# Considering an EOS 35mm (film) body



## msdarkroom (May 30, 2012)

Does anybody have any tips or advice on either the EOS-1V or the EOS-3? I'm looking at purchasing one of them.
Do they work with the same lenses that the 5D works with?
Ebay okay to buy from, or would you recommend elsewhere?

Thanks.

-MS


----------



## bdunbar79 (May 30, 2012)

I don't know much about the EOS-3, but I know the EOS-1V is compatible with all of Canon's EF lenses, according to Canon's website. I've not used either.


----------



## bdunbar79 (May 30, 2012)

Update, both are compatible with all EF lenses. EOS-3 can still be purchased used that I saw, and EOS-1V new at Adorama and B&H. A new 1V is still $1699!


----------



## drjlo (May 30, 2012)

I had both EOS-1v and EOS-3. Both are pure awesomeness, but I sold the 1v as it fetches more money and kept the 3 with optional grip. They work with current EF lenses (see the photo with my 70-200 II), and while 1v has better weather-sealing with faster FPS, EOS-3's AF and FPS gets better with the optional battery grip, too, and it can be bought much cheaper. In addition, EOS-3 has the cool eye-controlled focus that actually works well.


Here's an EOS-3 review.
http://emedia.leeward.hawaii.edu/frary/canon_eos3.htm




IMG_7602 by drjlo1, on Flickr


----------



## bdunbar79 (May 31, 2012)

I LOVE film, and was actually considering buying a new EOS-1V from Adorama once. But then I figured, if I get the shot wrong, I got it wrong and nothing you can do about like you can now. Of course, shots I get wrong I throw away anyways, despite Photoshop and RAW processing. It's a tough one because you buy and develop film too. But I'm sure the images are wonderful. Maybe when I become insane in another area besides 50mm lenses (I have 50L, 50 1.4, AND 50 1.8 II), and become an insane camera collector, I'll buy one. Reading reviews it looked like it'd be worth it to buy the EOS-3 because the reviews were about the same, but the price was much cheaper.


----------



## wickidwombat (May 31, 2012)

i went with a cheaper option of the elan 7, you can get them for under $100
they use the same sensor as the more expensive models 

all plastic though and have the cool eye control focus stuff

all the lenses work on it


----------



## RunAndGun (May 31, 2012)

I just picked up an EOS-3 a few weeks ago from a guy on Amazon. Almost flawless condition for $199. Everything seems to work just fine, including the eye-controlled focus, but I still haven't had a chance to run any film through it. I will say that it feels like a toy, though. The body (external) is plastic. The shutter definitely has a unique sound compared to my 5D MKIII and II's.


----------



## Hillsilly (May 31, 2012)

All Canon eos film SLR camera's take the same lenses as the 5D. Photonotes.org is a good site for comparing different models. As mentioned, they all use the same sensor, so its just a question of choosing the right feature set - frames per second, eye control, number of focus points, weather sealing etc.

Very few people have problems buying on ebay. KEH, Adoama, B & H etc also sell used gear and often at good prices.

I'm a 7e (AKA eso 30) user. No complaints - Its a good little camera. But if someone offered to swap an eos 3 for it, I'd take the 3 in an instant. I think the 3 will be the long term collectors item and is the one to get.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 31, 2012)

The thing to watch out for on ebay is the guy who was given a camera found stashed away in grandpa's closet for 15 years, and has no clue as to whether it works or not.

Get one from sombody who has tested it and gives you return rights if it doesn't work. Pay with a credit card, and, if the deal goes sour, you can charge back as a last resort.


----------



## dr croubie (May 31, 2012)

I got my EOS 3 a few weeks ago, i've already run a roll of expired film through it, and half a roll of Tmax 400.
It takes all EF lenses (not EF-s of course), full autofocus and everything.
45pt AF, with f/8 focussing in the middle (it works with my 70-300L and Kenko 1.4x, sometimes it misses because the AF speed is the same as without the TC, but that's the Kenko's fault, not the camera).
AF-Spot-linked metering (for 11-points) also isn't available anywhere else but the 1-series.

I got it instead of the 1V basically because of the eye-control Focus, and they go for $200 or less, a 1V can be $4-500. Otherwise there's not much difference between them, the 1V is better sealed (no idea how much though) and has higher fps (I always shoot high-speed on my 7D, but single-shot on my 3, no wasting film).
Mine cost me 91GBP + 27 shipping, from a real shop in the UK offering warranty and all, via ebay (i just checked, they don't have any others listed or i'd have linked them).

