Bill Blackwell
Leica M Shooter
Give them time. ... I wouldn't be a bit surprised to see that coming (of course, they'd call it something else).
Pál_K
Cameras. I has it.
At first, yes. I even backed them with a little money. However, then the design turned into a high-tech nightmare which I'd never consider buying. I wanted all-manual, mechanical, operations.
So true. Yet to me they are not old - somehow I still see them as if they were contemporary.
Rather than a new film camera, I want to see older films resurrected. Panatomic-X, Plus-X, HIE, and pack film!
David Murphy
Veteran
If Voigtlander came out with a new all-mechanical LTM or M mount rangefinder, yes I would buy one - assuming the price wasn't completely through the roof. The vintage cameras are great, and I have many, but sometimes one needs the high reliability afforded by a newer camera for taking photos in special circumstances.
In fact if the M-A was more like $3000 as opposed to $5000, I'd probably scrape the money together and buy one now.
I'm not particularly interested in a new-age film SLR. The last one I really liked was the K1000. Unless someone would issue an all metal, all mechanical, quality film SLR body, I'm not interested.
In fact if the M-A was more like $3000 as opposed to $5000, I'd probably scrape the money together and buy one now.
I'm not particularly interested in a new-age film SLR. The last one I really liked was the K1000. Unless someone would issue an all metal, all mechanical, quality film SLR body, I'm not interested.
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
One of my "newer" cameras is a Nikon F2. Probably the most reliable camera ever made. Nothing made since has come close.
Phil Forrest
David Murphy
Veteran
One of my "newer" cameras is a Nikon F2. Probably the most reliable camera ever made. Nothing made since has come close.
Phil Forrest
I own a pretty nice F and a beater FT3, but if I need to make sure the camera will work I usually take my Bessar R2C, at least as a backup. I will give you this however, I've never had a vintage Nikon SLR fold on me - a few other brands yes, but not Nikon.
Larry Cloetta
Veteran
One of my "newer" cameras is a Nikon F2. Probably the most reliable camera ever made. Nothing made since has come close.
Phil Forrest
None of this “has had a recent CLA” nonsense in the Nikon F2 world. That entire “needs a regular CLA to keep it working to spec” is completely foreign to the Nikon way of building cameras, especially back then.
I have an F2AS which I sent to Sover Wong a few years ago for a complete going through. So, it was close to 50 years old, never been touched mechanically, just used, and used, and used. The only reason I sent it in was to be sure I had done everything I could do to maximize its potential, it wasn’t because I was having any issues with a 50 year old, unserviced, camera. I measured shutter speeds before I sent it in, as best I could and they all seemed to be within 1/3 stop. After he worked on it they are probably slightly more accurate, but still within 1/3 stop. Nor does it feel any different in operation, still smooth and solid, and as bulletproof as any camera ever made, more so than most. My point isn’t that there is no possible advantage to having Sover Wong overhaul your F2, it’s that F2’s were almost at the perfect intersection of simplicity, and operational, design, and manufacturing perfection. Having someone today manufacture something at this level of robustness and reliability for an affordable price seems impossible to me. It could be made, but not sold for $1,500.
(And the whole “needs routine CLA to keep in spec” thing should point to either design or manufacturing shortcomings. You’d think
Maybe not the ultimate in camera goodness.) (This last bit is trolling.)E.M
Well-known
If Nikon made an exact new copy of the F or F2 I would buy it , even at a high price. I still have my F2, but my F was stolen from me months after I bought it new. It would also mean that spare parts would be available for a long time. No need for phonemic , just plain prism. In 2009 I was hoping for the release of a new F for the 50 th anniversary of the F-mount ...
D
Deleted member 65559
Guest
If i had any need of a 35mm SLR, I'd buy a Nikon F2 titan in a heartbeat.
JeffS7444
Well-known
Yes I'd consider buying a new film camera, but not at any price, and I'd really want to see something new, rather than a faithful recreation of an old design. Nikon's reissued S3 and SP cost more than I was willing to spend, and while their F6 seems like a very good buy as such things go, I'd get more value out of a new Sony digital camera.
BWF
Established
I would buy a new film camera assuming it’s in a useful lens mount and sub $5000
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
I could definitely get into the threshold of price which I'd pay for a new camera, but that new camera would have to come with a future of factory support via a warranty and after the warranty period, spare parts. Let's take the Nikon F2 previously mentioned. If it were to just use an eye-level prism, not the metered prisms, it wouldn't have need for the circuitry inside, aside from the contacts for a flash. Anyway, we've got our bare-bones, no battery at all Nikon F2 with DE-1 prism. Exact same camera, save for the meter stuff, just to cut a bit of cost. Now, we have a product that has a history of reliability in every imaginable shooting scenario and environment. We have a dedicated existing set of users (myself and others here and elsewhere), AND we have the cachet of a fully manual, professional quality camera that the younger digital generation can grab and learn with. The benefit of it being Nikon, is that it is from a large corporation which is not a fly-by-night company that may go teats up at any time, like so many starry-eyed kickstarter campaigns. We could just as easily substitute the Canon F1 or New F1 in for our F2, as they are contemporaries and also "bulletproof". I wouldn't hesitate to take either body on a deployment with Navy combat engineers to Iraq (if I were to travel back in time.)
