Film M vs. M9

[Xmas]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi

 

Last 100 foot of C41 Fuji 400ISO was 12 GBP per can, expired some time in '07, snag is I can only carry so many cans away from shop. A processing kit was about 20 GBP and does about 20 cassettes, after I streeeeetch it.

 

The local super market was selling of five packs of expired Feb'11 24x Fuji 200 ISO for 3 GBP, think I got about ten off.

 

Since I normally shoot expired mono, color is an expensive luxury.

 

Filing sleeves are expensive too.

 

Noel

[Torontoamateur]

I did the math for a roll of 36 pics developed and printed in my city(Toronto) and the price of an M9 including taxes.... I would not break even until I had shot 462 Rolls of film. But then again I like film and it's not about the money. I can switch to super high resolution B&W that just leaves an M9 in the dust or infra red or slides to project W.I.D.E. on a screen depending on my mood, and use my 15mm without worry of weird sensor effects. I still have 450 rolls to go.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[pico]

All the original 35mm silver-gelatin prints I have put online are clearly grainy, 'dirty', compared to digital camera made images.

 

Is that a bad thing?

 

So, here's a 'dirty' 35mm Tri-x image. It would have been so smooth in digital FF. Would that have been better, regardless of the fact that no digital cameras existed then?

 

http://www.digoliardi.net/images/seanwindow.jpg

 

I like it as it is.

You like it or you do not, I hope it is not due to the grain, digital issues and so-forth.

 

LF and MF is a different story when presented in print.

Edited May 24, 2011 by pico

[taskoni]

The main difference to me is that my M2 will still work after let say 10 years the way it worked the last 50 years and the pictures taken with it will look the same. I doubt you will be able to shoot anything at all with the M9 after 10 years, more likely you'll be finishing frying your M11 sensor

Regards,

b.

[jaapv]

A colleague of mine uses a Canon 30 D for medical photography -works flawlessly.

[Xmas]

If we are talking about cameras and not film for the moment.

 

The 2nd hand price shows supply and demand maintenance cost as well as write off, shop warrenty...

 

RD/1 nice about 900GBP

M8 nice about 1400 maybe 1500GBP

M2 nice about 500 GBP

 

This means that people are still using RD/1, and the M8 less so? Or the RD/1 is easier to get repaired, or there are too few? Donno myself your opine may vary.

 

Whereas the M2 are cheap, compared with M6 or MP...

 

Might save and get another M2, last Weston Master was 15 GBP, so M6 does not look attractive. Maintenance costs for Weston 80 GBP, so a failure is discard get another.

 

Noel

[adan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The main difference to me is that my M2 will still work after let say 10 years the way it worked the last 50 years and the pictures taken with it will look the same. I doubt you will be able to shoot anything at all with the M9 after 10 years, more likely you'll be finishing frying your M11 sensor

Regards,

b.

 

Care to make a bet?

 

I can still boot up my 1987 Mac Plus. It does everything it always did (which is no longer enough - but then the exact same thing can be said of an M2).

[jaapv]

Actually we should let the audio crowd into this dirty little secret that all electronics die on their tenth birthday. We cannot have people use 1967 Nikko preamp-amplifier combo's like a friend of mine, whom I gave it to in 1980 does... Still sounds superb though - more like tubes than transistors.

Edited May 24, 2011 by jaapv

[bill]

I still use my grandfather's 1922 Bush valve radio. It takes about a minute to warm up, but it still sounds great. I love listening to the Home and Light programmes and Hilversum but Vatican Radio is not what it was.

 

Honestly, I am not going to care whether or not my cameras are still working in 50 years..

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[01af]

A colleague of mine uses a Canon [EOS] 30D for medical photography—works flawlessly.

So what? Well, if he used an old EOS D30—that would be worth mentioning.

 

More off-topic reading here.

[jaapv]

You're right Canon went dyslectic by the 10 D D 30 it is...