Also, I've got an Ed-Mika'd FL 55/1.2, aparently the rear element hits the mirror of 5D etc, but it's perfectly fine on my 3 (as it is for 1-series, something about thinner mirror-mounts)

In short, it's the only EOS 1/1D/1Ds series camera to not have a '1' in its name...


----------



## pdirestajr (May 31, 2012)

Here's a good resource to compare canon models (film and digital):

http://photonotes.org/reviews/1-1N-3-1V/

Responding to an earlier comment of the EOS-3 being a plasticky/ toy... I believe it has a metal frame under the plastic.


----------



## dr croubie (May 31, 2012)

pdirestajr said:


> Responding to an earlier comment of the EOS-3 being a plasticky/ toy... I believe it has a metal frame under the plastic.



I was going to say something about that too. Maybe it's because it's newer styling or whatever, but my 7D feels more like a toy than the 3, kind of like driving a 70s muscle car made of metal compared to a korean plastic sports car (although both are waaay ahead of a 550D, and probably both way behind a 1DX)


----------



## drjlo (May 31, 2012)

I just held the EOS-3 with battery grip again, and it feels darn solid to me. I do still sometimes miss my 1v. Hey, I just found the Elan-7N in the closet, too..




eos1v by drjlo1, on Flickr


----------



## BillyBean (May 31, 2012)

I can highly recommend the EOS-3. It's a truly great camera in my view. Robust, weather-sealed (up to a point), and accepts all EF lenses (not EF-S).

It has eye-control focus, though that's easy to switch off if you don't use it. The spot meter can be linked to the eye-selected focus point, which works very well in contrasty light situations.

The exposures are spot on, and I find it a delight to use. I've recently upgraded to a 5D mark III, which feels roughly the same in terms of build quality and general usage, though even that doesn't have all the EOS3's features...

They are about £100 on ebay in the UK, and I would recommend the PB-E2 battery grip, which accelerates the FPS to 7 frames a second - faster than the 5D mark III, as well as providing portrait operation and additional battery options.


----------



## smithy (May 31, 2012)

I shoot regularly with the 1-V, and it's an exciting camera to use. It feels more 'pro' in the hand than my new 5D Mark III, and shares many of the features of the 1DS series cameras like f/8 autofocussing (as does the EOS 3) and super fast shutter blackout times.

If you can find one for a reasonable price, you won't regret the purchase. I bought mine, used, 4 years ago for the equivalent of US$300-$350. It's heavy, and when paired with a heavy lens like the 24-70mm f/2.8, can be a real back-breaker if you have to carry it around for long periods.


----------



## FunPhotons (May 31, 2012)

12 year old autofocus and metering technology, 150 year old sensor technology, every shot costs a buck, no auto ISO and a limited range, and they get back to you a few days later (toss in a few trips to the store with the price of gas). No thanks ...


----------



## crasher8 (May 31, 2012)

I shoot with an Elan 7, love it but will one day upgrade to an EOS 1 or 3 for a more solid body with better sealing.


----------



## smithy (May 31, 2012)

FunPhotons said:


> 12 year old autofocus and metering technology, 150 year old sensor technology, every shot costs a buck, no auto ISO and a limited range, and they get back to you a few days later (toss in a few trips to the store with the price of gas). No thanks ...


Oh my gosh... it's almost like you have to take the photo YOURSELF! 

Film's still a pretty good way to shoot, financially speaking. I wanted to explain it in this post, but it started getting complex and I gave up haha.


----------



## BillyBean (May 31, 2012)

FunPhotons said:


> 12 year old autofocus and metering technology, 150 year old sensor technology, every shot costs a buck, no auto ISO and a limited range, and they get back to you a few days later (toss in a few trips to the store with the price of gas). No thanks ...



This is ill-informed nonsense. If you don't like film fine, I have no issue with that.

But, just for the record:

1. The eye-controlled 45 point '12 year old' focus on my EOS 3 is better than the 5D mark II. This is why I waited for the 5D3 before upgrading, and even that has some bad points compared to the EOS3.
2. The 150 year old sensor technology was actually likely developed/revised in the last 5 years, and gets further updated regularly, which your current digital sensor won't, unless you replace the camera.
3. The 'per frame' cost of film is lower than digital, because the camera doesn't cost as much as a small car.

Stop talking about things you clearly don't understand.


----------



## crasher8 (May 31, 2012)

What is this store thing you takes trips to? I take trips to the darkroom.


----------



## RichATL (May 31, 2012)

BillyBean said:


> 3. The 'per frame' cost of film is lower than digital, because the camera doesn't cost as much as a small car.
> 
> Stop talking about things you clearly don't understand.



For an amateur... yes...
For those of us who shoot 1000+ frames per week... no.

