Film use continues to grow

[excalibur2]

Who's slaging digital users ? I own both Nikon D700 and Canon EOS650D digital cameras also a Canon G11 compact

Interesting to know, and ignoring mobiles that can take pics, how many members in T&C don't have a digi camera or haven't used one.
IMO... here we appreciate more the pros and cons of photography using different equipment and could include home development (or darkroom work).....as we see both sides compared to narrow minded digi guys who have never tried film.

 

[DG Phototraining]

I don't think so, unless you can demonstrate otherwise of course.

Short of inviting you to clubs and engaging in the banter that can be had about film v digital there's no possibility of anyone proving anything here - so that's a daft statement isn't it, and just as daft as you think mine is

---::---

So, back to the point of the thread then - while its good that film isn't dying out, what are the reasons for its growth in popularity? And is this primarily people returning to using film or totally new folk, the young even as first timers?

Dave

 

[Deleted member 21335]

Short of inviting you to clubs and engaging in the banter that can be had about film v digital there's no possibility of anyone proving anything here - so that's a daft statement isn't it, and just as daft as you think mine is

---::---

So, back to the point of the thread then - while its good that film isn't dying out, what are the reasons for its growth in popularity? And is this primarily people returning to using film or totally new folk, the young even as first timers?

Dave

I think it’s a combination of both, Dave. For me personally, I honestly believe if I hadn’t rediscovered film photography, I’d have given up years ago. I just don’t connect with digital cameras or like the results, the screen that demands I look at it or how it makes me shoot.
I genuinely think some people are tired of all the technology and being constantly connected and that carries over to cameras. Another screen to look at.

Also, I get really sick of the constant chatter about upgrades. You only have to look at the Canon R and Nikon Z threads on here and the uproar over features that haven’t been included, none of which let the amateur take better, more meaningful photographs. I can’t be the only one who’s tired of stuff like that.

Also, I know some people say the cameras are just tools and to a point, I do agree but for the hobbyist, it’s nice to have a little connection with the equipment and for it to be nice to use. If you handle SLR cameras from all the manufacturers, they all have weird little quirks and ways of doing things. Today’s stuff is so boring in comparison.

I could talk all day about why I love film and the look it gives and the way it feels. The organic grain, the transitions between tones or the different film stocks for different colour renditions or contrasts. Those are some of the reasons I choose to do it and again, I can’t be the only one.

By the way, I’m not anti digital as far as photography goes. Some of my favourite photographers shoot it. I love the medium of photography as communication regardless of how it’s shot. It’s just for me, I have no desire for it, the same way you say you have no desire to go back to film. They are both correct, because it’s what suits us.

 

[Asha]

They are both correct, because it’s what suits us.

 

[DG Phototraining]

I think it’s a combination of both, Dave. For me personally, I honestly believe if I hadn’t rediscovered film photography, I’d have given up years ago. I just don’t connect with digital cameras or like the results, the screen that demands I look at it or how it makes me shoot.
I genuinely think some people are tired of all the technology and being constantly connected and that carries over to cameras. Another screen to look at.

Also, I get really sick of the constant chatter about upgrades. You only have to look at the Canon R and Nikon Z threads on here and the uproar over features that haven’t been included, none of which let the amateur take better, more meaningful photographs. I can’t be the only one who’s tired of stuff like that.

Also, I know some people say the cameras are just tools and to a point, I do agree but for the hobbyist, it’s nice to have a little connection with the equipment and for it to be nice to use. If you handle SLR cameras from all the manufacturers, they all have weird little quirks and ways of doing things. Today’s stuff is so boring in comparison.

I could talk all day about why I love film and the look it gives and the way it feels. The organic grain, the transitions between tones or the different film stocks for different colour renditions or contrasts. Those are some of the reasons I choose to do it and again, I can’t be the only one.

By the way, I’m not anti digital as far as photography goes. Some of my favourite photographers shoot it. I love the medium of photography as communication regardless of how it’s shot. It’s just for me, I have no desire for it, the same way you say you have no desire to go back to film. They are both correct, because it’s what suits us.

