Yep, you're reading it right - film SLR cameras, not the digital equivalent.

After all... I can always get one on the cheap when looking for used bodies and I can always pair it with a lens.

Do you think something like that is still worth it today?

Honestly, not really. A single roll of 24 exposures is about $10 from purchase to development, and you cannot erase exposures, see how your pictures came out (except in a few select cameras), or do anything with your pictures prior to development. Unless you're the kind of person who already has invested a lot of money in a film camera, this is little reason to continue using film.

Also, for reference, film has been approximated at 32 megapixels of resolution, but that relevance is moot when it's not even double (both horizontal and vertical) current SLRs. (Megapixels mean very little on point-and-shoot models due to the low quality sensors often employed.)

Hmm...

I wonder whether it's normal to want to have a real film camera after actually using a disposable film camera. I guess I'm quite the person for old tech that are still working. To be honest... I think I'm spoiled by digital, but I could be wrong.

Makes me think very hard about whether to just stick to digital or try dabbling to film. For some reason, I still have an affinity to photos produced from film cameras and I'd like to have used a proper film camera at least once in a lifetime. Sometimes I feel like limiting myself.

I guess I'm that crazy turtle.

After sending the disposable camera for processing, I'm out another $10 to get it processed and digitized, and it'll be a week.

Now that makes me reconsider getting a film SLR. So many $10s will rack up eventually, even if the system and lens are cheap enough. Maybe, instead of getting a film SLR, I can save up and get just a vintage lens and a suitable adapter for my camera (Minolta AF lenses can be used with full support with the LA-EA2 adapter with my camera, which adds... well, a mirror, AF sensors, and motors.)

At least I'll be outside tomorrow because I'm planning on getting shots that I've missed during the last outing if the weather permits. I hope that it'll be sunny enough, but I don't have high hopes with weather here.

Another idea is to pick up or borrow a film SLR off someone who has recently upgraded to a digital SLR. Then you can at least have some nostalgic try-outs, but don't let those film costs rack up.

Ah, quite a coincidence. I got hold of a Nikon N60 film SLR that we weren't able to sell at our own garage sale. We were going to donate it, and I remembered you, so if you want it cheaply, let me know. Make an offer.

No lenses.

1 attached image

That N60 certainly looks nice, and yet I think I have a stronger interest in Minolta AF SLRs these days. It probably has something to do with the fact that I'm in the Sony Alpha system in a way right now

Gotta love how you can easily confuse the model number for the Nikon for a Nokia phone, too.

That said, have you ever used a film SLR, Scotty?

Yep, I've used my dad's Nikon some back in the day when he actually was huge on photography (and literally spent five 24-exposure rolls of film on a single iguana ). It was definitely something to have to manually focus and take multiple pictures of the object to know whether or not it came out. (Of course, I know some people who rely too much on the screen of a digital camera and think 320x240 pixels is enough to verify a picture isn't blurry.) Oh, and you had to learn all about the aperture settings as well as the shutter speed well enough that you knew how the picture would look. My dad's SLR did give you a hint for what settings you should use, but if you're photographing something dark next to something bright, it doesn't always work right. It was definitely an experience.

The other comment is that SLRs (both digital and film) with quality lenses are far superior in picture quality compared to cameras with miniscule lenses, such as those on popular point-and-shoot cameras and mobile phone cameras. (And if you think they're getting better, they're just running more complex filters with software to make up for the terrible lenses.)