Price rising, do you still shoot film?

[Ouroboros]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, hansvons said:

....I have tested all the usual ISO 400 suspects and ended up with Delta 400, as it appears to be the sharpest with the finest grain and the nicest skin tones (slightly lighter than the competition), and retains the best highlights of the whole lot in Xtol at box speed, as this is my preferred developer (environment-friendly, high acuity and fine grain).

 

I have a love/hate relationship with 120 Delta 400.  I like it for the reasons you mention,  but hate it for all the rolls that I've had ruined by 'measles'.  The only way I can be reasonably confident that I'll avoid this problem with it is to expose the entire roll on the day I load the camera and process the film asap, preferably the same day. 

[250swb]

2 hours ago, erl said:

Has anyone actually road tested it against the more 'upmarket' films. My past experience with cheap films (distinct from discounted) is that one can see why it is cheap. I would relish the idea of cheaper film, but not at the expense of performance/quality. My past ' bad' experiences were with colour films. I wonder if B&W films at the cheaper point will stand up to their dearer counterparts. Info welcome.

I think there have been many comparison tests, but of course it needs using sensibly. For grainy street photography it may be the film of choice, for fine grained landscape no, but these are choices photographers make with any film aren't they?

[hansvons]

1 hour ago, erl said:

but the Delta films are still sharper but less tolerant of errors in exposure.

I cannot confirm that. I find that Delta films like to be rated a half to a complete stop slower. Coming from similar stock in my earlier professional life (t-grain Kodak Vision), I'm used to not following the box speed. I get the best results in fine grain and latitude when shooting Delta 400 at ISO 200 and developing the negative in Xtol stock (replenished) at 7:00 min instead of 7:30, which Ilford suggests at box speed. Exposing it at box speed and the recommended dev time of 7:30 Delta 400 still yields a good result, just not as flat and fine-grained. 

I observed that Delta 400 isn't less forgiving to exposure, at least not to my knowledge, as it shows quite a DR, but is picky in dev times and dev temperature. Recently, I cooked Delta at a slightly higher temperature (21,5 and not 20 Celsius), and the results were remarkably more contrasty and grainy but not of a higher density (exposed at ISO 320). I can't remember experiencing that with old-school stock. When pushing Delta, you lose its unique virtues.

Perhaps other people make the same observation and might attribute it to exposure. 

[hansvons]

51 minutes ago, Ouroboros said:

but hate it for all the rolls that I've had ruined by 'measles'. 

Interesting. Can you elaborate on that? Never experienced "measles".

[Ouroboros]

15 minutes ago, hansvons said:

Interesting. Can you elaborate on that? Never experienced "measles".

It's well-known and seems to be some sort of reaction between the emulsion and the backing paper, probably due to humidity.  It manifests as an irregular mottled pattern on the film which effectively ruins the image.  Ilford will replace affected rolls if returned to them.  I've never had the issue with 35mm Delta 400, only 120.  I've also had it to a lesser extent  with 120 Delta 100.

If I come across any affected films I have not thrown away, I'll post an example here.  If you search the web, you'll find plenty of references to the problem.

[hansvons]

35 minutes ago, Ouroboros said:

Ilford will replace affected rolls if returned to them.

At least. But that won't bring back the precious moment. 

Thanks for the clarification!

[250swb]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Measles on 120 HP5, this is the white spot version, you can also get a dark spot version

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 December 2, 2022 by 250swb

[williamj]

I have digital cameras, they have program mode and autofocus and matrix metering, I don't need to be told about the benefits of digital.

Yet I still shoot film like an idiot. Why? Each shot is a commitment, not only will I have to develop the film, I'll have to make a contact print (I cheat and use a digital camera to photograph the film strips to make a digital 'contact' print), I will need to make 4" x 6" (10 x 15 cm) prints of the 2-3 better shots on the roll, and then every 2 or 3 rolls one will be worth making a 20 x 30 cm print. This is a better work flow for me. It's easy to tell if a photograph printed at 24 x 36 mm is any good. They say if your photo isn't good print it bigger and if it is still no good print it in colour.

