The F50 is a low end Nikon SLR from 1994, and besides the fact that you can swap lenses, it basically is just a glorified point and shoot. 
It has some stupid scenes modes, PASM modes, basic AF, TTL metering, 4 stupid buttons instead of wheels, NO diopter adjustment for the viewfinder (that sucks), no DOP preview button, no remote, and easy film loading: there is really not much to say about that piece of plastic: exposure is right, AF is right too: set it in Aperture priority mode, frame, shoot.
The viewfinder is large and clear enough, it handles well even if the plastic is a bit slippy. Just worth 20 bucks with a cheap lens. 
The Kodak UltraMax 400 is the "new" Gold Max 400. Well, it is just the same with a new name in my opinion. Nothing special about that film: it's not bad, not good, can handle mostly any situation, behaves well at developing and behaves well at scanning. It's cheap and versatile. that makes it quite a good all-around film.
It turns out my F50 works as intended, exposure is right, no light leaks, AF is good: nothing to report.
Actually, the camera model and the film don't really matter. Any camera in working order will take well exposed and focused images. And any film will make good images too. The differences in films are supposed to be basically: sensibility, color balance, grain and curves. But in the end, all that remains after you scan it is basically the grain, sensibility and in some measure the curves. 
Even with software technologies that are supposed to get the colors from the neg, you won't really get it. On top of that, since you're very likely to adjust your photo in LR or another software, the original colorimetry will mostly be gone. 
What is really important is the process of shooting film. But that is not the topic here: slow, deliberate shooting, being limited to 36 exposures in a roll, waiting for the film to be developed, scanning it, etc. 
It's just fun and different, something I enjoy from loading the film to scanning and working on the negs on my Mac. If you have some spare change just give it a try: buy some used working camera, a couple rolls of film, and shoot.

You may also like

Sigma 500mm F/7.2 AF APO
How good can be a Sigma 500mm F/7.2 AF lens from 1990? Simple answer: definitely worth 89 bucks BUT there are lots of BUT...
Shooting the Nikon D70 in 2022
2004... Jesus, time passes quite fast. I won't review that Nikon D70, the specs sheets and reviews are everywhere on the internet. Only 3 figures are significant anyway: 6.1 megapixel CCD sensor, 1\/8000th second max shutter speed and 1\/500th second x-sync. I decided to buy and shoot this camera again with the Nikkor 18-135. For 20 bucks, what could go wrong?
Shooting the Nikon D200 in 2022
The D200 is a camera I always loved. At the time it came out, it was a hell of a camera for the price Nikon asked. Shooting it in 2019 is still a pleasant experience. 2005 specs? that's outdated, nobody wants that. Photos taken with that camera will be ugly, especially compared to the Sony A9 ($4500), the Nikon D850 ($3000) or the Canon 5D mark whatever ($2700). Or will it not?
Improving cheap flatbed scans
I still shoot film from time to time, not enough to invest in am excellent neg scanner or bother trying to shoot my negs with a camera. I tried that, don't like it. I love the scanning - editing process.
Olympus OM-D E-M5
August 2018 I bought that little camera for $150. Definitely a bargain considering it was sold boxed, in a not too bad condition, with less than 6.000 clicks, and included two batteries and charger, a 12-50mm F/3.5-6.3 zoom lens, a 45mm F/1.8 prime lens, the tiny Olympus flash, a couple filters (ND1000 and CPL) and a (slow) 64GB SD card that I just trew away and replaced with a Sandisk Extreme Pro.
Shooting the Olympus OM-D E-M1 in 2023, 2024 and later.
One month ago, I was fed up with travelling with camera gear. Air travel became a miserable experience: arguing with check-in people, Unpack all that expensive shit at security, having gear damaged in the plane when frantic fellow passengers trow their hard cases in the overhead bins. I want to travel light: then a classified caught my eye: EM1, grip, charger, 2 batteries and 45-150 for 300.
Tokina 12-24 DX adapted on Micro 4/3
Some sample photos taken with the Tokina SD ATX pro 12-24 F/4 IF DX ASP Nikon F-Mount on the Olympus EM1.
Sony RX100 m3: all you need from 24 to 70mm
I got this little camera for $200 a couple years ago and didn't write about it yet.
Tamron SP AF 70-200mm F2.8 Di LD IF Macro
It took me some time to write about that A-mount lens I got NOS for 250 bucks. At that price, you will unlikely find any better F/2.8 telezoom.
Sony alpha A200: a Nikon D80 with IBIS
After Sony bought the Minolta photography department, they released the A100 in mid 2006, the A700 in mid 2007, and the A200/A300/A350 in early 2008. Two years after the Nikon D80, we find the same SONY ICX493AQA CCD sensor (wich is basically a slower ICX483AQA that was in the Nikon D200 released 3 years earlier) in what is basically a Minolta body with Sony branding imitating a Nikon D80..
Back to Top