OT: Film cameras and photography comeback?

[Louis]

Originally Posted by Mr. Pink

Now, this is how you do it, Kate.

After all, she was a commoner.

[warren128]

Originally Posted by NHAero

I carried the 35 RC all around Europe, India, Nepal, and East Africa for years, with passable results for a rank amateur. For a pilgrimage to Tibet in 2002 I bought a Ricoh GR1v. I loved that camera and it took wonderful photos. But I was not a film enthusiast, just someone who wanted to record these places I was in, and when digital became reliable I switched. I think I sold the Ricoh for more than it cost!

I wonder if there's a current digital camera that compares for diminutive size, fast shooting, and quality optics.

Digital equivalent: look no further than Ricoh's own GR series digital. Ricoh carried over the same design philosophy as their GR Film series. I have the GR II, which has a built-in flash (the latest versions, the GRIII and IIIx do not). My GRII has a superb 28mm f2.8 ( 18.3mm actual), APS-C sensor. I'm always pleased with the iq of this little gem.

https://www.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/english/products/gr-2/

[jamesdak]

Originally Posted by NHAero

I carried the 35 RC all around Europe, India, Nepal, and East Africa for years, with passable results for a rank amateur. For a pilgrimage to Tibet in 2002 I bought a Ricoh GR1v. I loved that camera and it took wonderful photos. But I was not a film enthusiast, just someone who wanted to record these places I was in, and when digital became reliable I switched. I think I sold the Ricoh for more than it cost!

I wonder if there's a current digital camera that compares for diminutive size, fast shooting, and quality optics.

That was the first camera I handed off to my youngest son. He used it for the shot that won his first blue ribbon at the county fair.

[Alistair]

Originally Posted by warren128

Digital equivalent: look no further than Ricoh's own GR series digital. Ricoh carried over the same design philosophy as their GR Film series. I have the GR II, which has a built-in flash (the latest versions, the GRIII and IIIx do not). My GRII has a superb 28mm f2.8 ( 18.3mm actual), APS-C sensor. I'm always pleased with the iq of this little gem.

https://www.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/english/products/gr-2/

Yep, the Ricoh for size. Or the Fuji X100 if you can deal with something a big bigger. The Ricoh is just a bit big for pocket carry, but only just (probably fits in a jacket pocket). The Fuji is small by SLR standards, but not really much smaller than some other smaller mirrorless options.

Another option is the Sony RX100 series. Smaller sensor, but still a really solid camera and with a zoom lens. Smallest of the three listed here.

[Mr. Pink]

Supply chain issues have really screwed up camera availability in the past few years after Covid. There was a big collapse of demand during the lockdown, and now everybody wants a camera. Sort of the opposite of the Covid bike mania. I just read the Ricohs are super hard to find, and Ricoh has stopped taking orders, trying to keep up. I have been looking for a higher rez Fuji, but, out of stock, out of stock. That said, if you're looking for a compact camera, rumour has it that Fuji will finally be updating the XE series with an XE5 this year. Please,please. I have an old XE1 with a pancake lens that I bike with, but a 40 mp sensor would be awesome in the same size body.

[robin3mj]

Originally Posted by Mr. Pink

Supply chain issues have really screwed up camera availability in the past few years after Covid. There was a big collapse of demand during the lockdown, and now everybody wants a camera. Sort of the opposite of the Covid bike mania. I just read the Ricohs are super hard to find, and Ricoh has stopped taking orders, trying to keep up. I have been looking for a higher rez Fuji, but, out of stock, out of stock. That said, if you're looking for a compact camera, rumour has it that Fuji will finally be updating the XE series with an XE5 this year. Please,please. I have an old XE1 with a pancake lens that I bike with, but a 40 mp sensor would be awesome in the same size body.

I got a Ricoh GR3 "Diary Edition" (28mm) direct from Ricoh about a week ago. Planning on selling my Ricoh Gr3x (40mm), which replaced my prior GR(1). I just like the wider FOV and I have longer lenses for my mirrorless camera.

