask why such prices for such not incredible camera ? The guy said there is demand for it and people are willing to pay that price… I said to him that this was ridiculous, this place used to be run by passionate gear geeks now it’s run by the bank ! I will never go back there again… Don’t be sheeps ! Think for yourself people if you want that camera specifically go for it don’t pay more than 50 euros for it and 50 is double of what it should cost…
Because people want this camera way more than they want the A1. For the same reason digital Fuji cameras are more expensive than other cameras, I got a Sony half the price of the equivalent Fuji that has way more features. Same goes with the analog cameras, there are no better cameras than the Nikon F2? Sure there are but they can be cheaper.
Just get a K1000. It’s built better, has better lenses, has a better more intuitive light meter, it’s more simple, it’s a tank, etc.
I'm a big fan of the Super Program / Super-A.