I'm not going to be snobby and say that the cost of film is irrelevant, but photography is my main hobby and if you're shooting Leica then the cost of film is the least of your considerations when you look at the cost of say the new stainless steel 35mm summilux.  I haven't been shooting less over the last few years. And then there's the issue of upgrades of digital that no one counts, like when you have to buy a new computer when some digital component failed and the upshot of a series of upgrades of software and flash cards results in you having to buy a new laptop. Ok I feel this is very stream of consciousness after having a glass or so of wine after dinner but there it is.

[Steve Ricoh]

Kodak putting up prices again.

 

[Einst_Stein]

Around 2003, carrying a digital camera is a social status.

Now it’s film camera. 

“You what? You have your own darkroom?!, You know how to develop film?”

[Erato]

Renaissance of the film era? Yes, it's forming and perhaps it's coming faster then what we thought.

[erl]

There was a time when carrying my Hasselblad into a venue, everyone stood back. 'He must be important'.😋

Then photographers for awhile got a bad rep, paparrazzi etc.

Then I started fronting up with my Leica. 'He's OK, let him pass, just an old bloke with an old camera.' 😇

Nothing stays the same for ever.

[stray cat]

Here's some exciting news for lovers of film (originally seen in another thread):

 

[Erato]

MESSAGE FROM PRESIDENT AND CEO NOBORU AKABANE(赤羽 昇 代表取締役社長よりメッセージ)
Ricoh Imaging has declared that it will be “reborn” in January 2022. As a new initiative in Japan, we will listen to the voices of our fans more directly, such as strengthening digital and online communication, listing in crowdfunding, opening a PENTAX clubhouse, etc., and products that are close to their feelings. We have continued to “challenge” that is not bound by conventional wisdom, such as creating and selling In addition, we have started offering products realized through “workshop-like” manufacturing, such as developing special models in limited quantities worldwide.

As a new “challenge”, we would like to declare the challenge of developing a new film camera under the PENTAX brand in order to provide enjoyment different from digital cameras. This declaration is not a promise that we will release a new film camera product, but it is a declaration that we believe that as long as people are faithful to the air and light of nature, there will always be film camera fans. . I know how difficult it is to develop a film camera once finished. We are only at the starting line of the investigation.

We would like to hear the voices of fans through various events and digital communication (SNS, etc.) and update the development status as much as possible. Nothing would make me happier than to be able to take on the challenge of a new film camera project in the spirit of co-creation, with the support, approval, and occasional criticism of everyone.

 

Source in Japanese: 

https://news.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/rim_info/2022/20221220_037858.html

Edited December 21, 2022 by Erato

[LocalHero1953]

I hope that's a typo, and it will be "reborn in January 2023", or possibly "2024". Even that will be fairly quick to get a new film camera off the stocks after this announcement in December 2022.

[Anbaric]

4 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

I hope that's a typo, and it will be "reborn in January 2023", or possibly "2024". Even that will be fairly quick to get a new film camera off the stocks after this announcement in December 2022.

The official English version has it as 'In January 2022, we declared the rebirth of Ricoh Imaging', which apparently refers to a broader initiative than the film camera plan:

https://news.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/rim_info2/2022/20221220_037861.html

[Einst_Stein]

I don’t feel we need any new film camera, Leica or others. There are simply enough good old and excellent film cameras in excellent condition with surprising steal deal. 

It’s films! More precisely, more affordable films. Just bring back the good old films. 
 

Sorry, Penrax/Ricoh, you are very little help. 

Edited December 22, 2022 by Einst_Stein

[lmans]

Film cost= the cost of doing business,or in my case hobby. I just accept it. I skip the extra cup of coffee.

In terms of film quality, it is funny what we all perceive to be ‘quality’. An expensive fine grain film is worthless to me as opposed to a noisy grainy film … personal taste:)

[Einst_Stein]

2 hours ago, lmans said:

Film cost= the cost of doing business,or in my case hobby. I just accept it. I skip the extra cup of coffee.

In terms of film quality, it is funny what we all perceive to be ‘quality’. An expensive fine grain film is worthless to me as opposed to a noisy grainy film … personal taste:)

Wow, Your coffee is expensive!

Indeed, photography is my hobby, no commitment.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[4r36]

I just went to the Fotoimpex webpage, discovering that a roll of ADOX CMS 20 II now costs 9.60 EUR. A few months ago it was sold for 5,29 EUR. I tremble with fear, as I see where all this is leading to: paying 2 EUR per shot as I used to with my Impossible One Camera (Polaroid) before going broke 😆