Any Film Shooters Here? (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 2/23/2025 8:40:32 PM EDT
|
I did it for a living back in the 80's before my ex-wife told me to get a real job (I picked her up at a wedding I was shooting, biggest mistake I ever made) Fast forward to now and while I've played with digital (Nikon 200,300 and D7500) they never felt like they had any "soul". I broke my old Nikon F2 out of mothballs over the summer last year, had it CLA'd and found I enjoyed using that allot more than I did the digitals. Now I'm up to having all my old "working" 35mm's rehabbed (2 F2's, 1 F-3 and 2 FM's) plus I added a Leica M3 (had 1 in the 80's and sold it to get a Mamiya 645 1000s to do weddings) and bought a Bronica ERTSI 645 to get back into medium format. Next plan is getting a decent film scanner so I can convert film to computers. but getting a darkroom set up so I can soup my own film. I figure I'm going to retire 2026 and that's going to be something I can do again. Anyone else here going old school? |
Joined:
Dec 2024
Posts:
135
EE: 0% (0)
USA
|
Originally Posted By Dawson64: Hi have working Nikon F2AS, F3 and F5 cameras, plus a D610. Lenses from 20mm to 500mm. I prefer film, but it gets pricey. I also have a Nikkormat, EM and FE, but don't normally use them. I've notice more people using film at tourist sites. I got a Nikkormat to, thinking of getting it serviced. I'm thinking a roll of film is about the same price as a box of ammo and I can make 1 last all day when I shoot it |
|
I've got a small collection. 35: Nikon F3. Yashica GX35. Leica M3 120: Mamiya 645 1000s I'm thinking of picking up a RB67 because I want swappable backs so I can easily switch between color and B&W. I just ordered a Leica M6 that should be here this week. I've been sending my film off for developing and using the Valoi Easy35 with my Fujifilm X-T30ii to scan. It's incredibly fast to burn through uncut negatives. I'm starting to develop on my own now, though. If you use Lightroom, Negative Lap Pro is pretty awesome and it's only $99. I don't have experience with it, but I know some people have good results with Grain2Pixel which is free. |
"The answer to crime is always cows." -Cheesebeast
|
Yup. started with a K1000, ended up a CANON guy. I develop my own B&W, and send my C41 process to the darkroom https://thedarkroom.com/product/35mm-film-developing/ I used to be able to print my own but then I lived in a house that I couldn't have a darkroom, so I started scanning negatives. |
You got gun law problems, I feel bad for you son. I got 99 problems but a ban ain't one. -Sylvan
|
I was heavy into film in the 80 ‘s & 90’s I didn’t transition well into digital …..sold the cameras for peanuts took the color & B&W darkroom to the dump now all I have is studio lights and some very expensive Backgrounders canvas backgrounds . It’s been painful. Bye Bye Nikons, RB , & Hasselblads No more WPPI trade shows in Lost Wages…. Even tossed out my sample wedding albums. The Ex has the 30x40’s of the kids … film like it or not is never coming back because of the chemistry. |
|
Originally Posted By JaxShooter: I've got a small collection. 35: Nikon F3. Yashica GX35. Leica M3 120: Mamiya 645 1000s I'm thinking of picking up a RB67 because I want swappable backs so I can easily switch between color and B&W. I just ordered a Leica M6 that should be here this week. I've been sending my film off for developing and using the Valoi Easy35 with my Fujifilm X-T30ii to scan. It's incredibly fast to burn through uncut negatives. I'm starting to develop on my own now, though. If you use Lightroom, Negative Lap Pro is pretty awesome and it's only $99. I don't have experience with it, but I know some people have good results with Grain2Pixel which is free. I'm toying with getting a Leica M6. it's a chunk of money for sure but I do like the idea of the built in meter. I really wanted a M5 when I was doing it in the 80's but couldn't afford it back then. Now, I can afford a decent used M6 or MP to go with the M3. If I can get to a gun show next month I might sell 2 of my 12 M-1 Carbines to help fund the M6. Problem is I can't be sure where I work (local Ford plant) will let me have the Saturday off. Worst case is i save my overtime up a couple months and see what KEH has in stock. They have a couple M6's in stock right now around $3K that look good I've been researching film scanners and a Plustek 8200 or 8300 look like my best bets for 35mm scanners long term. I'll also set up a film developing setup when I retire. Odds I'll do that before I get a M6 since it makes more sense to have that since I have plenty of 35mm's to choose from |
|
My F100 still calls my name. Wish Fuji Velvia 100 was around. Gladly would still shoot 50 but damn the price... Miss my Hasselblad days. ETA: Not gonna lie that I don't look at F5 and F6 prices from time to time, as well as 120 prices. |
“An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." - Lt.Col. Jeff Cooper
It's not rocket science, but it's close!
