OT: Film cameras and photography comeback?

[jkbrwn]

Lovely photos. This is what I meant way earlier in the thread. Digital just can’t compare to film IMO.

[mortirolo]

Where is my NIKON F100?

[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.

[Alistair]

Originally Posted by alexihnen

I have several film cameras and know some photographers who use film in addition to digital. I learned using film and the very different process can be fun at times.

Here’s more on the new Pentax: https://petapixel.com/2024/02/29/pen...h-this-summer/

Interesting selection of features. Zone focus, fixed lens, manual wind. Should help keep the price down. Makes me wonder - will they be marketing against the disposables, or as a premium offering?

[jamesdak]

Originally Posted by Alistair

Interesting selection of features. Zone focus, fixed lens, manual wind. Should help keep the price down. Makes me wonder - will they be marketing against the disposables, or as a premium offering?

This makes no sense to me. IF I did want to go back to shooting film it would be for a camera much, much more capable than this one. Why buy something like this when there's a gazillion used options out there that will give you better bang for the buck than this, even if the Pentax is dirt cheap. To me this is the equivalent of the $50 turntables you can buy on Amazon.....why?

[charliedid]

Photography is Dead.

[Jeff N.]

I own two Nikon FA's with motor drives (and several Nikkor lenses to go along with the cameras) plus an FE2 and a FM2, all in mint condition. You can't GIVE this stuff away on Ebay.

[jtakeda]

I pretty much only use 1 camera that is a medium format film camera.

If I found a digital that mimicked it I’d switch but film is mostly dead

[avalonracing]

Originally Posted by Jeff N.

I own two Nikon FA's with motor drives (and several Nikkor lenses to go along with the cameras) plus an FE2 and a FM2, all in mint condition. You can't GIVE this stuff away on Ebay.

People want them. They just aren't going to pay top dollar for one that isn't a bit rare (like an FM3A or an F3/T).

Nikon FEs and FMs make me so damn happy to see as my first camera was an FM followed by an FE-2 for my second. Later I had a Hasselblad and Sinar 4x5 as I was a commercial photographer for many years. I wish I had kept all all of my old cameras. Not necessarily to shoot with (although I can process and print black and white film in my sleep) but I just enjoy playing with older cameras like a fidget toy.

While I like the results of my Sony full frame digitals they feel like computers and I don't really "enjoy" using them but I still do pro work and they are the best tool for the job. If I were only shooting for fun I would be using Fujifilm.

[.RJ]

Film has indeed made a big comeback. The price and availability of film during covid was really bad - fortunately things have settled down a bit.

I've been dabbling in photography for a long time and picked back up with film a few years ago. It all started with buying older film (Konica) lenses to adapt to my Fuji mirrorless camera, and I figured I'd get a 35mm SLR to use them too.

Originally Posted by jamesdak

This makes no sense to me. IF I did want to go back to shooting film it would be for a camera much, much more capable than this one. Why buy something like this when there's a gazillion used options out there that will give you better bang for the buck than this, even if the Pentax is dirt cheap. To me this is the equivalent of the $50 turntables you can buy on Amazon.....why?

Why? Because the used 35mm 'point and shoot' style options are all old and getting fragile, prices have gone through the roof, and a lot of them are generally not repairable - or if they are its not cost effective. Or they have a Leica badge on them.

I would really like to see autofocus on this camera, that one really misses the mark for me. I really really want a nice 35mm 'point and shoot' AF camera but the nice ones are coming up on $1000 and the cheaper ones are a roll of the dice and some of the lenses on them are just atrocious. At $20-30 per roll by the time its done I'm not wasting time with ****ty plastic lenses.

[benb]

My interest in photography has been relatively low the last few years.. have not been using my digital cameras much.

For a long time I took a ton of photos. If I am really into it I have no desire to go back to film as over the longer term digital has been WAY less expensive.

But I also have little interest in buying any new fancy cameras. I have a Canon 5D MkIII that is now 12 years old. Some of my lenses are now 20 years old. Prices on new stuff is bonkers insane for diminishing returns. There are itches I have never scratched like using a T&S lens or a view camera but I don't really have the time to do so in a satisfying way.

I am exceedingly not interested in P&S anything at this point because smartphone cameras have literally gotten better than P&S cameras.

[Alistair]

Originally Posted by benb

I am exceedingly not interested in P&S anything at this point because smartphone cameras have literally gotten better than P&S cameras.

Kindle vs printed book. The Kindle is objectively better, but some people just love the experience of reading a physical book.

[.RJ]

Originally Posted by benb

I am exceedingly not interested in P&S anything at this point because smartphone cameras have literally gotten better than P&S cameras.

You're using the wrong P&S then.

But, the best camera is the one you have with you and for most of us thats the phone.

[charliedid]

I have always wanted to own an 8x10 field camera....maybe as a retirement activity. I'm afraid I am too hyper and love the immediate gratification of digital but field cams have always appealed. 8x10 contact prints are out of this world.

[Mr. Pink]

Originally Posted by charliedid

I have always wanted to own an 8x10 field camera....maybe as a retirement activity. I'm afraid I am too hyper and love the immediate gratification of digital but field cams have always appealed. 8x10 contact prints are out of this world.

I found this guy on YouTube: https://youtu.be/HRk1BWP5iDI?si=0H82kyV3ADtMcnWA

He embodies an almost extreme example of somebody who really makes life hard for himself by not only shooting film in 2024, but landscape photography with an 8x10. I mean, good Lord. First, the weight of all that in the field. The camera, the tripod (no carbon fiber Gitzo can hold that camera well), the film and film holders, the lenses (big!), and everything else you need for the trek into Zion or wherever. I almost refuse to believe he does it alone. Then there's the setup, and restriction of working a large camera on a tripod. If you read Ansel Adams autobiography, he did all that in Yosemite and the Sierras with horses or mules and a friendly assistant, but, still, made me appreciate what an athlete he must have been in his younger years, but that really wore him down. But even he smiled when somebody put a Hassleblad in his hands with some interchangable roll film backs. Game changer. I'm convinced he would marvel at modern digital and Photoshop.
Anyway, what does this young man do after he goes through all the bother of shooting these images and having them processed? (Where does somebody have large format color transparencies developed today? And reliably? Color would shift noticeably with every batch in machines in the 70s and 80s if an expert didn't stay on top of the thing. Today? I doubt the expertise is left.) Well, he scans them on what seems to be a common consumer flatbed on his desk that I would cringe to use compared to a good drum scanner. But, again, a good drum scanner is super expensive, hard to operate, and fragile. But, the point is, he DIGITALIZES them at a certain point, in order to monetize them on his website and print them. Why not start with digital in the first place? A 100 mp digital camera could easily match the quality of a desktop scanned, even drum scanned 8x10, and would be so much easier to take outside in nature. And, overall, the cost would be much less.
It's all a strange charade, but, maybe he's marketed himself well to a certain element out there who also like to make life hard for themselves for some reason, and his YouTube pays well. He certainly produces his media well.