Here is a link to a series with the xpan:
Oh, and show us some of your Xpan photos. [/QUOTE]
3 Member(s) liked this post
I never fell into the "film vs. digital" debate
Using one, never excluded the other.
Since it is a hobby for me, I enjoy both, because they are different. (and i usually have both with me any time I go out to shoot/play.)
Software is my "day-job", long days at numerous computer monitors.
Getting my hands on a roll of film, and time in the wet-darkroom at home is a rewarding difference from the office.
Shooting digitally, is nice to see immediate results, and image results under the "what-if" possibilities as I manipulate the file.
How others select and use their photographic tools, doesn't bother me. (film vs. digital) -I'm glad for each. (I'm always amazed when I witness others get so "passionate" and argue for one).
keep shooting - keep smiling.
Film vs. Digital? -ha- just use everything.
Leica M3, M7, Epson R-D1s, Bessa R, Fed3, Revere stereo, Nikonos IVa, Canon FTbn, EOS1, EOS10s, EOS10D, EOS300D, P&S A590IS, Hasselblad500cm, Kiev 88, Seagull TLR, Burke&James 4x5
Have been shooting Kodachrome all year.....and I'm now on my last roll, but I'm not sure if I'll be shooting any more 35mm film after that.
I prefer film for B&W work, but 120 or larger are my preferred formats.
Sooo, my M series lenses are great on my M8, but there is this problem with what to do with my R series lenses........still looking for an answer
I didn't start this thread with film vs digital argument in mind......I was just curious how many folks here were still shooting 35mm film and why. Speaking for myself, as a person who shoots with just about every format from P&S digital to large format film, I'm obviously not committed to one camp or the other.
What I have struggled with recently (speaking for myself), is why I continue shooting specifically with 35mm film.....other than the fact that I really enjoy using the cameras (Nikon F3HP, Canon EOS 1V and Leica R8). Truthfully, that's probably the main reason I continue with 35mm film, the joy of using these cameras....I finally got a Leica, nice to use it now and then.
However, since I bought my first medium format film camera many years ago, I've been less and less satisfied with the results I get from 35mm (in comparison). High quality 35mm DSLRs are what got me back into using that format camera on a regular basis and for several years I was shooting a lot less film of any sort. Nonetheless, I do enjoy shooting with film, despite the extra expense and hassle. Problem is...when I come back from a day out with the 35mm film cameras and ultimately get the film back from the lab, I often wish I had taken the Pentaxes or Hasselblads instead. Gotta love those bigger negatives....but then, that's been my dilemma for many years now. With the motordrives and multiple lenses.....my 35mm gear really isn't that much lighter to carry than my MF setup.
Maybe if I was carrying a Leica rangefinder with a couple lenses in a small Billingham bag, I'd see the benefits of 35mm film more clearly.
Sorry for starting an uproar on your thread...just looking for information, but obviously most, or all, on this site are much more advanced photographers than I am.
I shoot Nikon F4 and F5 for things I am not going to blow up past 5x7 and for scanned imternet/email posts + I shoot XPan for internet/email posts.
Beyond that, everything in film is MF--Fujica G690BL, Linhof 6x17, and Noblex 150U. I frequently use my F5 35mm camera for metering and rangefinding for these MF cameras.
Shoot digital for internet/email low light and sports.
These were taken in Montreal. One afternoon the temperature shift created the dense fog, I ran out with the camera to see the local surroundings in a new light, so to speak, and within two hours the fog had completely dissipated.
Beautifully captured Roderick! I've never been to Montreal.....were those taken there? They reminded me of places I've seen in NYC.
1 Member(s) liked this post
About 80 rolls so for in 2010.
100 rolls of 120 though!
In order of usage: Mamiya7 > blad > M3 > F5 > MP > FM2 > IIIc
I have a D700 that is sitting in a closet and is wondering what is going on.
Well, I just don't have the time for digital (or the money).
