Starter but capable film camera for 2022?

[spydrxx]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

17 hours ago, 250swb said:

In the future yes, but why deploy a smoke barrage and disguise the future in a haze of uncertainty? Isn't this a case of just because you know something you feel obliged to say it, irrespective of the level you deploy you wisdom at? 

I'm sorry you feel that way. I've always considered this forum one in which members share experience, provide encouragement and support to others. Nasty comments don't seem consistent with that goal.

[pippy]

16 hours ago, aksclix said:

A lot of film related discussions is going above my head anyway...I am being selective and only after I develop the first roll I am currently shooting with, I’ll know what mistakes to avoid......so far, using the camera has been pretty straight forward.....the + 0 - indicators are helping me expose the image.. will hope my results won’t be too disappointing so far...

First-off don't be even remotely disappointed if there are some exposures in your first roll which aren't all you hoped they might be; making some errors is par for the course when learning anything new. Secondly don't be too disappointed if you find there are some mistakes in your second roll either...or the third......

One advantage about learning about film-shooting with C-41 colour-neg stock is that these films usually have a fair amount of what is called 'exposure latitude' which means that even if a frame is 'out' in terms of exposure by one, one and a half or, possibly, two stops then a reasonable result/print can still be obtained(*).

Getting the exposure correct, however, is always the aim so if you compare individual frame exposure densities along the film-strips and some are 'out' (they look either too dark - indicating overexposure - or too light - under...) then look at the relevant print(s) to try to see why there might have been a miscalculation in terms of the exposure given. Too much bright sky often leads to underexposure and so on.

Philip.

* Such is NOT the case with E6 / colour transparency film which is why you'd be advised against using this type of film when you are starting out.

[aksclix]

8 minutes ago, pippy said:

First-off don't be even remotely disappointed if there are some exposures in your first roll which aren't all you hoped they might be; making some errors is par for the course when learning anything new. Secondly don't be too disappointed if you find there are some mistakes in your second roll either...or the third......

One advantage about learning about film-shooting with C-41 colour-neg stock is that these films usually have a fair amount of what is called 'exposure latitude' which means that even if a frame is 'out' in terms of exposure by one, one and a half or, possibly, two stops then a reasonable result/print can still be obtained(*).

Getting the exposure correct, however, is always the aim so if you compare individual frame exposure densities along the film-strips and some are 'out' (they look either too dark - indicating overexposure - or too light - under...) then look at the relevant print(s) to try to see why there might have been a miscalculation in terms of the exposure given. Too much bright sky often leads to underexposure and so on.

Philip.

* Such is NOT the case with E6 / colour transparency film which is why you'd be advised against using this type of film when you are starting out.

Thanks and yea.. I’ll have to be patient for sure.. 

[bandrews]

All this talk just encouraged me to buy some Portra 400 film for my husband’s grandfather’s Yashica Mat and give MF a try.

[philipus]

Here in NL I get my C41 and E6 developed at Hema. Exceptionally reasonably priced at 3,50 Euro per 35mm or 120 roll for development. And they handle pushed film too (for just another 3,50). So it's not only in London and New York.

I'm actually a bit surprised about the FM3A bashing in this thread in a forum that celebrates what many consider very overpriced, under-performing and down right anachronistic digital and film cameras. 

 

6 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

There is no commercial e6 in my entire country...except in my own darkroom and I do not have the machines to do a volume run. And I think in the best of times most slides did not push very well, except for special films like Provia 400X. London and New York...well, they are London and New York.

[aksclix]

7 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

Golem

That was supposed to be “film”.. sorry, didn’t spell check 🤦‍♂️ I meant to say, whatever color the box showed on the outside.. yellow for Kodak, green on Fuji.. that’s generally an indication of the white balance or color temp you’ll get from that film.. 

 

[Stuart Richardson]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have heard the same, but never really found it to be true, but I have only shot film for about twenty years. Maybe it was more like that in the 80s and 90s? I have certainly heard it repeated a lot. 
I will grant that Kodachrome was warmer than Fuji slide films, but I did not find that to be the case with e100g and Provia…maybe Fuji was slightly colder? But I would not say it had or has a greenish tone. 