I have to agree with all of that - but especially the bold bit as I'm sick of that too. I actually set my digi cameras up to shoot in the simplest way they possibly can and very much as I shot with my film cameras, the vast majority of the 'clever' techie stuff I can happily do without

My fav 2 film cameras lasted almost 20 years before they strangely both broke within a year of each other, but up to that point they both did exactly what I wanted from a camera and the simplicity was FAB - as much as I like my D750s now I doubt I'll be using them in 2-3 years from now, or even that they'd work at all in 20 years

I do love digital though and couldn't shoot what I Iike & how I like on film, and I do love the PP element too so I'll never go back - I just want a good sensor, fast AF and and decent metering and sod the rest

Dave

 

[simon ess]

I only used the word "here" four times.

Clearly not enough to indicate I meant here and not elsewhere.

Hey Ho. Moving on

 

[FruitFlakes]

Trouble with this idea at present Lloyd is that the quality of some second hand 'flagship' 35mm film cameras will be far superior to any 'budget' Chinese new camera (Top of the range Nikon/Canon/Pentax/Minolta/Leica etc), therefore at present I'm not so sure there is a market.

I bought a Nikon F3 in fantastic condition, sent it for a CLA to Jules Abel and he has put a 12 month warranty on it for me; he reckons it will probably outlast me

On these very forums a New 5 x 4 film Camera is being produced out of acrylic and I believe he is not sleeping trying to fulfil orders for it

IMO Film will always be a small Niche in photography and although it's nice to see sales grow the market is still very, very limited - but one of the reasons I love it because it is very different.

That’s true, especially in regards to SLRs, but at present there is a problem in the supply of premium compacts, if they break they’re pretty much unrepairable. It’s why JCH doesn’t bother sourcing them anymore even though he still gets enquiries for them, and why he seems to have taken it on as a project.

Also something made in China needn’t be budget at all - I remember years back seeing some Noctilux clones giving the actual Leica lens a run for its money.

I think a sizeable part of Chroma’s success (and Intrepid’s for that matter) is down to the fact you don’t have to go forum/classifieds/eBay diving for hours to find out about a camera. I remember spending months doing my research before buying a 5x4, researching the benefits of base vs axis movements, what exactly the difference was between a Wista or Tachihara, lots of other bits and bobs. If Chroma came out a year or so earlier that would have saved me so much time. Both Chroma and Intrepid fill a gap in the market, and the inevitable breakdown of all those premium compacts is a huge gap.

 

[jakeblu]

I only used the word "here" four times.

Clearly not enough to indicate I meant here and not elsewhere.

Hey Ho. Moving on

So whats this if it's not a dig at digital camera users?

Film makes you think about your photography before you fire the shutter , 24 or 36 images is all you get so need to get them correct , Digital is machine gun technology , fire off 500 images , downoad onto your computer , sit for hours viewing and deleting most , then into photo shop or lightroom to process the few remaining images changing almost everything , DOH !

 

[Mr Badger]

I think the film using community in the UK can probably be divided into two main categories (but before anyone picks holes in that, there will be other sub-categories and cross overs):

Those that grew up during the hey-day of film cameras and thought it would be nice to shoot film again after perhaps finding their old film camera at the back of a cupboard (or seeing what was once their dream camera selling for peanuts and snapping up a bargain) and feeling nostalgic for the days of film.

Those members of the younger generation/s, who have only ever used digital cameras getting curious about film and/or liking the 'vintage' look it can give and deciding to buy a film camera and have a go for a new experience.

I think many people in both the above categories then found that they liked using film and saw it as a different experience from digital photography... in effect, they now had two hobbies they enjoyed (but a few have actually made the retro crossover completely)!

Leading on from this, for quite a few people, owning one 'classic/vintage' film camera quickly grows to owning several (after all, they can still be bought quite cheaply in comparison to new cameras). For that reason I think it's less likely any of us will actually wear a camera out, as we're usually using them in quite gentle rotation (for what a quality film camera was designed to handle).