I would pay maybe up to $2000 for such a camera (once I have a reliable job, purchased a house, and purchased a car to replace my current one), but it would have to be the exact same as my ugly and oh-so-reliable, black paint F2.
As I wrote earlier though, such a camera couldn't be made and sold for probably any less than $5000, and could easily run twice that much, depending upon interest, number made, prospective buyer deposits (guaranteed sales.)
Meanwhile, I can shop for the same old camera here and other places online, buy it for anywhere between $150 and $500, and have a reliable body for probably the rest of my life. That $2000 would be my investment into the future factory maintenance and parts availability for the F2.
Phil Forrest
I would pay maybe up to $2000 for such a camera (once I have a reliable job, purchased a house, and purchased a car to replace my current one), but it would have to be the exact same as my ugly and oh-so-reliable, black paint F2.
As I wrote earlier though, such a camera couldn't be made and sold for probably any less than $5000, and could easily run twice that much, depending upon interest, number made, prospective buyer deposits (guaranteed sales.)
Meanwhile, I can shop for the same old camera here and other places online, buy it for anywhere between $150 and $500, and have a reliable body for probably the rest of my life. That $2000 would be my investment into the future factory maintenance and parts availability for the F2.
Phil Forrest
Evergreen States
Francine Pierre Saget (they/them)
For me, the 135 format doesn’t bring anything to the table that digital can’t do.
However, I love the 4:3, 5:4 and 7:6 aspect ratios and the optical and total characteristics of the 120 formats. They give looks that are substantially different from digital formats. I’d love to be able to get 645 and 6x7 format cameras, especially rangefinders, as existing used models were few and the ones that can be bought used are priced well out of my means.
However, I love the 4:3, 5:4 and 7:6 aspect ratios and the optical and total characteristics of the 120 formats. They give looks that are substantially different from digital formats. I’d love to be able to get 645 and 6x7 format cameras, especially rangefinders, as existing used models were few and the ones that can be bought used are priced well out of my means.
D
Deleted member 65559
Guest
While you're on the mark about most medium formats (Rolleiflex, Plaubel) the meterless Fuji 'Teaxs Leicas' GW670,680,690 models ll & lll can still be bought for 5 or $600 and offer a tremendous value. Unfortunately there just aren't enough prospective buyers for new medium format film cameras....& that's a shame. The upside of what's out there used is that the non-electronic ones have proven to be incredibly reliable.
DownUnder
Nikon Nomad
As in so many other things in life, the answer to this, for me, is - maybe, it depends.
Like all of you, I already have a shipload of old cameras i don't really use enough. in my case, Nikkormats. I bought my ELs new in the 1970s and via a combination of good care and good luck, they all still work fine. Ditto a pair of FT2s I picked up about a decade ago when film cameras were being dumped for cents on the dollar on the secondhand sale market. All still working top-notch and still used, if not often enough, for quality black-and-white work. (For my color work, digital is entirely satisfactory.)
Purely as opinions, my thoughts are these -
We all have our favorite cameras. For me if Nikon were to make another Nikkormat, there MIGHT be a good sale market with students and young photographers sufficiently cashed up to pay the asking price, given the great lot of quality Nikkor glass available used. Cost would be a factor - somehow I doubt an FT2 equivalent would be sold today for the original sale price of $275.
This is a dangerous assumption to make, I know - but to compare current digital Nikons to their film counterparts, I briefly had a Nikon Df which I liked, but the ergonomics didn't suit me (highly personal), and which I thought was basically overkill for the money. I also briefly played with a Z6, which I didn't care for at all, for too many reasons to list here. (I now have a D800, and am satisfied with it in every way.)
A new film Nikon in the F# range and built like the Df would (again) maybe find a good niche market.
All entirely subjective, I know, with many ifs, ands and buts.
As always, others' input into all this will be greatly enjoyed.
Like all of you, I already have a shipload of old cameras i don't really use enough. in my case, Nikkormats. I bought my ELs new in the 1970s and via a combination of good care and good luck, they all still work fine. Ditto a pair of FT2s I picked up about a decade ago when film cameras were being dumped for cents on the dollar on the secondhand sale market. All still working top-notch and still used, if not often enough, for quality black-and-white work. (For my color work, digital is entirely satisfactory.)
Purely as opinions, my thoughts are these -
We all have our favorite cameras. For me if Nikon were to make another Nikkormat, there MIGHT be a good sale market with students and young photographers sufficiently cashed up to pay the asking price, given the great lot of quality Nikkor glass available used. Cost would be a factor - somehow I doubt an FT2 equivalent would be sold today for the original sale price of $275.