Edited January 23, 2022 by Stuart Richardson

[aksclix]

4 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

I have heard the same, but never really found it to be true, but I have only shot film for about twenty years. Maybe it was more like that in the 80s and 90s? I have certainly heard it repeated a lot. 
I will grant that Kodachrome was warmer than Fuji slide films, but I did not find that to be the case with e100g and Provia…maybe Fuji was slightly colder? But I would not say it had or has a greenish tone. 

Oh ok.. mine’s just hearsay anyway.. will try different brands in time as I learn this new old game 😌

Edited January 24, 2022 by aksclix

[aksclix]

9 hours ago, bandrews said:

All this talk just encouraged me to buy some Portra 400 film for my husband’s grandfather’s Yashica Mat and give MF a try.

This whole forum is extremely influential 😂 I have an S 007 while I didn’t need one with a gfx 100s already in my kit.. thanks to this group! 😂 I don’t regret it.. the S 007 is sooo good! Only have the 30 and 180 with no plans to add anymore lenses

[ynp]

5 hours ago, aksclix said:

the S 007 is sooo good! Only have the 30 and 180 with no plans to add anymore lenses

There is a 180 mm close up adapter. It will greatly expand the capabilities  of your S180. 

[otto.f]

You'll have to be aware that if you come from 15 years digital, the film may disappoint you in the 35mm format because of noise and grain. That's at least what occurred to me when I restarted with film in 2017 after I began with digital in 2008. I was very happy with a Mamiya 7 ii and a 65mm, which was two years ago within the budget you mention. There's also an advantage in having only a few shots on one film in the beginning, you have much sooner feedback on your work than with 36 takes.

After a few years analogue again, I'm quite happy with my M7 with ADOX Scala film, deep blacks, hardly any grain.

Edited January 24, 2022 by otto.f

[bandrews]

8 hours ago, aksclix said:

This whole forum is extremely influential 😂 I have an S 007 while I didn’t need one with a gfx 100s already in my kit.. thanks to this group! 😂 I don’t regret it.. the S 007 is sooo good! Only have the 30 and 180 with no plans to add anymore lenses

Tell me about it! Since joining I started with a second hand X2 and now have a CL, M10-P and an SL2-S 🙈

[otto.f]

8 hours ago, aksclix said:

This whole forum is extremely influential 😂

It might be that Leica would hardly exist anymore, if  LUF didn’t exist. 

Edited January 24, 2022 by otto.f

[oldwino]

16 hours ago, philipus said:

I'm actually a bit surprised about the FM3A bashing in this thread in a forum that celebrates what many consider very overpriced, under-performing and down right anachronistic digital and film cameras. 

 

The FM3a was what the Leica M7 should have been. The Nikon is a terrific camera. I enjoy mine. I sold my M7. 

[aksclix]

6 hours ago, ynp said:

There is a 180 mm close up adapter. It will greatly expand the capabilities  of your S180. 

I had considered it but decided against it… didn’t find the need to reduce min focusing distance as such 

[Brancbūth]

5 hours ago, otto.f said:

You'll have to be aware that if you come from 15 years digital, the film may disappoint you in the 35mm format because of noise and grain. That's at least what occurred to me when I restarted with film in 2017 after I began with digital in 2008.

Could you clarify this? If you use the same film stock, whether 35mm or medium format, the grain is the same per square whatever of surface area, right? It has been my understanding that the amount of grain is a characteristic of film stock-- not film size. Medium format uses a larger surface area of film, but the amount of grain is 1:1, so medium format provides more detail in photos taken with equivalent focal length just because of the larger surface area, but the amount of grain is the same. Also, what do you mean by "noise" when it comes to film? "Noise" is an exclusively-digital concept, isn't it?

[Ko.Fe.]

On 1/20/2022 at 10:43 PM, aksclix said:

Hello film shooters!

Another conversation from this forum led me here.. I used a friend’s Minolta film camera about 25 years ago and remember nothing about it.. not even the model.. I am interested in jumping onto the film bandwagon and looking for advice on getting a film camera that is

- easier to adapt to coming from the digital world of photography for over 15 years… (yes, I am spoiled by a lot of new tech across different brands!) I want to like it the first time I use it and not get frustrated by it.. 
- this is a Leica forum but if there is a recommendation for another brand, I would love that too..

