Convince me to buy a film M

[A miller]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

ImageUploadedByTapatalk1453409072.703396.jpg

 

Another from the same roll. I'm shooting a roll a week at the moment.

not bad, Yash.  I shot three rolls this morning before work (the low barreling morning sunshine in corridors of lower Manhattan is like a fantasy)... So tell your wife that her perception of your "obsessive" habit is relative

[colint544]

Ah, thanks guys. Yes, it's a fascinating forum this all right. It's a veritable rollercoaster ride sometimes. But always interesting. And we're all fans of the Leica marque, which is what draws us all together here in the first place.

 

Cheers!

[Advertisement]

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

[ShivaYash]

Ah, you're on a roll .....

 

Like the pun.

[ShivaYash]

not bad, Yash. I shot three rolls this morning before work (the low barreling morning sunshine in corridors of lower Manhattan is like a fantasy)... So tell your wife that her perception of your "obsessive" habit is relative

Three rolls? Wow! I love being limited to picking my shoots. When I'm feeling trigger happy I take the M-E. It's not the same but I don't want to be spending crazy amounts of money on film stock, processing etc. Look forward to seeing the results Miller.

[A miller]

Three rolls? Wow! I love being limited to picking my shoots. When I'm feeling trigger happy I take the M-E. It's not the same but I don't want to be spending crazy amounts of money on film stock, processing etc. Look forward to seeing the results Miller.

 

yes, Yash, you're right.  freedom rules.  I share film photos nearly daily on the I Like Film thread in the "Other" forum.  It is the best thread on the entire forum and all the great film forum members participate there.  You should be there...

[sml_photo]

Interesting...

Despite the interest in film by some Leica users (not including me), it appears that overall use is down.  I do realize, of course, that the percentage of film users is probably higher among Leica camera owners than any other demographic.

Petapixel article about Fuji raising its film prices, etc., to offset costs.

http://petapixel.com/2016/01/22/fujifilm-announces-big-worldwide-price-hike-on-film/

 

It is worth noting this quote from the article, which is good news for those of you who are film users:

“Fujifilm remains committed to photographic products despite its price change.”

[BerndReini]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

 

“Fujifilm remains committed to photographic products despite its price change.”

Let's hope so. I bought their wonderful GF670 medium format rangefinder when it was released, and since then they have discontinued Neopan 400 in the 35mm size (120 had already been discontinued) as well as their 4x5 instant film. I wonder how long their commitment lasts.

[ramarren]

Not posted on here for a while. 

I have a x2 Vario and a dlux109 and for black and white photography I am considering an M6.

 

Anyone else made the return to film? What benefits will I see?

 

Just need tipping over the edge to make a purchase 

 

My intention long term is to process my own film and scan the negs and print myself. Anyone else do this, if so I am open to suggestions with regard to the film scanner and printer for black and white purposes.

 

(bolded) I've never made a return to film. I've used film since I started making photographs 53 years ago and never stopped. Since digital cameras became capable enough (about 2002, for me), I've made a lot of photographs with them. And at some times my film usage dropped to very little annually since then since I was concentrating on learning how to get the most out of the new technology. But I have never stopped using film; this past year, I've invested quite a bit into expanding and exploring new film equipment again. 

 

You want to try shooting photos with an M6 on B&W film? Buy a camera and lens, buy some film, go do it. That's all. If you don't like the process or the results, sell it off ... You'll likely not lose any money if you buy carefully. 

 

I've been scanning film, rendering it with image processing software, and printing with an inkjet printer since about 1994.

• There are lots of ways to capture 35mm film into digital images. Easy, consistent, not particularly fast: use a Nikon Coolscan IV or V film scanner, run it with VueScan. Excellent quality results. Lots of other options exist... 
• Printers, inks, and papers were fairly poor (particularly for B&W printing) until about 2003-2005. Since then, the Epson K3 pigment inkset and a huge diversity of excellent papers produce quality results. I used an Epson R2400 from October 2005 to late last year ... It was a fine printer. I replaced it with the Epson P600, which improves upon it dramatically. 

I scan or otherwise capture my film exposures, import them into Lightroom, do whatever cleanup/rendering work I want to, and print to the Epson. It works and produces satisfying results for me. 

[sblitz]

Interesting...

Despite the interest in film by some Leica users (not including me), it appears that overall use is down.  I do realize, of course, that the percentage of film users is probably higher among Leica camera owners than any other demographic.

Petapixel article about Fuji raising its film prices, etc., to offset costs.

http://petapixel.com/2016/01/22/fujifilm-announces-big-worldwide-price-hike-on-film/

 

It is worth noting this quote from the article, which is good news for those of you who are film users:

“Fujifilm remains committed to photographic products despite its price change.”

 

Of course film  use is down, all those p&s auto 35mm cameras are now cell phones. And at the commercial/news level, time demands electronic turnaround. Everyone wants to see the snow fall NOW!!!!!!! For advertising, the ability to create just the right color in digital is better (easier?) than it was for film. This, however, doesn't mean film is disappearing. It isn't. Manufacturers will rationalize business size for the current world and that should result in higher prices. For us elitists insisting on film, well it is the price to pay to not be among the masses :-)  

 

BTW their instamax film is selling lot hot cakes along with their small instant cameras ..... at least here in NYC.