This is a dangerous assumption to make, I know - but to compare current digital Nikons to their film counterparts, I briefly had a Nikon Df which I liked, but the ergonomics didn't suit me (highly personal), and which I thought was basically overkill for the money. I also briefly played with a Z6, which I didn't care for at all, for too many reasons to list here. (I now have a D800, and am satisfied with it in every way.)
A new film Nikon in the F# range and built like the Df would (again) maybe find a good niche market.
All entirely subjective, I know, with many ifs, ands and buts.
As always, others' input into all this will be greatly enjoyed.
dof
Fiat Lux
I was tempted to buy an al-a-carté MP from Leica a couple of years back, just before they discontinued the program. I'd rather lusted after one for a long time. However I cancelled the order after coming home and picking up my M6 TTL. The fact is, it does everything I need from a film Leica. I couldn't justify the cost for whatever peace of mind comes from knowing I'll have another body in the case that my TTL has an electronic failure.
I've owned a second M body before and found it just didn't make sense to have one in use while the other sat in a drawer. Even the allure of a custom body wouldn't have changed the fact that I'd be inviting that scenario and the vague sense of guilt that accompanies it back into my life.
From the present vantage point, that's as close as I can envision I'll come to buying a new film body.
As others have observed, I have plenty of film bodies of various mounts to keep me happy shooting film for a long time to come.
I've owned a second M body before and found it just didn't make sense to have one in use while the other sat in a drawer. Even the allure of a custom body wouldn't have changed the fact that I'd be inviting that scenario and the vague sense of guilt that accompanies it back into my life.
From the present vantage point, that's as close as I can envision I'll come to buying a new film body.
As others have observed, I have plenty of film bodies of various mounts to keep me happy shooting film for a long time to come.
Pál_K
Cameras. I has it.
We are all thinking in a rut. Certainly any new 35mm camera is going to duplicate what already exists in voluminous quantities, be it an all mechanical camera like an M3 or something technologically sophisticated like an F6. Moreover, to make such a camera today of comparable quality would also make its cost prohibitive.
So maybe a new type of 35mm film camera should be considered. Not the 135 format we have now, but film 35mm wide with a larger image area. Instead of 24x36mm, use narrower sprocket holes and increase the image area by 16% on each side, giving 28x42mm. Now, instead of 864 sq mm, you have 1176 sq mm - a 36% increase. Image quality would improve and I think it would certainly be noticeable.
Yes, there would have to be special manufacturing for the sprocket holes and there'd have to be new lenses with a larger image circle. This is somewhat analogous to what happened transitioning from Regular 8mm to Super 8 ciné film.
Would there be a market to support this? These days most definitely not, but we're fantasizing in this thread anyway. However, I do believe what I've described here is the path that should have been taken in the 1960's rather than 126 format, 110 format, and ever-decreasing image sizes and image quality.
So maybe a new type of 35mm film camera should be considered. Not the 135 format we have now, but film 35mm wide with a larger image area. Instead of 24x36mm, use narrower sprocket holes and increase the image area by 16% on each side, giving 28x42mm. Now, instead of 864 sq mm, you have 1176 sq mm - a 36% increase. Image quality would improve and I think it would certainly be noticeable.
Yes, there would have to be special manufacturing for the sprocket holes and there'd have to be new lenses with a larger image circle. This is somewhat analogous to what happened transitioning from Regular 8mm to Super 8 ciné film.
Would there be a market to support this? These days most definitely not, but we're fantasizing in this thread anyway. However, I do believe what I've described here is the path that should have been taken in the 1960's rather than 126 format, 110 format, and ever-decreasing image sizes and image quality.
D
Deleted member 65559
Guest
Pal just to play the devil's advocate here, what's the use of a bigger format when the majority of people are just scanning & looking at images in screens? I'll believe there's a real film renaissance when enlargers don't get taken to the dump and when B&H & Freestyle have new silver gelatin papers. Sorry....just dreaming
Pál_K
Cameras. I has it.
Pal just to play the devil's advocate here, what's the use of a bigger format when the majority of people are just scanning & looking at images in screens? I'll believe there's a real film renaissance when enlargers don't get taken to the dump and when B&H & Freestyle have new silver gelatin papers. Sorry....just dreaming
Right. Today such a change doesn't make sense: film users are a very small minority compared to digital and smartphone camera users.
I'm dreaming that in an alternate universe there would have been a "super 35mm".
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
Forest_rain
Well-known
One would think that they would want to make rangefinders or compact 35mm cameras. Maybe something with a fixed lens, it would make manufacturing a lot easier.
There's a market for compact cameras it seems, too many used SLRs on the market. Not too many working compacts out there, they seem to break down more easily over time.
Something people can carry around in their backpack or purse.
Just an idea, handling is often underrated on the forums.
There's a market for compact cameras it seems, too many used SLRs on the market. Not too many working compacts out there, they seem to break down more easily over time.
Something people can carry around in their backpack or purse.
Just an idea, handling is often underrated on the forums.