However, if using a 30 or 40+ year old camera do bear in mind that the grease and oil that lubricates the moving parts will most likely have dried out and hardened. So if you find a classic camera you like and want to use regularly, then get it serviced. After all, if you found a 'mothballed' roadworthy classic car in a barn or a garage that hadn't been used for 30 or 40 years you'd certainly change all the oils and grease where necessary before putting it back on the road and driving it... so why should we expect a mechanical camera to be any different and not need a bit of TLC before we try to put film after film through it?

 

[Carl Hall]

Those members of the younger generation/s, who have only ever used digital cameras getting curious about film and/or liking the 'vintage' look it can give and deciding to buy a film camera and have a go for a new experience.

I think many people in both the above categories then found that they liked using film and saw it as a different experience from digital photography... in effect, they now had two hobbies they enjoyed (but a few have actually made the retro crossover completely)!

Leading on from this, for quite a few people, owning one 'classic/vintage' film camera quickly grows to owning several (after all, they can still be bought quite cheaply in comparison to new cameras). For that reason I think it's less likely any of us will actually wear a camera out, as we're usually using them in quite gentle rotation (for what a quality film camera was designed to handle).

Quite an accurate description of my life! Grew up with digital, got curious about film, tried it out and loved it, and now have a small collection of cameras

 

[Asha]

Quite an accurate description of my life! Grew up with digital, got curious about film, tried it out and loved it, and now have a small collection of cameras

Similar here except that I grew up with film, never managed to produce a descent photograph…..Several decades later, shooting both film and digital, the inability to obtain even a half decent photo remains…..I'm sure it's a genetic thing

T'is why I have returned to TP……..so I can view the results of you guys and see what a REAL photo looks like

 

[simon ess]

So whats this if it's not a dig at digital camera users?

First, his comment is about digital photography, not digital users.

Second, I have never said that some film users don't dig at digital users. I questioned how common it was here.

But I'm tired of all this nonsense now.

I shan't trouble this thread again.

 

[Asha]

.

But I'm tired of all this nonsense now.

I'm just plain tired……………………………………………………………………









of this thread!

Time for a Siesta …..:sleep::sleep::sleep:

 

[F1.2]

So whats this if it's not a dig at digital camera users?

Its my opinion on digital camera use and yes I have 3 Digital cameras

 

[Nomad Z]

Also, I know some people say the cameras are just tools and to a point, I do agree but for the hobbyist, it’s nice to have a little connection with the equipment and for it to be nice to use.

I've never really bought the "it's just a tool" line. It seems to me to imply that it doesn't matter what you use, and, by extension, that the tools are all the same. In reality of course, they aren't, and the small differences can be quite important in terms of ergonomics and usability. Film and digital SLRs, for example, might be outwardly similar, but the use and handling can be very different. For me, the controls on my DSLR (Canon 30D) are all in the wrong place, and it bugs me that there are no focus aids in the viewfinder - it just gets in the way of taking pictures. On the Nikon FM, the controls are where I expect them to be, it feels right, and I barely have to think about the camera.

(When I first got the DSLR, I set it to manual, switched off auto-chimp, told the flash to never pop up, and set it to manual focus. When I found out how useless the finder was, I set it back to autofocus and used it more like a rangefinder. When I found my right thumb waggling about between shots, I caved in and got back into film.)

 

[StephenM]

A half like really; I do view cameras as tools, but I don't think all tools are the same. Some are more appropriate to some jobs than others. When I want/need photos to be available quickly, or when I'm not bothered about the composition etc., then I'll use Sue's digial camera. Mine, now, it seems, since she upgraded, so I now have my first digital camera! If I actually want to produce photographs that I'd want to keep/put on my wall/show people, then I'll use film.

The digital camera in question is a Sony a7r2. I use it with manual focus lenses, set in aperture priority mode, adjust exposure compensation if the viewfinder/experience indicated I should, and only in very rare and exception circumstances do I review what I've just taken. (Basically, if I think someone walked into the picture.)

I'm a film user who never actually went away since my first forays with a camera in 1957. Seems a long time ago now...

 

[skysh4rk]

I've never really bought the "it's just a tool" line. It seems to me to imply that it doesn't matter what you use, and, by extension, that the tools are all the same.