[wildlightphoto]

The main difference to me is that my M2 will still work after let say 10 years the way it worked the last 50 years and the pictures taken with it will look the same. I doubt you will be able to shoot anything at all with the M9 after 10 years, more likely you'll be finishing frying your M11 sensor

Regards,

b.

 

The main difference for me is that at last month's gallery show 75% of my print sales were photos made with the DMR. 25% were made with film cameras. If I need to replace the DMR I will easily be able to pay for the replacement camera with the additional revenue from the DMR's photos. My Leicaflexes may still be working when the DMR is gone, but the DMR's productivity will have paid for its replacement several times over.

Edited May 24, 2011 by wildlightphoto

[taskoni]

The main difference for me is that at last month's gallery show 75% of my print sales were photos made with the DMR. 25% were made with film cameras. If I need to replace the DMR I will easily be able to pay for the replacement camera with the additional revenue from the DMR's photos. My Leicaflexes may still be working when the DMR is gone, but the DMR's productivity will have paid for its replacement several times over.

 

Good for you (and I really mean it). I am far for rejecting the digital - I just pointed out what is the advantage of the film M vs. M9 and I hope you agree with me on this. Note that I am not talking about price.

Regards,

b.

[taskoni]

Care to make a bet?

 

I can still boot up my 1987 Mac Plus. It does everything it always did (which is no longer enough - but then the exact same thing can be said of an M2).

 

I guess my comment was misleading. However, if you shoot the M9 as much I shoot my M2 I would take the bet

 

Regards,

b.

 

P.S.

I am a studio musician as well and I have many vintage synths like you have your mac. They all do what they always did, but it is still way more that modern hybrid synth can do

 

Regards,

b.

[chris_livsey]

The 2nd hand price shows supply and demand maintenance cost as well as write off, shop warrenty...

RD/1 nice about 900GBP

M8 nice about 1400 maybe 1500GBP

M2 nice about 500 GBP

Noel

 

Nikon D2H nice 500 GBP

 

(maybe "only" 4MP but 8fps)

 

You need to look at discount from new over time really.

The D2H 2004 was 2400

The M8 was 3,000 on launch

I think you will find the M2 has increased since launch

[wildlightphoto]

Good for you (and I really mean it). I am far for rejecting the digital - I just pointed out what is the advantage of the film M vs. M9 and I hope you agree with me on this. Note that I am not talking about price.

Regards,

b.

 

Predicting which camera will be more useful in 10 years' time is really just guesswork.

 

My Leicaflexes (a pair of SL bodies) have been serviced recently and in some respects are better than new (1.5-volt battery calibration and ROM lens compatible) but I can no longer get Kodachrome slides out of them so for my purposes they don't work as well as they used to.

[adan]

You need to look at discount from new over time really.

 

Adjusted for inflation, of course....

 

1965: UK average home price £3,660 - M2 was $243 (about £100 or so) or 1/36 of a house

 

2010: UK average home price £232,628 - M2 is 1/465 of that

 

In "constant houses" an M2 is worth about 1/13th of what it was new in '65 - but feel free to figure it in loaves of bread or Minis or oz. of gold or whatever.

 

And there is a steep drop-off at the beginning of any depreciation curve, so one should compare how much a used M2 was in 1965 (relative to a new one as %) - or wait and see what an M8 is worth in, oh, 2050 - to even out the time frame.

 

@taskoni - my M9 has averaged 1000 shots per month.

[Xmas]

Hi

 

I bought my first M2 in '72 for 75 GBP, a beaten up shooter in BP. It has only needed maintenance once, so far.

 

Noel

P.S. it is from '58 so it was old when I got it.

Edited May 25, 2011 by Xmas

[taskoni]

@taskoni - my M9 has averaged 1000 shots per month.

 

Niiiice!!!

 

I shoot between 8 - 12 rolls per week so it's somewhere there...

 

See you in 10 years

 

Regards,

b.

 

P.S.

Nice pictures tho'

b.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[pico]

I like the 1/4000th shutter speed of the M9. It's made at least one picture possible that couldn't have been done otherwise.