- image quality is very important to me.. I want to be wow’d by the final developed image.. does the film roll matter as well or just the camera? 

- 35mm or medium format? 
- reliable place to buy used film gear? 
 

Anything else I missed?
 

Thank you in advance! 😌

Don't know why you have posted in M, if it is not only about M. Should be in film sub forum.

Don't know what is "wow'd" for you, either. Just sharp?

 

Comparing to Nikon, Olympus and else bunch from 135 film format... with M you have to have good lens. Very few CV are going to cut it and even some Leica made will. CV you have is just a regular lens. No wow.

But...The difference between good M and SLR lenses is very little and will wow you only if you are willing to pay attention for small details. If just sharp is needed, most are wow.

You would also need to see the difference to be wow'd depending on 135 type of film. Some lenses are only good on BW darkroom prints (scan of negs is loosing a lot if not all wow). Some lenses are good on color film. Where your option is most likelly to be just scans (digital).

Most easiest way to get wow'd by film is by using of Rolleiflex or Hasselblad. Fist, it is medium format where deeper, wider tones are  achieved just because it is larger than tiny 135. Second, it is because Rolleiflex and Hasselblad optics are superior to all Japanese in terms of how alive, not sterile is rendering of optics.  

And you won't need to jump through the hoops to scan 6x6 аnd see the wow, comparing to 135 format. Just Epson flatbed will do with its software, which is most strait forward but accurate software, comparing to SilverFast and VueScan.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Written to you from perspective of prolific film user between 2012 and 2020.

I have tried many lenses on different Leica M, different scanners, enlargers. And went with all kinds of film cameras systems between original Minox, via SLRs and such and up to 4x5.

From my practical and recent experience, get serviced Rolleiflex. And spend the rest on film, chemicals, enlarger, scanner, paper and so on. Film users base is shrinking and it is very difficult to find decent lab without overpricing and acceptable results, instead of common these days quick and dirty way. 

Edited January 24, 2022 by Ko.Fe.

[Doc Henry]

27 minutes ago, Brancbūth said:

Could you clarify this? If you use the same film stock, whether 35mm or medium format, the grain is the same per square whatever of surface area, right? It has been my understanding that the amount of grain is a characteristic of film stock-- not film size. Medium format uses a larger surface area of film, but the amount of grain is 1:1, so medium format provides more detail in photos taken with equivalent focal length just because of the larger surface area, but the amount of grain is the same. Also, what do you mean by "noise" when it comes to film? "Noise" is an exclusively-digital concept, isn't it?

Hi , the silver grain has same size for all films  but the picture size is bigger when you change the format from 135mm to 4x5 or 8x10,  look at this table below .

Digital Phase One IQ 180  is far behind and beaten by the film.

Best  H.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited January 24, 2022 by Doc Henry

[aksclix]

7 hours ago, otto.f said:

You'll have to be aware that if you come from 15 years digital, the film may disappoint you in the 35mm format because of noise and grain. That's at least what occurred to me when I restarted with film in 2017 after I began with digital in 2008. I was very happy with a Mamiya 7 ii and a 65mm, which was two years ago within the budget you mention. There's also an advantage in having only a few shots on one film in the beginning, you have much sooner feedback on your work than with 36 takes.

After a few years analogue again, I'm quite happy with my M7 with ADOX Scala film, deep blacks, hardly any grain.

Yes, I’ve calibrated my expectations accordingly.. 😌

Edited January 24, 2022 by aksclix

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[otto.f]

1 hour ago, Brancbūth said:

 "Noise" is an exclusively-digital concept, isn't it?

Not that I know; noise is perhaps a bit strange a concept for B&W, but for color film we talk about noise, if the film can't handle dark area's on a clean way, you'll see all kinds pickles in different colors.

 

Every color film will be evaluated on the noise characteristics, read the texts when you want to order one: https://www.fotoimpex.com/films/kodak-500t-color-negative-film-vision3-7219-50-ft-super-8-cartridge.html?cache=1643043448 

MF has less visual grain, but also less noise, because you've got a larger surface per detail of the image to carry

Edited January 24, 2022 by otto.f