Cheesecake OG. Cold War 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. Foreign War 1.
It's not rocket science, but it's close!
Cheesecake OG. Cold War 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. Foreign War 1.
|
Originally Posted By Sanlanman: I have been contemplating trying to get my Olympus OM2 and OM4 serviced and back in action. Where do you buy old school 35mm film these days? Amazon or places like B&H Photo for bulk buys (10 roll pro packs). Walmart still carries Fuji 400 color neg in a 3/36 exposure pack for $25.00. I snag it when I see it in stock my local store. Carema shops still carry it but their the most expensive of course. Unless you already have a tech I would try here https://ictcamera.com/ They seem to have a good rep and specialize in film cameras. I'm having them rebuild a Nikon F2 I bought off evilbay that I should have known better, but the price was right. You do have to set up a appointment online since their that busy and they take 4-6 weeks to service your cameras. I've toyed with getting a OM1, friend of mine gave me a OM10 years ago with all his lenses since he knew I collected film Nikons. |
|
I've got an F3HP with Ai-S 28/2.8, 85/2, and 135/2.8 as well as two Canonet QL17 GIIIs. The F3 has the shutter capping issue, so it'll be going in to have that fixed as well as a CLA and light seals replaced. Running a couple rolls of film through the Canonets to check operation, bare minimum I'll need to replace the light seals on those. I don't do my own processing so I don't shoot a lot of film, I do my own scanning since I already have the equipment from doing a family photo digitizing project. |
This page intentionally left blank.
|
Originally Posted By JAFFE: I've got an F3HP with Ai-S 28/2.8, 85/2, and 135/2.8 as well as two Canonet QL17 GIIIs. The F3 has the shutter capping issue, so it'll be going in to have that fixed as well as a CLA and light seals replaced. Running a couple rolls of film through the Canonets to check operation, bare minimum I'll need to replace the light seals on those. I don't do my own processing so I don't shoot a lot of film, I do my own scanning since I already have the equipment from doing a family photo digitizing project. I would try that link I posted for ICT, they specialize in F3's from what I gather |
|
Originally Posted By DonFlynn: I would try that link I posted for ICT, they specialize in F3's from what I gather I had already added the link to my list of shops to check out - thanks. There's a camera shop in Tucson that does repairs, I need to see if there are good reviews on them since they're local and it would be the easy button if the work is good. |
This page intentionally left blank.
|
Originally Posted By JAFFE: I had already added the link to my list of shops to check out - thanks. There's a camera shop in Tucson that does repairs, I need to see if there are good reviews on them since they're local and it would be the easy button if the work is good. Originally Posted By JAFFE: Originally Posted By DonFlynn: I would try that link I posted for ICT, they specialize in F3's from what I gather I had already added the link to my list of shops to check out - thanks. There's a camera shop in Tucson that does repairs, I need to see if there are good reviews on them since they're local and it would be the easy button if the work is good. Good luck. I've found trying to get my old Nikons serviced is few local shops work on them anymore. Hell, the guy I used when I did it in the 80's learned how to do it in the Luftwaffe in WWII  1st studio I worked for in 79 was owned by 2 Jewish guys who fought in WWII in the US Army and they would always say "hey Don, run this camera by the Kraut while your out"
|
|
Originally Posted By DonFlynn: Good luck. I've found trying to get my old Nikons serviced is few local shops work on them anymore. Hell, the guy I used when I did it in the 80's learned how to do it in the Luftwaffe in WWII 1st studio I worked for in 79 was owned by 2 Jewish guys who fought in WWII in the US Army and they would always say "hey Don, run this camera by the Kraut while your out"Yeah, local shops doing sales or repairs are getting more difficult to find in many (most?) areas. I shouldn't have been surprised, they're named as a repair shop but they sell Nikon gear. I thought they had changed from repairs to sales and kept the name. I asked the question and was told yes, they still do repairs, even on film cameras. |
This page intentionally left blank.
