Graybeard
Longtime IIIf User
Permit me to offer some historical perspective (my personal take on things, of course).
In the 1960's rangefinder cameras had become passe and the camera(s) to have were the Japanese SLR's. This was true even before the advent of TTL metering (or any on-board metering for that matter) and a Pentax H1 was state of the art.
Screw mount Leicas weren't worth much. I remember a store called "Fotoshop" on 32nd Street in NYC, several doors down from Willoughby's, that had shelves of LTM Leicas in the window. These were labelled "any camera this shelf $25" and offered Leica IIIA's, IIIC's, and IIC's with the f2 Summar. This was about 20% of the discounted price of a Pentax.
The $35 shelf had the same cameras with a F3.5 Elmar. The Elmar, at the time, was desirable as an enlarging lens, hence the higher price.
I was a poor student in those days and was able to afford only two cameras: a IIc with a Summar and a IIIf body (which I fitted with a $25 50mm.f1.8 Serenar) to go with the $10 electronic flash I bought at Spiratone. My (also) graduate student wife (same girl as now) was very understanding. With my first job, a Spotmatic F joined the stable.
Nikon rangefinder cameras went for a bit more, but usually well under $100. There were plenty of them in the pawnshops below 14th Street. Twenty exposures of Plus-X had risen in price from 85 cents to just shy of one dollar.
Today, film cameras, obviously Leicas among them, have become less desirable again due to the advent of digital imaging. Used (user) M-series Leicas can be had for $500 or so. Leicaflexes and SL's are much cheaper still. (BTW, don't kid yourself; any second hand camera which you might purchase needs a CLA in order to be a reliable instrument unless the seller can offer you documentation of a recent servicing.)
My point in this ramble is that (IMHO) we are in a similar point in camera pricing as was the case, forty years ago, when SLR's seemed to dominate everything. If one believes that 35mm film will be readily available in the future, then Leicas, and in particular darkroom equipment, are at (relatively) historically low prices. For example, one can readily buy Nikor tanks, with reels, for under $10.
I subscribe to the "film will be available at an acceptable price to me (perhaps as high as $5 for 36 exposures)" position and feel that this is the time for judicious purchase of equipment. I futher submit that B&W photography took its hit sometime between 1985 and 1990 with the advent of cheap color negative film and one-hour minilabs; it follows that mass market color photography, rather than B&W imaging, will be the victim of the digital revolution.
Even greater bargains are to be had with the all-metal SLR's of the 1960's and 1970's; I have several Nikkormats, with f2./50mm Nikkors, that set me back less than $75.
If one feels that 35mm film will not be readily availabe in the future, then everything that I offer here or consideration here will be hogwash to you.
I post this to provoke discussion and invite your comments.
In the 1960's rangefinder cameras had become passe and the camera(s) to have were the Japanese SLR's. This was true even before the advent of TTL metering (or any on-board metering for that matter) and a Pentax H1 was state of the art.
Screw mount Leicas weren't worth much. I remember a store called "Fotoshop" on 32nd Street in NYC, several doors down from Willoughby's, that had shelves of LTM Leicas in the window. These were labelled "any camera this shelf $25" and offered Leica IIIA's, IIIC's, and IIC's with the f2 Summar. This was about 20% of the discounted price of a Pentax.
The $35 shelf had the same cameras with a F3.5 Elmar. The Elmar, at the time, was desirable as an enlarging lens, hence the higher price.
I was a poor student in those days and was able to afford only two cameras: a IIc with a Summar and a IIIf body (which I fitted with a $25 50mm.f1.8 Serenar) to go with the $10 electronic flash I bought at Spiratone. My (also) graduate student wife (same girl as now) was very understanding. With my first job, a Spotmatic F joined the stable.
Nikon rangefinder cameras went for a bit more, but usually well under $100. There were plenty of them in the pawnshops below 14th Street. Twenty exposures of Plus-X had risen in price from 85 cents to just shy of one dollar.
Today, film cameras, obviously Leicas among them, have become less desirable again due to the advent of digital imaging. Used (user) M-series Leicas can be had for $500 or so. Leicaflexes and SL's are much cheaper still. (BTW, don't kid yourself; any second hand camera which you might purchase needs a CLA in order to be a reliable instrument unless the seller can offer you documentation of a recent servicing.)
My point in this ramble is that (IMHO) we are in a similar point in camera pricing as was the case, forty years ago, when SLR's seemed to dominate everything. If one believes that 35mm film will be readily available in the future, then Leicas, and in particular darkroom equipment, are at (relatively) historically low prices. For example, one can readily buy Nikor tanks, with reels, for under $10.