"Stop talking about things you clearly don't understand"


on topic...
I have an Elan 7 and it works just peachy for me...
Autofocus is pretty much equivalent to the 5d2...
but it's just a box that holds film for me... I don't use it's metering system, and I take my time with focusing anyway... so the $100 made more sense to me than $400 for a 1V


----------



## BillyBean (May 31, 2012)

crasher8 said:


> What is this store thing you takes trips to? I take trips to the darkroom.



Ha ha! Nice response. I too develop my own black and white, but colour is a bit too much hassle. But even for colour, I get excellent professional lab results returned within 2 days of posting. OK, it's not instant, but it's pretty good.

And then scan, and all the benefits of lightroom and Nik etc.

I used to do the printing (enlarger) myself, but although it's fun, life is too short.


----------



## BillyBean (May 31, 2012)

RichATL said:


> BillyBean said:
> 
> 
> > 3. The 'per frame' cost of film is lower than digital, because the camera doesn't cost as much as a small car.
> ...



I'm not suggesting film for a pro - that just would not make sense in this day and age. So yes, good point. But I don't expect to have to write small print on my posts... and the nonsense being spouted by the earlier poster did get me kinda riled.

Film is fun, and if folks out there have never tried it, they should. My point was: it's not expensive to give it a try out, and for lower volumes is way cheaper than digital.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (May 31, 2012)

Another vote here for the EOS 3.

The EOS 1V is about 5% better (metal body, 100% viewfinder, viewfinder blind)

The EOS 3 is about 30% of the price to buy.

Same top shutter, same metering, same AF (+ECF) Metal chassis, weatherproof, fast motordrive, expandable with PB-E1 and PB-E2.

For the idiots trying to turn this into a film vs digital debate, it isn't. The OP didn't mention digital anywhere in their question. They are obviously strong enough willed to have weighed up the pros and cons which exsist on both sides.

For what it's worth for me there is nothing quite like a good print from Ilford XP2, lovely grain and contrast, and it has the bonus of being a mono film that can be put through a colour lab. And I say that shooting 99.5% of the time on digital.

The EOS 1V is the best 35mm SLR camera in the world.

The EOS 3 is the best value 35mm SLR camera in the world.

The Elans and Rebels all offered good value and specs at the time, but really, a used 3 can be had for so little that it's almost rude not to.


----------



## mnewberg (May 31, 2012)

I had the same urge to move back to film. I have been shooting a EOS 5, Elan 7, and a Argus C4 for the past month. You can get dirt cheap film($2-4), and it only costs a few bucks to have a roll scan to CD at most one hour places. When you want to move up to something higher quality there is always more expensive films and developing. I have had good results with thedarkroom.com. Film can be a lot of fun, and produce interesting results. There is nothing like feeling the film advancing in the camera after the shot. Most films are really forgiving on exposure compared to digital, and they also look better then any instagram filter. I have had good luck with the canon cameras with both canon lens support, and canon flash support. If you have canon EF lenses, I feel there is no reason not have at least one EOS film camera just for fun since they are so affordable now in the used market.


----------



## msdarkroom (May 31, 2012)

Holy smokes - awesome feedback here guys. Thank you all very much for your opinion, even the film haters. 
Jose Villa is a name that came to mind when I saw the debate about nobody shooting film professionally.

I'm leaning EOS 3.

Speaking of www.thedarkroom.com, I just found that site the other day when searching for somebody to develop my 120 holga film. I have one of their postage paid envelopes on the way but haven't used them yet.

Thanks everybody for the info, very good stuff. 

-MS


----------



## Seanlucky (May 31, 2012)

While I do shoot some 35mm film every once in a while, I find it much nicer to do on a camera little different from a Canon... I currently use a Contax RTSII with those beautiful zeiss lenses. I find if I'm going to shoot film, I prefer to get away from the more digital style bodies, and really embrace the craft.

That being said, I rarely shoot 35mm, generally opting instead to shoot 120 format. While I do enjoy the Hasselblad 501 for it's smaller size, I'm generally taking out an RZ67 as I find it easier to shoot with (especially focusing...)

EDIT: That being said, I loved shooting on the Contax 645, which is starting to feel quite a bit like a Hasselblad H2 setup sans top LCD screen. Wish that one was in my budget, especially since it's the only medium format camera I know with an 80mm f2 lens...


----------



## risc32 (May 31, 2012)

Take note of the wireless flash abilities and HSS mode. Everything new does all that stuff, but not all of the older film bodies. I use a 1n and it doesn't do HSS. Sometimes that stinks when you have to go faster than 1/250th and still want some flash. Otherwise I really like it. Plastic over metal body, feels pretty tough. The AF is slow to get going compared to modern stuff, but the math going on must be pretty good cause it actually tracks things well. I even like the neat little trap door with buttons behind it. I got one of the optional grips(there are 2 or 3 different versions) so i can run the thing off Eneloopes and stop buying those damn expensive specialty batteries that i can't source locally.