[chrism]

Let's hope so. I bought their wonderful GF670 medium format rangefinder when it was released, and since then they have discontinued Neopan 400 in the 35mm size (120 had already been discontinued) as well as their 4x5 instant film. I wonder how long their commitment lasts.

That GF670/Bessa III might well be the last new, proper (excluding Holgas and the like), medium format film camera ever introduced.

 

Chris

Yes, I know about the W version.

[Falstaff]

Folks, in case anyone is wondering, in post 62 (pg 4), the OP tells us that he already has bought an M6 .

 

 

[sml_photo]

Of course film  use is down, all those p&s auto 35mm cameras are now cell phones. And at the commercial/news level, time demands electronic turnaround. Everyone wants to see the snow fall NOW!!!!!!! For advertising, the ability to create just the right color in digital is better (easier?) than it was for film. This, however, doesn't mean film is disappearing. It isn't. Manufacturers will rationalize business size for the current world and that should result in higher prices. For us elitists insisting on film, well it is the price to pay to not be among the masses :-)  

 

BTW their instamax film is selling lot hot cakes along with their small instant cameras ..... at least here in NYC.

 

Yes, you bring up some valid points.

However, the business model of the industry is clearly "digital."  There are no (or few!) film cameras being made.  The demand is not increasing.

Edited January 23, 2016 by sml_photo

[sblitz]

Its not about coming back but finding a level. Too many older film cameras out there to justify new production at any scale although some do make it including Nikon and there is Fuji instamax that they extended. This Is a silly argument discussion. I could care less about film returning to glory. It won't and I don't own stock in any film or camera company. I think most of us here believe film is a viable and for some better alternative. That's all and what we want and do see is stability in demand. Enough to justify firms continuing to make film. At a higher cost to user? Of course. So what it's a price I am willing to pay for my hobby. And there are enough of us around to keep film alive. Not what it was but alive. Who wants to be part of the masses anyway [emoji4][emoji4][emoji4]

[chrism]

Yes, you bring up some valid points.

However, the business model of the industry is clearly "digital."  There are no (or few!) film cameras being made.  The demand is not increasing.

Your point?

 

The thing is this—it's all photography. Just as using a gas-powered motor mower for cutting the grass is gardening, and so is cross-pollinating orchids by hand in the hothouse. Both gardening, but worlds apart. Same thing with photography. My orchids might not be spectacular, but they are mine. Leave me be.

 

C.

[sml_photo]

Your point?

 

The thing is this—it's all photography. Just as using a gas-powered motor mower for cutting the grass is gardening, and so is cross-pollinating orchids by hand in the hothouse. Both gardening, but worlds apart. Same thing with photography. My orchids might not be spectacular, but they are mine. Leave me be.

 

C.

 

Wow.  I wasn't trying to be confrontational nor criticize anyone's personal preference.  I was just making an observation that is widely known.  The only reason I jumped in this thread in the first place was because I saw the article about Fuji and I thought of my "friends" who are still shooting film.

Do what you want.  What does it matter to me? 

Me....I got an M4 in 1973 and sold it about thirty years later when I started to embrace digital.  To each his own.

[Doc Henry]

Of course film  use is down, all those p&s auto 35mm cameras are now cell phones. And at the commercial/news level, time demands electronic turnaround. Everyone wants to see the snow fall NOW!!!!!!! For advertising, the ability to create just the right color in digital is better (easier?) than it was for film. This, however, doesn't mean film is disappearing. It isn't. Manufacturers will rationalize business size for the current world and that should result in higher prices. For us elitists insisting on film, well it is the price to pay to not be among the masses :-)  

 

BTW their instamax film is selling lot hot cakes along with their small instant cameras ..... at least here in NYC.

Steve, perhaps for advertising , digital is perfect but for the rest not sure  !

I always have to correct the M8 or M9 pictures for color but for film , certainly less or not needed to correct , especially since I develop myself color.

If Fuji increases these prices ,it's normal in a profit economy !  and what about Leica or Fuji or Sony camera that also increases their prices ?

 

If you speak about film prices and for those who like to calculate,look at the third part of this link :

"It isn't as expensive as you think"

http://erickimphotography.com/blog/2012/01/10/10-reasons-why-you-should-shoot-street-photography-with-film/

Rg

Henry

Edited January 23, 2016 by Doc Henry

[fussgangerfoto]

what scanner is just good?

 

 

I really like the Plustek OpticFilm 8200i. 

 

Street Art - The Horse by Dave, on Flickr

[sblitz]

Have same and agree. And it is currently being manufactured which gives it an edge to coolscans

[ShivaYash]

Does the Epson scanner range compare? I like the ability to scan 24 frames at once.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[BerndReini]

 

 

I always have to correct the M8 or M9 pictures for color but for film , certainly less or not needed to correct , especially since I develop myself color.

I would argue that film looks a lot less like reality than what the M8 and the M9 produce, which is what many of us are drawn to. The abstraction that film provides is inherently pleasing, but I would not say that the colors are accurate. It may appear so because there is temporal separation between taking the exposure and seeing the results, but it is very difficult to produce "accurate" colors with film for product shots etc. Just look at the different color rendering between different film stocks.

 

As to the question of scanners, is anyone here even considering the Pakon 135? Shiva, if you think you want the convenience of scanning 24 frames "at once" (actually consecutively after you painstakingly cut the negative and fiddle it in those holders), you will love feeing an uncut roll into a machine and get 36 beautiful scans 7 minutes later. 

Edited January 24, 2016 by BerndReini