I can’t say I agree, if I’m understanding you correctly.

I choose my tools (e.g., screwdriver, hammer, etc.) to fit the circumstances based on what I need to do.

Likewise, I pick up the camera, lens, film, etc. that best suit the photographic circumstances.

I don’t have a toolbox filled with all the same tools, as that would be weird; I don’t have cameras with overlapping purposes either.

On another note...

I do enjoy cameras, but I have been increasingly disillusioned with the emphasis often placed on equipment and light tight boxes, rather than the creative, expressive, and artistic elements of photography, which are personally more important than whether I am using a £50 6x6 folder or a £2000 Mamiya 7.

Certainly, when I look back at photographs I’ve taken over the years, it’s never been gear holding me back in any way; it’s the guy holding the camera...

 

[ChrisR]

Well said, RJ. I so much agree with that last sentence, which is one of the reasons I've stuck with a small number of cameras that I know well (basically my two Pentaxes now). What possessed me to back a certain Kickstarter not a million miles from F&C I'll never know! I think I'll be too terrified at the cost of film & processing to press the shutter.

 

[Fraser Euan White]

That’s true, especially in regards to SLRs, but at present there is a problem in the supply of premium compacts, if they break they’re pretty much unrepairable. It’s why JCH doesn’t bother sourcing them anymore even though he still gets enquiries for them, and why he seems to have taken it on as a project.

Both Chroma and Intrepid fill a gap in the market, and the inevitable breakdown of all those premium compacts is a huge gap.

Hi Lloyd,

I just purchased a Rollei 35 SE - beautifully built compact with a gorgeous Sonar f2.8 lens - Newton Ellis serviced it for me and it works like new

Rollei 35SE by Fraser White, on Flickr

ScanImage43 by Fraser White, on Flickr

ScanImage22 by Fraser White, on Flickr

 

[FruitFlakes]

Hi Lloyd,

I just purchased a Rollei 35 SE - beautifully built compact with a gorgeous Sonar f2.8 lens - Newton Ellis serviced it for me and it works like new

Rollei 35SE by Fraser White, on Flickr

Very nice Fraser, I've always wanted to try one of those. The 35SE is all springs and gears though, it's almost impossible (or incredibly expensive) to get an autofocus premium compact repaired. A friend's Contax G2 just died on them on a shoot today, they've had to borrow one for another shoot tomorrow and they're now on the lookout for a replacement (again).

 

[Mr Badger]

Very nice Fraser, I've always wanted to try one of those. The 35SE is all springs and gears though, it's almost impossible (or incredibly expensive) to get an autofocus premium compact repaired. A friend's Contax G2 just died on them on a shoot today, they've had to borrow one for another shoot tomorrow and they're now on the lookout for a replacement (again).

Unless I'm mistaken, the Contax G2 was a highly advanced (for its time) auto rangefinder camera, and not what most of us F&C Forum regulars would regard (immediately think of) as a 35mm autofocus compact. If so, how does the demise of some relatively exotic camera (particularly if being regularly used in a commercial environment) hope to illustrate the point you appear to be wanting to make?

 

[FruitFlakes]

Unless I'm mistaken, the Contax G2 was a highly advanced (for its time) auto rangefinder camera, and not what most of us F&C Forum regulars would regard (immediately think of) as a 35mm autofocus compact. If so, how does the demise of some relatively exotic camera (particularly if being regularly used in a commercial environment) hope to illustrate the point you appear to be wanting to make?

A mechanical 35SE is a lot simpler to work on than anything that’s automated, and I used the G2 as an example. You’d have a similarly hard time with a Ricoh GR. How hard is that to follow?

 

[Fraser Euan White]

Hi Lloyd,

surely if you are in the market for a premium 35mm compact and the Contax has become unreliable & irreparable then a Leica would fit the bill? There will always be someone who can repair them and they therefore do not need 'throwing away' when they break down? In comparison to a digital camera a Leica film camera is 'cheap' and can be used with a variety of aftermarket Chinese lenses if cost of these is prohibitive?

I personally would prefer an £800 Leica film body than a new Chinese compact?