Between post-processing, storing, maintaining two up to date backups, storing images on DVDs and buying TB of storage; I just spend the less and less time with photography, the way I enjoy it. HD are piling up.
Meanwhile, I can store negs in a folder that takes no space, and I am sure I can use them in 50 years (who knows what my images on DVD or HD are doing then...).
I do B&W processing myself. Throw 5 films in a tank with Rodinal, read a book for an hour, rinse, fix, done.
Oh, and on top of all that, B&W on MF are so much nicer than digi.
I still shoot a lot of 35mm film with my manual focus Canon SLRs and Canon FD lenses. Reasons? Well, they are nice cameras and it would be a shame not to use them. That, and I don't have a DSLR. And there are some more specific pluses for shooting film...especially for my purposes. For example, older cameras with mechanical shutters are handy for doing super long time exposures of star trails (ie several hours.) And for my 3D photography, slide film is a favourite because the transparencies can be mounted in stereo viewers.
If you shoot 35mm film, scan it, and then run it through Lightroom/Photoshop do you have the flexibility of a 35mm digital RAW capture? I am an old guy and have used both extensively but have never scanned a 35mm neg and put it through the paces in LR or PS.
Billy, yes you can do that. Not many scanners or scanning software can save as "raw" files but typically they will save as "tif" files, which are uncompressed, or "jpg" if you wish. (I always save as "tif" and keep a master copy)
Scanning is a bit of an art but the results can be more satisfying than usual digital pictures. Film has an organic quality to it with more dynamic range than digital but the challenge is getting good scans.
There are few new film scanners anymore so your choices are limited but still good. Most people are now using flat-bed scanners like the Epson V600. Those are not as good as dedicated film scanners but are very flexible and give great color rendition.
Make sure, whatever scanner you get, that it has "digital ice" or equivalent since dust is the biggest problem with scanning.
Most of your PS work will be picking out dust. It takes me about 1 to 3 minutes per picture to clean them up. The results are very well worth it.
I don't even use my digital cameras any more since film is so much more fun and interesting to me.
on rare occasion i'll shoot 35mm film in an old russian rangefinder i picked up on ebay...just for ****s and giggles. or perhaps the AE-1p, or EOS650...just to blow the dust off 'em. if it were cheaper to dev + scan, i'd probably take 'em out for a spin more often.
my father still shoots 35mm occasionally, velvia 50. either through his mother's A-1, or the F3hp he always wanted and recently acquired. this is when not using the D2X.
Late to the thread but I do still shoot film. Medium format I shoot a Bronica ETR and for 35mm I took the cheap but very satisfying route of a Yashica Fx3/2000. Like many have said, not only are the results satisfying but the overall experience of planning, executing and anticipating cant be matched in the digital world (which I also embrace).
I still shoot 35mm myself, 4 rolls today in fact. I do it for a few reasons, mostly I just like the look and the process. Also good kit is inexpensive in comparison and you can get compact full-frame kit that doesn't cost an arm and a leg and batteries last months, not hours.
I've got two 35mm kits, one is a pair of Minolta Maxxum 7's with a 17-35D, DT50/1.8 (yep, it covers FF) and the cheap and excellent Sony 85/2.8, the other is a Nikon FM2 and F801s with 28/3.5, long-nose 50/1.8 and a 100/2.8 E for when I want to go manual focus.
I dipped my toe in the water with film last year when I was intrigued enough to purchase a Hasselblad SWC.
It was a slippery slope. I've now sold my entire Leica M8 kit and lenses and my only link to digital it through my m43rds system - which incidentally is very good.
I thought I would tire of film eventually - but I have also been engaged in a long term project which I have only shot on film, using my SWC, a 500CM and more recently the amazing Fuji GSW690III.
I am fortunate to live in central London where I have identified two (and I am sure there are loads more) reliable processors. One is part of a high street chain and the other a specialist shop run by enthusiasts.