Member
Joined:
May 2023
Posts:
144
EE: 0% (0)
TX, USA
|
I started out on digital shooting weddings too as a way to earn some extra cash after I graduated Highschool. The local Community College in the town where I grew up had a Darkroom Course a friend of mine attended. He invited me to come check it out and showed me the process for developing B&W and how to enlarge negatives, it got me hooked. The Professor for the course was really cool and told me he didn't mind if I used their facilities to develop and scan despite not being a student at the school. I immediately bought a Canon AE-1, a bunch of Ilford HP5 and started shooting and developing a ton of 35mm B&W. After sometime shooting 35mm I decided I wanted to get into medium format and opportunity arose. At the end of the semester a student in the class was about to start a digital photography course and was in need of DSLR and was offering up a Mamiya RZ67 for one. I happened to have a Canon T6i in my bag and impulsively traded for it not really knowing anything about it or how to use it. I learned how to use it and found it takes really nice photos. I started shooting almost exclusively 120 because I hate money, but to this day it's still my favorite camera I own. I got hired on here at ARF to help out on the content team a little over 2 years ago but I had to move to Texas, leaving the lab I use develop at behind, leading to a hiatus.  This year I decided to bring my Minolta x700 with me to SHOT Show to end my hiatus. After returning from SHOT I paid to get some film developed and scanned at a local lab here in DFW. Unfortunately the lab ruined a couple of the rolls in the development process which left me sour, also I didn't like the idea of not developing my own film in the first place so this experience just confirmed it  . Last week I went out bought a Epson V700 Scanner, Some D76 and C-41 Process Kits so I can start Developing and scanning on my own again. I would rather be the one to mess up my rolls, and after some research found it will be much cheaper in the long run to do it all my self and bulk load my own film.Here's the current line up and some shots:     
|
|
Originally Posted By Sc00t3r: I started out on digital shooting weddings too as a way to earn some extra cash after I graduated Highschool. The local Community College in the town where I grew up had a Darkroom Course a friend of mine attended. He invited me to come check it out and showed me the process for developing B&W and how to enlarge negatives, it got me hooked. The Professor for the course was really cool and told me he didn't mind if I used their facilities to develop and scan despite not being a student at the school. I immediately bought a Canon AE-1, a bunch of Ilford HP5 and started shooting and developing a ton of 35mm B&W. After sometime shooting 35mm I decided I wanted to get into medium format and opportunity arose. At the end of the semester a student in the class was about to start a digital photography course and was in need of DSLR and was offering up a Mamiya RZ67 for one. I happened to have a Canon T6i in my bag and impulsively traded for it not really knowing anything about it or how to use it. I learned how to use it and found it takes really nice photos. I started shooting almost exclusively 120 because I hate money, but to this day it's still my favorite camera I own. I got hired on here at ARF to help out on the content team a little over 2 years ago but I had to move to Texas, leaving the lab I use develop at behind, leading to a hiatus. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/583900/Shot25BW007-3475649.jpg This year I decided to bring my Minolta x700 with me to SHOT Show to end my hiatus. After returning from SHOT I paid to get some film developed and scanned at a local lab here in DFW. Unfortunately the lab ruined a couple of the rolls in the development process which left me sour, also I didn't like the idea of not developing my own film in the first place so this experience just confirmed it . Last week I went out bought a Epson V700 Scanner, Some D76 and C-41 Process Kits so I can start Developing and scanning on my own again. I would rather be the one to mess up my rolls, and after some research found it will be much cheaper in the long run to do it all my self and bulk load my own film.Here's the current line up and some shots: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/583900/20250226_193021-3475644.jpg https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/583900/img007-3475652.jpg https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/583900/Drifting120003-3475653.jpg https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/583900/Screenshot_2025-02-26_204845-3475662.png https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/583900/Getzan056-3475665.jpg Good line up. That Rz67 is a beast. I toyed with getting 1 instead of the Bronica 645 but my neck said get the lighter camera Nikon F2 was my 1st pro level camera, bought my 1st in 1977 when I turned 18. I was driving a $200 dollar car and using a $600 (in 1977 money) camera. |
Member
Joined:
May 2023
Posts:
146
EE: 0% (0)
TX, USA
|
Originally Posted By DonFlynn: Good line up. That Rz67 is a beast. I toyed with getting 1 instead of the Bronica 645 but my neck said get the lighter camera Nikon F2 was my 1st pro level camera, bought my 1st in 1977 when I turned 18. I was driving a $200 dollar car and using a $600 (in 1977 money) camera. I just got my F2 this past month second hand for $250. I had to replace all the light seals due to a bad light leak but so far its been a good shooter and its built like a tank. I'm a pretty young guy as well, most others film shooters I've met are surprised when they find out I shoot film. Shooting on the RZ is very rewarding but it is definitely a chore. I've been interested in trying out some Range Finders, I'd love to mess around with a M6 but they are well out of my price range for now ill have to settle for a Yashica or Voigtlander instead.