I subscribe to the "film will be available at an acceptable price to me (perhaps as high as $5 for 36 exposures)" position and feel that this is the time for judicious purchase of equipment. I futher submit that B&W photography took its hit sometime between 1985 and 1990 with the advent of cheap color negative film and one-hour minilabs; it follows that mass market color photography, rather than B&W imaging, will be the victim of the digital revolution.
Even greater bargains are to be had with the all-metal SLR's of the 1960's and 1970's; I have several Nikkormats, with f2./50mm Nikkors, that set me back less than $75.
If one feels that 35mm film will not be readily availabe in the future, then everything that I offer here or consideration here will be hogwash to you.
I post this to provoke discussion and invite your comments.
Film is going to be around for a long time. I will be collecting my Canon P in 2027. There will always be a market for it, too many people just like the look and feel of film. A lot of younger photographers use film, and like it. Too many of us old timers are ingraining our kids with it. My 6-year old loves traditional cameras, and does not use her digital. It does not go "click". So far she has handled the M3, Retina IIIS, Nikon SP, and Nikon S3. She does fairly well with them, but I set up the exposure for her. Have not taught her the Weston Master yet, she still is learning to tell time.
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
Graybeard
No argument here.
Bob
No argument here.
Bob
T
Todd.Hanz
Guest
I partially agree, though you'd be hard pressed to find an "M" body in decent shape for $500. The "all metal" SLR's 60-70's are quite a bargain in todays world, thier respective lenses are a steal as well.
I hold sites like this one, with it's growing membership, responsible for the fact that I can't get a black Oly SP for 50 bucks anymore
Todd
I hold sites like this one, with it's growing membership, responsible for the fact that I can't get a black Oly SP for 50 bucks anymore
Todd
W
wlewisiii
Guest
I am in total agreement as well. My son is only 3 and can not, as yet, really use it, but he carries his lynx and tries his best to use it like "daddy's cameras". Likewise our babysitter, a 13 year old girl, became more and more fascinated by my cameras till finally for Christmas I gave her a Pentax K1000 and a couple of lenses. I have watched her use it and know that's someone who will always choose film first.
Now the big companies probably will stop producing film within my lifetime. But there will be enough demand for companies like Foma and Forte and Ilford to make a good living, I think. And if all else fails, well just as I own a book that tells me how to make albumen prints, I'll be willing to bet on an ebook in 50 years that tells how to prep a sheet of celluloid to take a layer of silver salt...
There will always be a way to turn silver salts into positive and negative images... there will always be some film available. My son will use my Kiev with it's then 100 year old Prewar Sonnar when he is my age.
William
Now the big companies probably will stop producing film within my lifetime. But there will be enough demand for companies like Foma and Forte and Ilford to make a good living, I think. And if all else fails, well just as I own a book that tells me how to make albumen prints, I'll be willing to bet on an ebook in 50 years that tells how to prep a sheet of celluloid to take a layer of silver salt...
There will always be a way to turn silver salts into positive and negative images... there will always be some film available. My son will use my Kiev with it's then 100 year old Prewar Sonnar when he is my age.
William
K
Ken Tanaka
Guest
"Always" and "never" are two words I never use.
The relentless shrinkage of nearly all facets of the film-based markets is starkly self-evident. Even the medical and industrial segments of film imaging, once untouchable bastions due to their demanding resolution requirements, are shrinking at a rapid pace.
The only braces supporting Chicago's few independent camera shops that deal in film paraphernalia are the local photo / trade schools that persist in inculcating their students in film imaging. I expect that that, too, will evaporate as schools begin to compete for tuition dollars on the basis of teaching more contemporary imaging techniques. The schools will continue to teach film photography for some time, but mainly as a secondary subject much as they treat digital imaging now. (Remember, the film-oriented faculties of these schools are retiring at quite a pace.)
I do, however, believe that the market for nostalgic imaging (as it will be called within coming decades) will offer sufficient profit opportunities amidst a greatly reduced number of equipment and media competitors for some time to come. If Leica could manage to survive during this transitional period (a highly marginal proposition at this writing) they could potentially emerge as one of these competitors. I expect to see the bigger companies such as Canon, Nikon, Minolta, et.al. begin to withdraw entirely from film cameras by 2015. That could leave the remaining old-timers with the playground once again to themselves.
Well it's fun to speculate. But I'm not going to spend my remaining click years in apprehension over the film business. Nope, I'm going to continue shooting with both the best digital cameras and the best film cameras I can lay my hands on, savoring every frame!
Vivez pour aujourd'hui! (I think.)