Or even consider the Rollei 35 RF:

http://elekm.net/pages/cameras/rollei_35_rf.htm

 

[FruitFlakes]

Hi Lloyd,

surely if you are in the market for a premium 35mm compact and the Contax has become unreliable & irreparable then a Leica would fit the bill? There will always be someone who can repair them and they therefore do not need 'throwing away' when they break down? In comparison to a digital camera a Leica film camera is 'cheap' and can be used with a variety of aftermarket Chinese lenses if cost of these is prohibitive?

I personally would prefer an £800 Leica film body than a new Chinese compact?

Or even consider the Rollei 35 RF:

http://elekm.net/pages/cameras/rollei_35_rf.htm

I have a Leica, I don't actually need any more cameras. My M4 is my favourite 35mm camera and I run at least a roll a week through mine, but it still doesn't measure up to the point and shoot ease of a Contax or a Ricoh.

Suggesting a mechanical, manual focus rangefinder (or a scale focus Rollei) to someone looking for an autofocus compact is like telling someone in the market for a Tesla to get a Mercedes W111. They're completely different in use despite serving the same purpose from a utilitarian point of view.

Here are two links that explain the situation regarding 35mm compacts quite clearly and the rationale behind introducing a new one in the future. If film is to have any appearance of being alive and healthy then new cameras must be introduced, Fuji and Polaroid Originals are good examples of this in the instant photography market.

https://www.japancamerahunter.com/2017/05/compact-cameras-future/

https://emulsive.org/articles/news/...alks-emulsive-new-35mm-compact-camera-project

 

[Mr Badger]

Lloyd, I've just bought one of last mid-range EOS 35mm SLRs Canon made, it looks to be in nice condition and the price paid (body only) was £32. It's quite small and light for an autofocus SLR, it's exceptionally quiet for a motor driven 35mm SLR (I know this as I already have one of this model that I use regularly, hence me being eager to buy another at that price!), it's got a fast AF system (complete with a 7 zone eye-selectable AF point system that I find works very well and is very useful - and how many of todays DSLRs have got that feature?), it's got a 32 zone evaluative metering system (plus 2 other metering modes), it gives me the standard PASM options plus depth of field preview, a top shutter speed of 1/4000 second and it will rattle through shots at 4 frames per second if I want it to. Plus it works with all the current Canon EF lenses I have for my DSLR, including the image stabilised ones. Not bad for £32, yes, £32! Even if I factor in a full service and CLA for around £120 inc postage, it's still going to stand me at less than £155, and look at that spec! Now how much was your 35mm auto compact concept camera going to cost with its fixed lens?

In all fairness, I think the time may come where a new 35mm film camera (or several of them) is going to be a good idea, and will probably sell well to a niche market... but as I said originally, there are still loads of fully working classic 35mm cameras out there to be bought, used and treasured for what (in today's money) is an absolute song. Sure, it takes a bit of research and patience to find the right one at the right price, but I find that adds to the experience and makes me appreciate the camera even more when I finally get my hands on it. Don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing for the sake of it, I just think it's still too soon for the launch of a new 35mm film camera, and for that reason I won't be investing.

 

[FruitFlakes]

I'm not going to argue any more, turns out we both agree but our timescales and what we prioritise in our tools are simply different. For what it's worth, today I even suggested to my friend who shoots the Contax G2 commercially to just switch to a Leica if they liked the compactness and lenses, or just get a 1V or F6 if you wanted fast autofocus. The G2 is a best of both worlds camera, and many feel that the top premium compacts (Ricoh GR, Contax T2, T3, Minolta TC1, Nikon 28/35ti) hit a similar balance of size, image quality and convenience. The zoom versions of the Contaxes haven't had their prices inflated yet, but people are moving on to them. If Ricoh did a run of their GR1 and set the price at the RRP for their current APS-C GRII (£549) they'd still sell extremely well.

 

[excalibur2]

Don't know where to put this link anyway for the young guys some back issues of Photography magazine.... as well as the articles you can see all the adverts for cameras tempting us to buy.
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=rzH31j84pn8C&source=gbs_all_issues_r&cad=1