aad
Not so new now.
Funny, my local (and locally owned) photo shop recently stopped selling ALL digital cameras, to concentrate on developing film, and printing services etc.
Makes sense, if you think about it-and they say they are swamped with work.
Makes sense, if you think about it-and they say they are swamped with work.
ChrisPlatt
Thread Killer
True, and consumers don't print now. They share photos on LCD displays.
IMO a major reason for the success of digital photography is that
it eliminates the necessity of the expensive paper print.
Digital photography appeals to the inner cheapskate in all of us.
Chris
sanmich
Veteran
Depends what you shoot.
I don't move to digital first and foremost because It's so expensive.
I shoot B&W and process it myself. The cameras are RFs.
I also like to have two cameras at the very least (2 lenses, backup etc.)
To get where I would like to be in terms of digital, I would need to part from what? 10K$?
Lots and lots of Tri-X I can buy, process, and scan for this amount...
Film is not dead for me as long as I can buy a roll of a decent 400 ISO film.
Vics
Veteran
I think that film is probably cheaper now than it was when I started 40+ years ago. Tri-X, all these years my film of choice is now $5.49/roll 36 exp (15 cents a picture) I process at home for next to nothing. I just don't find photography expensive at this rate. And with cameras and lenses as cheap as they are now, not to mention darkroom gear, I think it's cheaper than ever.
sepiareverb
genius and moron
I have my doubts about that even. I know nobody younger than 30 who has any interest in collecting anything tangible. I'd expect that all "collectables" will continue to decrease in value as those of us over 40 or 50 pass on.
Wow. I really can't believe they'll be in business in 5 years.
aad
Not so new now.
I don't know-not many other options to bring film to anymore, especially MF and 4x5. They've always done good work, too, and being a college town must help.
Still, the store looks a little empty.
Still, the store looks a little empty.
Brian Legge
Veteran
Perhaps this is regional. I know plenty of young photographers who have transitioned to at least partially shooting film. Many have been picking up medium format gear over the last two years, etc.
Several of those in their mid twenties have a dozen or more film cameras as they rapidly tried different gear before finding what they shot most frequently. A couple recently started collecting cameras they felt were historically significant or groundbreaking.
I routinely see younger people using their Pentax and Nikon film SLRs at various events. Some street, some photographing friends.
Granted, its a miniscule sample set and totally anecdotal, but its what I'm seeing here in Seattle.
Several of those in their mid twenties have a dozen or more film cameras as they rapidly tried different gear before finding what they shot most frequently. A couple recently started collecting cameras they felt were historically significant or groundbreaking.
I routinely see younger people using their Pentax and Nikon film SLRs at various events. Some street, some photographing friends.
Granted, its a miniscule sample set and totally anecdotal, but its what I'm seeing here in Seattle.
MarylandBill
Established
Collecting something like cameras has always been an older person's game. Someone in their twenties, just trying to get themselves set up in the world usually lacks time, space and money to buy multiple cameras. Besides, the future of film photography has less to do with people collecting cameras and more to do with people getting 1-3 cameras and using them.
I can. Sure film is never become the standard choice ever again, but a some point it is going to level off (If it has not already). My personal feeling is that art is as much about process and technique as it is the final result. Some people just feel more connected to film and dark rooms than to image sensors and computers.
--
Bill
PointOmega
Established
Run of the mill gear - film or digital - has always moved slowly on RFF and other specialist forums. I'm open to buying more gear, but just don't see anything interesting in the classifieds at the moment. I suspect many of us feel the same way.
MarylandBill
Established
Well, I see a few interesting things, I just can't justify spending money on it right now... or at least as much as is being asked
.goamules
Well-known
In 1820 all firearms were blackpowder muzzle loaders. By 1920 they were 100 years obsolete, but you can still buy them and use them. In 1880 everyone in America that didn't walk rode a horse. By 1920 they were obsolete, but you can still buy horses, buggies, buggy whips.
In 1970 everyone shot film. Hundreds of thousands of rolls a year were manufactured, shot, developed. You'll still be able to shoot film cameras in 20 years.
Don't base your worry on a few cameras not selling on one forum. There were MILLIONS of them built, but there are few buyers today. They are not going to retain their 1990 values. Yet, on Ebay, every quality camera that isn't ridiculously common (think AE-1), or stupidly expensive (1990 prices) gets bidders and sells for decent money. Even the boring SLR.
In 1970 everyone shot film. Hundreds of thousands of rolls a year were manufactured, shot, developed. You'll still be able to shoot film cameras in 20 years.
Don't base your worry on a few cameras not selling on one forum. There were MILLIONS of them built, but there are few buyers today. They are not going to retain their 1990 values. Yet, on Ebay, every quality camera that isn't ridiculously common (think AE-1), or stupidly expensive (1990 prices) gets bidders and sells for decent money. Even the boring SLR.
ColSebastianMoran
( IRL Richard Karash )
In the "SLR -- the Un-RF" forum, I started a thread "Film SLRs are Extremely Inexpensive."
My question is with film SLR bodies this cheap, what implications for us? Possible answers: Buy camera gear just to try it out (Contax 167MT body for $25 at KEH, for example). Now's the time to buy that camera for which you always lusted. Many SLRs are so cheap that repairs will not be economic; if your Nikon breaks just buy another. We should buy cameras and give them to young people.
The RF world is holding price better than SLRs. A good Yashica GTN goes for only a little less than a Nikon F100 body.
