RayD28 Posted December 16, 2020 Share #41 Posted December 16, 2020 Advertisement (gone after registration) On 12/11/2020 at 5:11 PM, Herr Barnack said: Relentlessly climbing film (and developing chemistry) prices are making an even stronger case for both the Q2 and Q2 Monochrom. JMHO but it seems that the Q2 and/or Q2 Mono could represent the proverbial middle way for those who cannot abide film prices or the asking price of the M10R or M10M and lens (or two) to go with it. I have not crunched the numbers, but I would think that a reasonably active photographer who shoots 5-10 rolls of film per week would spend as much or more on film and processing in a 3-4 year time frame as a new Q2 or Q2M would cost up front. Then we have to consider the fact that film and chemistry will probably be 50-100% higher in price 3-4 years down the road. How ironic that a $5000 USD Q2 or a $6000 USD Q2M can actually make economic sense and pay for itself in the long run. When this news gets out, it will strike fear into the hearts of Leica wives around the world. 😎 I look forward to having the time to shoot more but It's hard for me to imagine five rolls per week on an annual basis, but I hope it happens. 🙂 5 hours ago, Ouroboros said: It's an irrelevant comparison and the flaw in your 'theory' is the depreciation factor of a new digital camera over a similar 3-4 year period. 10 rolls X 6 dollars + ten rolls X 6 processing (home or lab) = 120 per week. 120 X 52 weeks = 1,240 per year 5,000 cost of Q divided by 1,240 = about 4 years The Q would have some residual value after 4 years. Perhaps 1,000 equaling 20% of original cost. The net cost of the next Q would be about 4,000 dollars. So, as years go by digital makes more and more economic sense. I know I made several assumptions and some are dubious, but I believe it's safe to say digital makes more sense when the number shots is higher, i.e. cost divided by number of shots. This is because the Q has a fixed cost and film is nearly all variable cost. Side note, a shelf-queen Mint M9 with 2,000 actuations works out to 3 per shot! This assumes 3,000 residual value. Then there are the intangibles, especially the joy of using film. Just my 2 cents. I'm not making an argument for either film or digital. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 16, 2020 Posted December 16, 2020 Hi RayD28, Take a look here Kodak raising prices again - in 2021. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Ouroboros Posted December 17, 2020 Share #42 Posted December 17, 2020 17 hours ago, RayD28 said: ......I know I made several assumptions and some are dubious, but I believe it's safe to say digital makes more sense when the number shots is higher, i.e. cost divided by number of shots. As I said earlier, it's irrelevant. Even if there were any point to this simplistic financial comparison, my experience (as an owner of a photography business for many years) of the relative costs of film vs digital over a given period of time is somewhat different. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RayD28 Posted December 17, 2020 Share #43 Posted December 17, 2020 I don't make my living from photography (I'd starve to death) so I'm sure you have studied the cost more closely than I. My simple example was to illustrate how the cost per shot goes down with digital the more you use you the camera whereas with film the cost per shot stays about same. Again, I'm not making an argument for digital or for film. I'm preferring film more and more but I"m a hobbyist and shoot at the most 20 rolls per year. The increase in film costs over one year is insignificant for me. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
theendlesshouse Posted February 18, 2021 Share #44 Posted February 18, 2021 Bye-bye Tri-x, hello Bergger. At c.£10 a roll in the UK Kodak have priced me out. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted February 18, 2021 Share #45 Posted February 18, 2021 On 12/17/2020 at 12:38 PM, RayD28 said: I don't make my living from photography (I'd starve to death) so I'm sure you have studied the cost more closely than I. My simple example was to illustrate how the cost per shot goes down with digital the more you use you the camera whereas with film the cost per shot stays about same. Again, I'm not making an argument for digital or for film. I'm preferring film more and more but I"m a hobbyist and shoot at the most 20 rolls per year. The increase in film costs over one year is insignificant for me. I just bought a new (to me) digital camera, so I would love to do these sorts of calculations to make myself feel better. But the truth is, pretty much every film camera I've ever bought has appreciated in value over time, whereas even a used digital camera is a hard sell the day after you take delivery of it. So a few rolls of Kodak film one way or another doesn't really enter my reckoning. Unless I'm succumbing to digital camera GAS. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Prime Posted February 18, 2021 Share #46 Posted February 18, 2021 I’m wondering.... given that the need for higher quality film is no longer strongly driven by commercial interests because digital provides that now, the economics of film should be different. I don’t know if it costs more in terms of materials and QC to produce a modern T-grain vs an older cubic grain film but my reason for using film is the traditional way of shooting it, a preference for how film cameras handle and the ‘look’ achieved at the end. So I am using those old stalwarts, FP4+ and HP5+. If I look at Delta 100 it costs more money and although I’m curious about it, I have no artistic need to use it... so is there a case for lower cost film to encourage more use and hence gain the benefits of higher volume production (cost, stability etc.) ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RayD28 Posted February 18, 2021 Share #47 Posted February 18, 2021 Advertisement (gone after registration) Possibly but I believe there are a lot of variables that affect the answer, especially development cost. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einst_Stein Posted February 19, 2021 Share #48 Posted February 19, 2021 The film price is indeed pushing me back from shooting it. I completely stopped shooting E6 slide. I also shoot more C41 color negatives than B&W. 100ft B&W is about the same as Kodak Gold 200 and fujifilm C200 except the film development chemical. I use Rollei 5L C41, which is about 1 US$ per roll. When I need really fine grain, I treat myself with Kodak Ektar 100. --- and I capture the film image with digital camera to get both color and B&W. I found the color negative very convenient to control the B&W tonality. This makes some film cameras more affordable. A Leica R7 in excellent condition now costs about $350. Fuji GW690 is similar, and with a 135 conversion kit, I get a 24mm x 80mm panorama camera. My favorite Kodak Retina iiic can be found for less than $100. However, so is the used digital cameras, such as Sony R1 (APS_C), Canon G7, Leica Digilux (except Digilux 2 and 3). Those are all around or less than $100. The film price rise indicates film is not coming back. It is on its way to fade out. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted February 19, 2021 Share #49 Posted February 19, 2021 8 minutes ago, Einst_Stein said: The film price rise indicates film is not coming back. It is on its way to fade out. The film price rise indicates that the cost of stuff is going up. It's been happening for some time but masked by IMO misleading consumer price indexes. 12 years of almost unbroken money printing is debasing western currencies and something has to give. 2 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
willeica Posted February 19, 2021 Share #50 Posted February 19, 2021 4 hours ago, Einst_Stein said: The film price rise indicates film is not coming back. It is on its way to fade out. Have a look at the Lomography site and explain that. Its customer base is largely young and not well heeled but prefers using film to digital as it consists largely of digital natives for whom digital imaging is nothing special. It is ironic that the younger generation is going for the 'old technology' whereas some of the biggest fans of the 'new technology' are the older generation. The evidence of this is all over this forum. To appeal to the younger demographic Leica should take a long hard look at doing something with Lomography. William 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einst_Stein Posted February 19, 2021 Share #51 Posted February 19, 2021 2 hours ago, willeica said: Have a look at the Lomography site and explain that. Its customer base is largely young and not well heeled but prefers using film to digital as it consists largely of digital natives for whom digital imaging is nothing special. It is ironic that the younger generation is going for the 'old technology' whereas some of the biggest fans of the 'new technology' are the older generation. The evidence of this is all over this forum. To appeal to the younger demographic Leica should take a long hard look at doing something with Lomography. William I dont see Lomo has any significance on the trend. Fuji discontinued 400H, every film maker is raising the price. Even Jobo is cold in their foto procesding equips and chems. On the orher hand, I would like everyone, especially the major film stuffs suppiers to believe there is a good future. Unfortunately, guess what, they are the ones knowing better. Surprise! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Prime Posted February 19, 2021 Share #52 Posted February 19, 2021 Marketwatch, https://www.marketwatch.com/press-release/photographic-film-market-2021-business-trends-and-investigation-growth-rate-consumption-by-regional-data-with-impact-of-the-domestic-and-international-market-2026-2021-01-16-31974231 “The global Photographic Film market is anticipated to rise at a considerable rate during the forecast period, between 2021 and 2026.” 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
