jevidon Posted July 14, 2009 Share #21 Posted July 14, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Actually, I think it is an excellent question. I bought an M8 and after many months, I bought a very nice used M4P which I sent to DAG for adjustment. My reason for going retro is very simple. I want another media to play with. Besides, a film M feels and operates in a very different way from the M8. It is very tactile. In addition, I bought a very clean used 50mm Summicron DR with goggles for closer shooting when the mood strikes me; something I cannot do with the M8. Buying a film M after using the M8 makes absolutely no common sense at all, but where would we be without our toys? I certainly don't regret it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 14, 2009 Posted July 14, 2009 Hi jevidon, Take a look here If you have The M8(.2), Do you buy anothor M Camera (film) ?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted July 14, 2009 Share #22 Posted July 14, 2009 oh, really? Is the DMR really good at image quality? I heard that it doesn't meet the leica's standard at all... that news really hold me back for years! By the way, there is nowhere I can buy the DMR in Hong Kong now, except the ebay. Sorry, you heard wrong. The files are better than the M8. And it was deemed clearly superior in a 360-page thread on FM forums to the 1DsII in low-ISO situations. I wonder where you heard that it does not meet Leica's standard. I heard differently - in Solms....You can only buy it used. There were about 4000 made and they sold out quite some time ago. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
delander † Posted July 14, 2009 Share #23 Posted July 14, 2009 A rationale for getting a film M is of course full frame and to see how the lenses render on the variety of films that can still be bought. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted July 14, 2009 Share #24 Posted July 14, 2009 ...films that can still be bought. I often see film referred to as something that's gradually disappearing, as a rarely found remnant of a glorious panoply of films that could be bought in former times. But other than Kodachrome (and Ektachrome?) and a few other specialist films, as far as I can see the choice is greater now than it''s ever been. Is that a correct impression? I'm no film historian so I genuinely have no idea - but it nags at me that digital users often refer to film as something that's all but disappeared already. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentleman Villain Posted July 14, 2009 Share #25 Posted July 14, 2009 Is that a correct impression? "The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated" - Whenever I see a demise of film post in forums it reminds me of the quote attributed to Mark Twain that he made in regards to newspapers printing his obituary while he was still alive. The films that are no longer being produced were more likely replaced by competing film stocks rather than digital. For example, Kodachrome has been dying a long slow death since long before the digital revolution. It's demise has little to do with digital and more to do with Fuji Velvia or Astia. Many of the films that still exist are actually greatly improved. They have finer grain than their predecessors and are often higher speed. Back in the mid 90s, I was friends with a Kodak consultant and we were talking about the coming digital revolution and what it's impact would be on film. He told me that film was getting better than ever...and it would be a long time before digital was ever going to catch up. But he also told me that most people wouldn't have the ability to tell the difference anyway....it appears he may have been correct Personally, I miss tech pan....it was a great film to rate at iso 40 and push 2/3rds of a stop for milky skintones Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
delander † Posted July 14, 2009 Share #26 Posted July 14, 2009 In my comment I did not intend to imply that films were 'dying' sorry if it came over that way. Two weeks ago I bought a Leica 11F and some film. As a photographer of sorts for now 40 years, 33 of those where spent using film cameras (notice I use the correct term film - not analogue). All that said, the volume of film being sold must be fraction of what it was 10 years ago. I expect that the digi-revolution will falter and there will be a B&W film resurgence although it will never be mainstream, sales wise. As Leica design their latest lenses for use on FF then currently only with a film camera can you use the lenses to their full design spec. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted July 14, 2009 Share #27 Posted July 14, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) In my comment I did not intend to imply that films were 'dying' sorry if it came over that way... As Leica design their latest lenses for use on FF then currently only with a film camera can you use the lenses to their full design spec. Re-reading my own post I realize I came over more combative than I meant to be - I didn't mean it to sound like that: I'm both intrigued by how much film is still being sold and used, and also amazed by the dizzying choice of films now available. As I said, I have no idea how many films have actually disappeared and not been replaced, but I'm pretty sure that film itself has never been better. As for FF - I wonder whether the M9 will even render lenses as film does: the tendency to correct lens 'faults' in-camera may mean that we never see the gorgeous vignetting of the original Noctilux (for example) on the forthcoming full-frame M. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentleman Villain Posted July 14, 2009 Share #28 Posted July 14, 2009 I expect that the digi-revolution will falter and there will be a B&W film resurgence although it will never be mainstream, sales wise. Jeff Thank God - Film is so much more fun now that it is out of the mainstream Isn't it amazing how we could shoot film for decades and it was nothing out of the ordinary....then digital comes along and now shooting film is like an act of rebellion LOL Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJP Posted July 14, 2009 Share #29 Posted July 14, 2009 A few weeks ago Kodak announced that Kodachrome would stop. Since then I keep hearing people saying film production has stopped. Of course this is not the case but it appears that is how they interpreted the news item. Anyone else with that impression? This would be bad news as it might turn into a fait accompli. I still want to use my M2 obviously. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted July 14, 2009 Share #30 Posted July 14, 2009 This would be bad news as it might turn into a fait accompli. Don't worry. The people who interpreted the news that way haven't shot with anything but their phonecam for the last five years. Film doesn't depend on them for it's survival. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJP Posted July 14, 2009 Share #31 Posted July 14, 2009 True, but those semi-inclined to start using film (again or first time) may not due to disinformation, which is bad news for dwindling turnover. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.