----------



## smithy (May 31, 2012)

Seanlucky said:


> While I do shoot some 35mm film every once in a while, I find it much nicer to do on a camera little different from a Canon... I currently use a Contax RTSII with those beautiful zeiss lenses. I find if I'm going to shoot film, I prefer to get away from the more digital style bodies, and really embrace the craft.


Digital style bodies? I'm pretty sure that film SLRs were that style before the digital ones...


----------



## daniel-barton (May 31, 2012)

I have an EOS 3. I bought it off of KEH for $149 to replace my 1973 Ashai Pentax ESII brass-body as my film camera. It is an outstanding well-built durable camera, the autofocus is great (I use the eye control), works well with a flash, and the viewfinder is excellent. The interface is easy to use, few frills I dislike, and plenty of features I do. I hate the battery, but that's that. I like it over my 40D for some things, but my 40D is still my daily shooter.

I have been shooting mostly Ektar 100 color negative using a 17-40L for landscapes and/or nighttime long exposure. I occasionally put a thrifty fifty (1.8 II) on it for a walk-around. I sometimes shoot a roll of Fuji 100 or TMAX for a change of pace, but I mostly buy 5-packs of Ektar 100. 

I would highly recommend this camera and a cheap 50 or a nice wide-angle zoom to anyone who wants to shoot film (again, or for the first time). Between the body ($149), the film ($9/roll with developing), and a good but not great scanner that allows for 13x19 enlargements of sharp images ($175), you could shoot 100 rolls, or 3600 images, for the price of a used 7D. That doesn't sound that cheap, and truthfully it isn't, but it's about 30 cents an image, not a buck as some film-hater above claimed. If you do your own C-41 at home (Tetenal press kit?) you could make it cheaper. I intend to do this at some point, but I worry because it's a bit finicky.

Rambling!


----------



## EYEONE (May 31, 2012)

I have an EOS-3 and love it. They are super cheap these days and are fantastic cameras. Obviously compatible with all EF lenses.

I'd recommend getting it if you wanna shoot film.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jun 8, 2012)

EYEONE said:


> I have an EOS-3 and love it. They are super cheap these days and are fantastic cameras. Obviously compatible with all EF lenses.
> 
> I'd recommend getting it if you wanna shoot film.



Do you have any idea of the shutter durability rating and if Canon would still repair/replace the shutter if it went bad? Thanks.


----------



## wickidwombat (Jun 8, 2012)

i would say its most likely cheaper to just buy another used one if that failed


----------



## crasher8 (Jun 8, 2012)

How much better is the EOS 3 over the Elan 7?


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jun 8, 2012)

crasher8 said:


> How much better is the EOS 3 over the Elan 7?



It looks like Canon rated the EOS-3 higher than the Elan 7. I believe the EOS-1, EOS-1N, EOS-1V were all rated top professional, where the EOS-3 was just one step below that. Not saying the Elan 7 isn't good though.


----------



## dr croubie (Jun 8, 2012)

crasher8 said:


> How much better is the EOS 3 over the Elan 7?


A few specs from the Canon Camera Museum

EOS 3 - 45pt AF with an f/8 centre, the same as every 1D and 1Ds before the 1DX. (But the EOS3 had eye-control AF, 1-series didn't)
EOS 30 (Elan 7) - 7pt wide-area autofocus, still eye controlled. Apparently faster than the EOS3 eye-control (probably because it had less points to choose from?)

EOS 3 - 4.3fps, 7 with grip
EOS 30 - 4fps, (not grippable?)

EOS 3 - interchangeable focussing screens (I've just put an EC-Civ in mine). 97% coverage, fixed diopter (buy interchangeable eyepieces for different strengths)
EOS 30 - fixed screen. 90%x92% coverage. Changeable strength diopter (like most dslrs).

EOS 3 - 9 exposure bracketing. +/-3 EVcomp. 1/200 X-sync. 18 custom functions. No flash.
EOS 30 - 9 exposure bracketing. +/-2 EVcomp. 1/125 X-sync. 13 custom fucntions. Built in flash.

So at the end, the 3 looks like a decent upgrade from the 30 (elan 7), mostly for the AF, interchangeable screens, and viewfinder coverage. These days the price differential is not much (seeing as a 3 is $150-200 shipped, a 30 can't be much less), i'd still go the 3.


----------