I keeping waiting for my patience or interest to be exhausted but at present I've lost interest in trying to create compelling photographs with my digital camera (except for birding and event type work).
And incidentally, all the evidence I have seen is that film is far from dead in terms of supply of film or processors.
I started a return to film less than a year ago with an OM-2. That soon led to the old OM-3 being serviced and then the purchase of an F6, a fantastic camera in every way. The latest purchase is a GX680 with all bells and whistles. I'm currently trying to figure out the ins and outs of that beast.
Film will in no way replace digital for all applications for me, but the F6 is seeing increased use, and I won't rule out buying a second body, just to be on the safe side
I too am tempted by either an FM3A or a F6 - probably the former to keep it as light as possible. One attraction is that this kit, which is professional level equipment, is so ridiculously cheap. I'm sure what goes around will come around but film equipment is mostly at the bottom of its cycle at present.
The choice for me was between those two. In the future, I might get the FM3A as well. Time will show
An old thread renewed. As is my shooting 35mm as in the past few years most has been medium and a little bit of large format. Now I am shooting a Pentax digital and since my 135 is also a Pentax I can now take a single system with me. The film camera adds little weight and no additional lenses so why not. If I am going out with the plan to shoot black and white I most likely will take the Hasselblad as it just seems like the right camera for me. The MZ5n is only slight lighter than the GX680, like 99% lighter
For me I seem to be less and less 35mm and more 120 through my Rolleiflex. Just love the process of looking through the WLF. Am going to Switzerland for 2 weeks starting this weekend and will take M9 + Rolleiflex (and maybe Rollei35) But never thought I would go on a photo holiday without my M6 and/or Xpan. Rolleiflex is just that good.
Had coffee with a couple of photo friends this evening and got to talking about shooting film. One of the guys is all digital, all the time and after trying a Hasselblad V, quickly decided film was not his thing. My other friend shoots mostly digital, but also now and then with a Hasselblad and Rolleiflex, definitely not 35mm film. Which got me to thinking.....when was the last time I pulled one of my 35mm film cameras out of the closet? It's been awhile, for sure. Just seems that if I'm going to shoot film, I go with medium format now. Been adding quite a few new lenses to my Pentax 645/67 systems, but nothing new for the Canon, Nikon and Leica 35mm systems. I won't sell them, but I'm sure not using them. Maybe it's just a case of too many cameras, too little time, I don't know. I certainly enjoy using them, but to tell you the truth, I'm always a little disappointed when I see those small 35mm negs/transparencies and think how much better they would look at 6x4.5, 6x6 or 6x7cm.
Yesterday I confirmed beyond any doubt that my brain isn't working properly
When I use the F6, which I do quite a lot and much more than I expected when I bought it, I sometimes miss a second body with a faster or slower film or simply a lighter, smaller AF film body. Another F6 would be too big, too heavy and too expensive. I was considering an F100, since they are cheap now, but it's almost as big as the F6. I've even considered switching to Pentax for film, since they made some very nice compact bodies until around 2004, and I've seen them go for as little as $7 in "like new" shape on the auction site.
For some reason, I decided to visit a very local camera shop at the basement floor of a local shopping mall yesterday, a place I haven't been in years. Maybe it was because somewhere deep down in my memory, I remembered that they had an F80 on display many years ago, for a very optimistic price. I believe it was around $350. What met my eyes in the shop window other than the same, brand new in box, silver, with the battery grip, now for a total of $100.
The people in the shop asked me repeatedly if I understood that this was not a digital camera and that I had to buy film, something they didn't have. In the end, I had to show them the F6 that I had with me to remove any trace of doubt.
$100 for a brand new Nikon full frame camera! Not bad, eh?
I don't care what gear I have.