The relentless shrinkage of nearly all facets of the film-based markets is starkly self-evident. Even the medical and industrial segments of film imaging, once untouchable bastions due to their demanding resolution requirements, are shrinking at a rapid pace.
The only braces supporting Chicago's few independent camera shops that deal in film paraphernalia are the local photo / trade schools that persist in inculcating their students in film imaging. I expect that that, too, will evaporate as schools begin to compete for tuition dollars on the basis of teaching more contemporary imaging techniques. The schools will continue to teach film photography for some time, but mainly as a secondary subject much as they treat digital imaging now. (Remember, the film-oriented faculties of these schools are retiring at quite a pace.)
I do, however, believe that the market for nostalgic imaging (as it will be called within coming decades) will offer sufficient profit opportunities amidst a greatly reduced number of equipment and media competitors for some time to come. If Leica could manage to survive during this transitional period (a highly marginal proposition at this writing) they could potentially emerge as one of these competitors. I expect to see the bigger companies such as Canon, Nikon, Minolta, et.al. begin to withdraw entirely from film cameras by 2015. That could leave the remaining old-timers with the playground once again to themselves.
Well it's fun to speculate. But I'm not going to spend my remaining click years in apprehension over the film business. Nope, I'm going to continue shooting with both the best digital cameras and the best film cameras I can lay my hands on, savoring every frame!
Vivez pour aujourd'hui! (I think.)
Graybeard
Longtime IIIf User
Todd.Hanz said:
Todd, this raises an interesting point about purchasing a second hand Leica.
As I mentioned in my earlier post here, experience has taught me that a CLA should be done on any newly purchased second hand camera. It is not uncommon for a camera being offered to have been stored in a closet for many years and in need of cleaning and lubrication.
If you accept the need for a newly acquired camera to have servicing, it might be sensible to look for a camera with a sticky shutter or needing new shutter curtains and priced accordingly. My experience has been that shutter replacement added about 50% to the service costs when done in conjunction with a CLA. For the money, I then had a camera known to be in "as-new" operating condition with a brand new shutter.
This is one way to find bargains.
GeneW
Veteran
One ally for film photography is the Internet itself. Just as it makes this forum possible (can you imagine the difficulties of maintaining a local rangefinder club?) it makes commerce possible in a new way -- e.g. eBay. This creates a way for manufacturers to distribute and for business to sell film without the overhead of a storefront operation. Local camera stores are dependent on a large-enough local business to keep them running. Possibly only cities are large enough to make the economics of this work.
I also found a couple of quotes in this article encouraging: http://www.inkedmagazine.com/inked/preview.html
"Digital camera sales are rising dramatically across the board, while all segments of film sales are falling...except one. Sales of black and white film have doubled in three years, says Alex Hodges, a Kodak marketing manager."
"According to PMAI (Photo Marketing Association International) annual sales of b&w film have risen every year since 1995. In addition, the number of art galleries worldwide selling b&w photography has nearly doubled in 20 years."
Gene
I also found a couple of quotes in this article encouraging: http://www.inkedmagazine.com/inked/preview.html
"Digital camera sales are rising dramatically across the board, while all segments of film sales are falling...except one. Sales of black and white film have doubled in three years, says Alex Hodges, a Kodak marketing manager."
"According to PMAI (Photo Marketing Association International) annual sales of b&w film have risen every year since 1995. In addition, the number of art galleries worldwide selling b&w photography has nearly doubled in 20 years."
Gene
Last edited:
Flyfisher Tom
Well-known
No arguments here, Graybeard. I suspect a declining market for film, but never an actual extinction of it. No more than I expected paint brushes and canvas to have gone extinct when photography made its appearance. There will be a niche market for film lovers, and we may pay more for each roll, but that will just make us even more contemplative and thoughtful of our shots, much in line with the original philosophy of using non-automated leicas in the first place. The same way that the relatively higher current price of a 4x5 shot makes the large format shooter work, thinking about the shot, weighing its merits before wildly clicking away. I love digital cameras, but for the literal transportation back to the moment of when I took the shot, nothing compares like looking at a velvia/provia slide on a light-table. The 3-D effect of chrome just never ceases to amaze me or re-fire the dendrites in my brain of that moment in time. Even just having the b/w film in sleeves leaves me more reassured than a CD of jpeg files. cheers
N
Natalia
Guest
Brian Sweeney said:
, Brian. I know the feeling. My kid used Nikon Coolpix 995, Sony V1, Canon 300D, 20D etc., but watching her shoot a Yashica GSN or Minolta XG9 is so different - even a kid understands that you got to take your time before you go "click".Emily just got her first roll back and wants to get MORE film!
Yep, film will be around.