My question is with film SLR bodies this cheap, what implications for us? Possible answers: Buy camera gear just to try it out (Contax 167MT body for $25 at KEH, for example). Now's the time to buy that camera for which you always lusted. Many SLRs are so cheap that repairs will not be economic; if your Nikon breaks just buy another. We should buy cameras and give them to young people.
The RF world is holding price better than SLRs. A good Yashica GTN goes for only a little less than a Nikon F100 body.
Jonnyfez
Established
This is right. Amazing that you can buy a Nikon F, F2 or F3 WITH a lens for $100 and change. Time to try out all the cameras I've always wanted.
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
I see good gear in the classifieds, but around here it's selling to a tough crowd.
I, for one, have already bought much of what I'm interested in by way of film cameras. I have enough now, of many different types, that even when I see something and have an immediate "I want" reaction, I also think: "But what am I going to do with it? Really. Am I likely to use it more than the cameras I already have?"
The answer is usually no, these days. The answer used to be "yes" more frequently, before I bought all the lovely cameras I now have. (Though a really nice medium format folder might still tempt me. I don't have one of those.)
...Mike
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
I was paying $6 a roll for slide film in the 1990s; with high quality processing it was easy to spend $11-20 a roll. Of course, I was not dropping $3k into a new FF digital body every three years, either.
R
ray_g
Guest
In a way, this makes sense. They certainly can't beat amazon/adorama/B&H camera pricing mainly because of the $$$ in sales tax. I would think that the people who would buy cameras from a brick and mortar store are mostly those who would ask the store clerk what he or she should buy. At least in my local store, most of their business is in printing. Multiple computer terminals with folks choosing photos from their memory cards for direct printing.
About the issue of cost, I personally believe digital costs more in the long term. Programmed obsolescence and endless upgrade paths for your gear, PC, and PP software. Faster cards, backup drives, and backup to the backups. Hours spent post processing, multiplied by the thousands of images you are now shooting in place of a handful of rolls of more discerning shots.
Film gear, in contrast, is cheap and wil last forever. I have bulk rolls in my basement freezer to keep me going for years, along with bottles of rodinal and fixer. Fiber based printing paper is what's getting expensive.
Ranchu
Veteran
I'm pretty much set, though I flail around in front of the computer when one of those Plaubel Makinas pops up. I just can't afford one.
goamules
Well-known
Film was hard to get once, in 1945, but came back. But I'm not sure Kodak nor Kodachrome will be the ones of the future.
Bingley
Veteran
I get my color film processed at the local Costco, and they're as busy as ever. Regarding film, one of the guys who works the processing lab there told me last Sunday that "a lot of folks are still shooting it." And check out the Oly XA and Oly RC groups on flickr: a lot of the people posting photos appear to be college students and twenty-somethings. The majority seem not to be geezers, like me. Urban Outfitters sells Holgas. Some kids I know move easily between their Hipstamatic iPhone shots and Holgas. We Leicalistas may dismiss this, but those cameras use film and their owners like the results. This is all anectdotal, to be sure, but there does seem to be some continued interest in shooting film. Whether it's enough interest to keep Kodak in business seems doubtful, but I'm not writing off film yet.
boomguy57
Well-known
Well, one reason that things aren't selling is that although folks are less likely to buy and there is lots of good gear on the market, most sellers aren't lowering prices enough to sell. People seem wary to push prices down much further.
This all gets around to a big issue for me with Leica. As a brand, they are missing a huge chance here. By inflating prices to the degree that they have, people can't afford to buy a digital M. There are plenty of folks who would be interested, even many hangers-on of film (myself included)...if their prices were 30% lower, they'd snag a huge group of people who are interested in a digital M, have M-mount lenses, but won't pony up what Leica is charging. So instead they get a NEX, digital Oly, micro 4/3s, etc...and they will eventually abandon the M. One can only mount M lenses one some APS-C sensor before it gets tedious and you simply buy the lenses that fit the system, and unload your bloated catalog of uber-expensive Leica glass.
This seems to be what's happening now.
The issues of film disappearing, and bla bla bla...that has been tossed around for a decade on this forum (from what I hear). But each time it's said, it isn't true yet, but each time it gets closer. Films disappear, film cameras with electronics go extinct for lack of replacement parts anymore (CL, CLE, Hexar, Ricoh GR1...). Processing prices go up, film is more expensive and harder to find, and fewer places process film. The digital allure grows ever stronger, I'm afraid.
This all gets around to a big issue for me with Leica. As a brand, they are missing a huge chance here. By inflating prices to the degree that they have, people can't afford to buy a digital M. There are plenty of folks who would be interested, even many hangers-on of film (myself included)...if their prices were 30% lower, they'd snag a huge group of people who are interested in a digital M, have M-mount lenses, but won't pony up what Leica is charging. So instead they get a NEX, digital Oly, micro 4/3s, etc...and they will eventually abandon the M. One can only mount M lenses one some APS-C sensor before it gets tedious and you simply buy the lenses that fit the system, and unload your bloated catalog of uber-expensive Leica glass.
This seems to be what's happening now.
The issues of film disappearing, and bla bla bla...that has been tossed around for a decade on this forum (from what I hear). But each time it's said, it isn't true yet, but each time it gets closer. Films disappear, film cameras with electronics go extinct for lack of replacement parts anymore (CL, CLE, Hexar, Ricoh GR1...). Processing prices go up, film is more expensive and harder to find, and fewer places process film. The digital allure grows ever stronger, I'm afraid.