High costs of photography?

i'm a masochist...i like to shoot four rolls of film in an hour..go home, develop, dry and go out for more....thankfully, i bulk roll and develop my own BW...that brings my costs way down...

as far as cameras...well, i'm a masochist too...i've been shooting pretty heavy on a 1935 leica iiia/summar combo for the past few weeks...since i've gotten it, it has probably seen about 30 rolls of film...the camera is by no means sophisticated or the best in terms of usability and auto anything....the lens is also by comparison soft and low contrast compared to modern lenses...however, i love it

i love the challenge of it. i love the feeling that when i make a great photo i know it's all me and definitely NOT the camera....it's sort of a weird inverse of the idea that the better camera=the better photo....i like to think of cameras as musical instruments...some are fine and nuanced...others are crude and obtuse...yet, if you are skilled, you can make any camera "sing"....
 
RML said:
I know what you mean. I have the same feeling with my Eos 300D: no emotion, no feeling, just automatic shooting. For me it comes from shooting my RF cameras, not so much that I use film. That's why I opted for the R-D1.

Im hoping all future digital RF cams will include the film advance lever like the R-D1. I think that single feature makes the R-D1 a very film-like digital body, if you know what I mean. It slows you down, makes you think about the shot a lot more before you fire that shutter. I too prefer the digital medium and I believe cameras like the R-D1 is a great compromise between the digital and film worlds. Now if only they'd work on a 1.3x body without the issues the R-D1 is suffering from.
 
dphotoguy,

Yes: excitement. Digicams are useful but as exciting as a dishwasher. I user both digi, because I have to, and film, for pleasure. Actually, digi is quite good for PR too: quick'n'dirty pictures to keep the clients happy.

Cheers,

Roger
 
Back
Top Bottom