Things I sell: http://www.shutterstock.com/sets/413...html?rid=611051 Member(s) liked this post
Well I'm glad to see that someone is still out there shooting 35mm film Jorgen. Congratulations on scoring that brand new F80 for a truly bargain price! I'm not familiar with that model, but it sounds like a sweet deal.
You would have to mention the F6! It's the one 35mm camera I still think about buying. Every so often I check KEH for one and whenever they've got an EX+ or LN- condition F6, I really have to smack myself a few times to keep from hitting the Checkout button. They've been in my shopping cart a few times. It was easier to resist when I didn't have any Nikon AF lenses....but now, after buying the D2x, D700 and D800e, I've accumulated a nice little collection of Nikon AF glass, to go with my AI/AIS lenses, so the F6 is more tempting than ever. Another camera I would rarely use.....exactly what I don't need.
Unfortunately, this article is always lurking in the back of my mind and I think, "It would be neat to have all three." I have the Canon 1V, the Leica R8 (close enough to an R9)....now I just "need" that F6.
Last edited by bensonga; 16th December 2012 at 10:03.
I've been using film cameras more again, lately. I picked up a Leica M4-2 last year and a CL this year, and my Rollei 35S is out having the shutter cleaned and lubed. A few rolls a year in 35mm.
What I've really fallen back into sync with is 6x6 film. Two classic folders led me to acquire a Bessa III this year, I love what 6x6 film images look like.
And, of course, I'm having a ball shooting with the Polaroid SX-70 that my uncle gave me last March. It's just a wonderful, unpredictable, unique and fun camera with the Impossible Project films.
So ... not too much 35mm film, but plenty of film work in the mix. Picking up the CL with M-Rokkor 40mm lens on it was like going home again for me. :-)
Godfrey - GDGPhoto Flickr Stream
I have the RX, so not quite the top model. That is really a camera I don't need, but it's such a sweet design, with the quietest shutter ever. Yeah, I know...
At least, the Contax was a relatively healthy investment. Camera and lenses (50 and 85mm f/1.4 and a Yashica 28mm f/2.8) sell for more now than when I bought it
Back to the F6: It's the best Nikon ever and the best SLR of any brand. Fantastic ergonomics and faultless operation. And beautiful too
In addition; when I mount an AI or AIS lens, aperture works with the aperture ring. No need to set the smallest aperture and operate it with the command wheel. The camera also figures out the correct aperture without me having to enter a menu to tell it what I mounted and what's the max aperture. Why on earth couldn't Nikon implement the same on their DSLR cameras
Aside from shooting 35mm film as a kid when the family went on vacation, I really have never considered it.
Basically, I started photography about 3.5 years ago, so of course it was digital (Canon). After a year or 2 into it and searching for better IQ, I began stitching. That helps with increasing print size, but still has pluses & minuses compared to 1 image captures.
I started researching medium format film. Last march, I picked up a 645AFD and some lenses. Impressed with the results from slide film, shortly afterwards I added a Fuji 690. With my love for panoramas, I bought a Gaeorsi 617 over the summer.And jumped to 4x5 a few months ago.
For me, I find film to be much more rewarding and has taught be to pay attention to more of the small details with in a scene that I might not have bothered with from digital. I also feel like I am part of the image making process much more regarding capture. I make every decision and with the exception of my Mamiya, my other cameras are completely manual.
35mm format didn't have the film real estate for what I was interested in.
I really should stay away from KEH. I resisted buying an F6 (although if they'd had one in LN- condition, I might have taken the plunge).....but I bought a F100 with a MB-15 vertical battery grip in LN/LN- condition.
Maybe I'll actually run a roll of film thru it in the next few months.
1 Member(s) liked this post
That's a beauty. I keep staring at my F5 and XPan, wondering if I will ever use them again. The Xpan is more interesting due to its 24x65 format, but that also means it would fetch a pretty penny.
Saving up for a D800 (or whatever comes next), I think in the end I might only keep my dad's old Kodak Retina IIa from about 1952. It's still working fine. Dad used it when he visited India in 1952, the Kodachromes still look great - I should post them here somewhere.