Planned to sell the GR3x to my local camera shop but if anyone is interested in it, I'd be happy to offload it here.

[.RJ]

Originally Posted by NHAero

I
I wonder if there's a current digital camera that compares for diminutive size, fast shooting, and quality optics.

Ricoh GRIII/GRIIIx or Sony RX100

I have (well, had, just sold) a Fuji x100F, and preordered the new x100VI - hopefully it arrives by summer, if not I'll probably pick up a Ricoh to hold me over while I wait. The fuji is great but its not really a pocket camera and doesnt fit well in a jersey pocket or bike bag without some fuss.

[weisan]

Fujifilm marks its 90th anniversary with a renewed commitment to a better tomorrow

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/brandstudio/fujifilm90

[slowpoke]

They discontinued FP100 and Superia is all questionable now (200 is supposedly Kodak Gold, and 400 is maybe Ultramax).

[Alistair]

Can somebody explain the deal with the "cine films" that some of the "hip" shops are selling (Lomography, etc)?

Are these literally rolls of film stock fed into 35mm rolls? All marketing? Some seem to have a layer of chemicals removed?

[jkbrwn]

Originally Posted by Alistair

Can somebody explain the deal with the "cine films" that some of the "hip" shops are selling (Lomography, etc)?

Are these literally rolls of film stock fed into 35mm rolls? All marketing? Some seem to have a layer of chemicals removed?

Yes, that's correct. It is motion picture film stock from Kodak - and is manufactured by Kodak - with its Remjet anti-halation backing layer removed.

As with all film stock, their film has a different vibe to any other film stock. People like the glow of lights when using Cinestill film. Lots of examples here: https://www.flickr.com/groups/cinest...th/53609355907

[VeloceNiente]

Excellent camera choices!

Originally Posted by warren128

Great thread There are three things that I have done for most of my life: cycling, photography, and martial arts.

I have used just about every type of film camera in the last 50+ years that I've been into photography. Just recently, I took a group photo of the 35mm film cameras that I have kept around. Every now and then I have the nostalgic idea to run some film through them for old time's sake, but so far, I have't done it yet.

I've gone digital ever since the first affordable digital cameras emerged around the year 2000, and my old beloved film cameras sit in the cabinet, unused.

IMG_20231108_102313928_HDR by warren t., on Flickr

[.RJ]

Originally Posted by jkbrwn

Yes, that's correct. It is motion picture film stock from Kodak - and is manufactured by Kodak - with its Remjet anti-halation backing layer removed.

Some of the Lomo films may be rebranded kodak, but not all of them - I've shot Lomo 100 and Lomo '92 and neither of them look like photos from Kodak Vision 250/500 that I've seen.

FWIW, Lomo 100 can be great - punchy colors and contrast and Lomo '92 just looks like expired film. Its kind of ****.

[Alistair]

Originally Posted by .RJ

Some of the Lomo films may be rebranded kodak, but not all of them - I've shot Lomo 100 and Lomo '92 and neither of them look like photos from Kodak Vision 250/500 that I've seen.

FWIW, Lomo 100 can be great - punchy colors and contrast and Lomo '92 just looks like expired film. Its kind of ****.

I think he’s talking specifically about the film that’s been repurposed from motion picture to 35mm still (which is what I was asking about).

[jkbrwn]

Originally Posted by .RJ

Some of the Lomo films may be rebranded kodak, but not all of them - I've shot Lomo 100 and Lomo '92 and neither of them look like photos from Kodak Vision 250/500 that I've seen.

FWIW, Lomo 100 can be great - punchy colors and contrast and Lomo '92 just looks like expired film. Its kind of ****.

I didn't interpret the question to be about Lomography film. I interpreted 'Cine' to mean 'Cinestill'.

Originally Posted by Alistair

I think he’s talking specifically about the film that’s been repurposed from motion picture to 35mm still (which is what I was asking about).

Indeed.