willeica Posted February 19, 2021 Share #53 Posted February 19, 2021 14 minutes ago, Einst_Stein said: I dont see Lomo has any significance on the trend. Fuji discontinued 400H, every film maker is raising the price. Even Jobo is cold in their foto procesding equips and chems. On the orher hand, I would like everyone, especially the major film stuffs suppiers to believe there is a good future. Unfortunately, guess what, they are the ones knowing better. Surprise! Look to the younger generation. Task forwards and not backwards. Every single dealer where I live reported a large jump in film sales over the past few years pre-Covid. Look at the work that Camera Rescue is doing in Finland with refurbishing old film cameras. You need to look around a bit and find out what is happening. Best of all you should take out a subscription to Silvergrain Classics magazine. All of this is sneaking up on a forum like this where a lot of the talk is about the latest digi-wonders which make little impact on the under 35s. William 1 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einst_Stein Posted February 19, 2021 Share #54 Posted February 19, 2021 40 minutes ago, willeica said: Look to the younger generation. Task forwards and not backwards. Every single dealer where I live reported a large jump in film sales over the past few years pre-Covid. Look at the work that Camera Rescue is doing in Finland with refurbishing old film cameras. You need to look around a bit and find out what is happening. Best of all you should take out a subscription to Silvergrain Classics magazine. All of this is sneaking up on a forum like this where a lot of the talk is about the latest digi-wonders which make little impact on the under 35s. William If this thought makes you feel better, stay with it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Prime Posted February 19, 2021 Share #55 Posted February 19, 2021 it’s good enough for me! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aryel Posted February 20, 2021 Share #56 Posted February 20, 2021 1 hour ago, Einst_Stein said: If this thought makes you feel better, stay with it. Film is dead, ah no, not yet, one year later, film is dead, ah no, not yet, film is dead, ah no, not yet... This what I hear/read since buying my firsr film camera 6-7 years ago. You generalize over fujifilm. Ilford launched a new version of its portfolio paper a couple of months ago. Kodak relaunched ektachrome no so long ago too. Oh wait, film is dead, ah no, not yet... You can spot some film shooters in the street now. Lomo definitely shows that there is a customer base. It may not be as big as what it used to be but it is there. The price of some film cameras is at its highest. We all heard million of times that film is dead... Well, it does not look like it is going to happen anytime soon. 1 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einst_Stein Posted February 20, 2021 Share #57 Posted February 20, 2021 No one said film is dead. It is being faded out nontheless. It's just more and more down graded on the choice list for more and more people. I am sure some people will still want it as long as it is available, regardless the costs and convenience, and, justification! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted February 20, 2021 Share #58 Posted February 20, 2021 2 hours ago, Einst_Stein said: No one said film is dead. It is being faded out nontheless. It's just more and more down graded on the choice list for more and more people. I am sure some people will still want it as long as it is available, regardless the costs and convenience, and, justification! It's simply so funny how you adamantly stick with your belief in this - on a data-point of... yourself. 😂 2 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Morgan Posted February 20, 2021 Share #59 Posted February 20, 2021 Film is doing fine. For much of what I want to shoot BW film is the default choice, but when I want to shoot colour it's digital, and with my recently acquired Canon 5d V3, the black and white output does a brilliant job with the architectural stuff I am mostly shooting at present. It's what works for what I want to shoot at the time. When people are back out on the streets, I shall return to my Leica Ms, HP5 and Pyro. When walking on Dartmoor is encouraged, it will be with my little 35S or medium format. I still hate scanning though... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
P1505 Posted February 20, 2021 Share #60 Posted February 20, 2021 Every time I see you g people out and about shooting they have film cameras. Unless they are shooting video. There is a complex issue underlying the reasons why, it’s not a hipster movement. Film is doing fine, it’s not for me any more but it’s not going away. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.