Of course, for medium/large format it's a different situation altogether - 8x10 is still my preferred format (although my back sometimes disagrees).
1 Member(s) liked this post
I've shot far more 6x6 this year, but next year plan on getting in at least a roll a week of 35.
SLRs are such bargains now (and the F100 is probably my favorite overall, I've owned two over the years) but I'm planning on just using a small RF for 35mm. Right now a Contax G1 with a 28 and 45 is in the lead. Want to keep things light; if heavier is warranted then the Rolleiflex and 6x6 will be the choice.
1 Member(s) liked this post
I kinda lost it on Nikon's pro SLRs after the F3 ... The F4, F5 and F6 just seemed way too bulky and heavy for my interest.
I have been tempted many times to acquire another F3, but this year I happened into a beautiful black F with both Photomic FTn and plain prism finders. For the amount that I will ever use it, that's good enough—simple, all mechanical, all manual. My original Nikon, back again from the past. :-)
And sheesh, even it is a large and heavy beast.
Godfrey - GDGPhoto Flickr Stream1 Member(s) liked this post
Just this guy you know
One thing that I've realised much stronger after starting to use 35mm film again, is that the value of the image goes far beyond technical quality and resolution. Grain is sometimes a positive creative element, at least in b&w, and while I've so far used low ISO, fine grain film, I will soon have a go at Tri-X, HP5 and probably the odd roll of Delta 3200 (T-Max 3200 has been discontinued).
Less than 12 hours ago I ordered the F100/MB-15 and I'm still thinking about that darn F6.
In my bones I know.....I'll end up with both of them.
I've got a bad case of GAS....but luckily, I'm fixated on 35mm film cameras (for the moment), not MFDB!
Last edited by bensonga; 18th December 2012 at 00:41.
But wait... the vacuum film holder that holds the film flat against the pressure plate. I'm sure you have often missed that
One manual focus system is really enough, and having the Contax prevents me from considering a Leica R. I do keep Olympus OM though, since they are even more manual, smaller and represent my photography roots. Maybe I'll buy a Nikon manual focus body as well, since have a couple of AI/AIS lenses. But then it's enough... I think
Ok, I think I can live without the vacuum back....haven't missed it for 35+ years, so I'm probably good for another 10.
Last week, new in box, $100 including battery holder (but not the lens)
I don't care what gear I have.
Things I sell: http://www.shutterstock.com/sets/413...html?rid=611052 Member(s) liked this post
Brand new, with the battery grip, $100.....now that one was a great bargain!
I already have two relatively compact Contax cameras, the 137 MD and 137 MA, both more or less unused in box. Unfortunately, those models had "leather" that tended to disintegrate, so I have to change it on both cameras before I use them. Apart from that, buying an Aria is generally a very bad idea. I really try to reduce the number of camera bodies
Really? I think I got mine for 150. Haven't looked at pricing lately. So, sell your 137s and do a 2 for 1 swap.
Gary, one thing I'll say about the Contaxes is that they have a great feature set and control layout -- much better than the R8 IMO. However I've decided to keep the R system over my Contax SLRs because, for me, the R8/9 are so much more comfortable to hold.
I'm keeping my Contax G kit though, which will allow me the pleasure of the Contax control philosophy.
I've had two Nikon F2s for 25+ years (one black and one silver, with motor drives), so I figured it might be time to add an F-1 to the mix. No room in the garage for a proper F1. Amazing how inexpensive these cameras are now.
My "thanks" to Jorgen for prompting this purchase!
1 Member(s) liked this post
Two beautiful sets, Ray. I have a similar setup for the RX, but bought a new in box Yashica 28/2.8 for wide angle. Was offered a mint in box 35/1.4 yesterday... for thirtysomething thousand baht. Unfortunately far too much for me