I'm currently interested in buying a film SLR. My price range is from $150 to $350, and it must be capable of doing manual mode. (I don't want an all manual camera though)

Good for you!

SLR? What's that?

Look into the Minolta Maxxum series. Very nice cameras for the price.

SLR = Single Lens Reflex Cameras dont have a separate viewer lens. You can see the object image through the same lens the image is going to be captured on the film.

Nikon has one of the best manual / manual-auto cameras which even professionals use.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/geoopt/slr.html

Ah... that figures.
That's pretty expensive (i guess :D)

I use a good Canon EOS

I don't know about your needs, but digital SLRs have fallen drastically in cost, from several thousand to $900 for Canon's newest "Digital Rebel." -- http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos300d/ for a review

I'm currently on an ancient Minolta (XG1) SLR, along with an Olympus point-and-shoot digital camera. My next camera's going to be a digital SLR. My reasoning is this -- I love the control of an SLR, along with being able to change lenses, etc. But frankly, image quality of digital cameras now equals that of film -- top-notch DSLRs actually rival medium format. However, I hate paying for film, and love being able to adjust things in Photoshop. If you figure that a roll of film, plus developing, costs $10 (I haven't actually bought film or had it developed lately, so I might be off), those who take a high volume of photos might actually end up saving money by going digital, and getting a ton of new features to boot. (After 100 rolls of film, you've in a sense saved yourself $100 -- $900 for the camera, but you would have spent $1,000 in film and processing. I've been known to take over 100 pictures a day with my digital camera; I'd be living on the streets if I used film. ;))

Anyway, I realize a digital SLR is a huge investment -- I'm yet to buy one myself. But depending on how many photos you take, it might actually end up cheaper in the long run.

Does your price range include the lens or just the camera body?
Originally posted by lex342
I'm currently interested in buying a film SLR. My price range is from $150 to $350, and it must be capable of doing manual mode. (I don't want an all manual camera though)

umm ok honestly you have 3 real choices, The best is that you go for a minolta maxum 7000i body and a sigma lense 28-300 mm or if you dont need the telephoto then probably 28-200 or 100 would be fine. If you want to do landscapes then your probably going to want to look at a wider zoom or prime lense.
The next choice being an old canon, maybe a rebel X again with sigma or tamron lenses. The final choice being nikon but to be honest id let us know what you want to shoot with it.
I shoot on minoltas right now but im switching to canon getting a 10d and two a2 bodies all probably with vert grips and some nice lenses but thats saying goodbye to 3000 or so.
Let us know what you want to shoot, remember on top of the lenses you at least want a uv or skylight (film \ slide) filter and probably a cpl.

btw saying top notch slrs rival medium format is a laugh, not even medium format backs at 16mp can match 100 iso film. Digital and film shouldnt be compared because they have different strengths and weaknesses. Pros generally mix and match as required esp at medium format level alternating between say a kodak digital back and 120 stock. The best dslr resolution wise is about 12-14 mp and the 'best' in terms of overall quality are 11mp which while are definately sufficent for 99% of uses they arent the worlds greatest for long exposure shots due to stuck pixels and neither are they great for landscapes. A decent saturated 50 iso film will produce a higher quality shot then any digital at medium format, drum scan a 50 iso film and youll see shot that show no grain or loss of quality at 50-100mp , that kind of film happily scans at 8000 + dpi.
Digital has flexibility, low cost per shot and speed on its side, and the quality is acceptable for a growing number of applications.
Plus film costs a buck to a buck 50 to develop if you process it yourself then scan it, best of both worlds. C41 and E6 are very easy to dev and I can dev 4 films in the time it takes to drag the shots off my digital. In reality you play both technologies to their strengths and use them to compensate for each others weaknesses.