|
|
Originally Posted By Sc00t3r: I just got my F2 this past month second hand for $250. I had to replace all the light seals due to a bad light leak but so far its been a good shooter and its built like a tank. I'm a pretty young guy as well, most others film shooters I've met are surprised when they find out I shoot film. Shooting on the RZ is very rewarding but it is definitely a chore. I've been interested in trying out some Range Finders, I'd love to mess around with a M6 but they are well out of my price range for now ill have to settle for a Yashica or Voigtlander instead. Originally Posted By Sc00t3r: Originally Posted By DonFlynn: Good line up. That Rz67 is a beast. I toyed with getting 1 instead of the Bronica 645 but my neck said get the lighter camera Nikon F2 was my 1st pro level camera, bought my 1st in 1977 when I turned 18. I was driving a $200 dollar car and using a $600 (in 1977 money) camera. I just got my F2 this past month second hand for $250. I had to replace all the light seals due to a bad light leak but so far its been a good shooter and its built like a tank. I'm a pretty young guy as well, most others film shooters I've met are surprised when they find out I shoot film. Shooting on the RZ is very rewarding but it is definitely a chore. I've been interested in trying out some Range Finders, I'd love to mess around with a M6 but they are well out of my price range for now ill have to settle for a Yashica or Voigtlander instead. Good price on the F2. I would check the foam on the mirror return, those tend to dry out over time. Does the meter work? I notice that's the DP-1 viewfinder for pre "AI" lens. I have both the F2 and F2a (AI version) and actually prefer the older model. Unless you plan on getting a AI model film Nikon you can find deals on older non AI lenses. You care for it, and it'll go to your grandkids. My 1st 1 I bought new runs like a champ, it's become a "safe queen" since I have the F2a I bought in 1982 used plus I snagged a 3rd F2a 20 years ago cheap from someone going digital. I'm trying to justify a Leica M6. I lucked out on my current M3, older gentleman (I'm 66) was in a camera shop before Xmas trying to sell it to them and the shop didn't want it since they only carry digital. I asked him what he wanted for it with the 50mm lens he had on it and he said "$1200 dollars" I told him "give me 20 minutes, the bank is down the street" I had in get it CLA'd and that cost $800 for both, but $2000 bucks later I have a nice Leica M3 again like I had in the 80's. Now my problem is I got the itch for a M6 and some extra money coming in next month from a profit sharing check (I work at the local Ford tranny plant now). We'll see. |
|
Originally Posted By Sc00t3r: I started shooting almost exclusively 120 because I hate money I feel your pain  (LOVE your images, btw) Here's an older RZ67 scan from when I was still doing test shoots:  And cross-processing expired slide film because I really hated money. Now that I'm older, wiser, and poorer, I'm considering the new Pentax 17, a half-frame 35mm camera, which would give me much less resolution (and even more grain), but would be much more affordable (72 frames per roll) and portable. Given current prices of vintage Olympus PEN or Canon Demi cameras in decent working condition, I can almost justify the $500 price tag.  ETA I'm blessed to have multiple film labs nearby, but I could definitely save money by developing my own film again. The Lomography Daylight Developing Tank system looks like it could be a promising alternative to the JOBO tanks I used once upon a time:  Lomo Daylight Developing Tank 35 mm Complete Workflow |
|
Originally Posted By djohn: Now that I'm older, wiser, and poorer, I'm considering the new Pentax 17, a half-frame 35mm camera, which would give me much less resolution (and even more grain), but would be much more affordable (72 frames per roll) and portable. Given current prices of vintage Olympus PEN or Canon Demi cameras in decent working condition, I can almost justify the $500 price tag. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/28207/Pentax17Banner-3476219.jpg I have a PEN FT and 17. I've been looking at getting the PEN FV because of the better viewfinder. The 17 has been great. The only downside or issue I've came across is that the mode knob can be bumped to a different setting easily. Also, more of a user error, but learning zone focus and forgetting to properly set the focus ring. I just need to doublecheck the knobs before snapping pics. |
|
Originally Posted By djohn: I feel your pain (LOVE your images, btw) Here's an older RZ67 scan from when I was still doing test shoots: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/28207/scan053_shiny_side_down_11x14ga-3476255.jpg And cross-processing expired slide film because I really hated money. Now that I'm older, wiser, and poorer, I'm considering the new Pentax 17, a half-frame 35mm camera, which would give me much less resolution (and even more grain), but would be much more affordable (72 frames per roll) and portable. Given current prices of vintage Olympus PEN or Canon Demi cameras in decent working condition, I can almost justify the $500 price tag. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/28207/Pentax17Banner-3476219.jpg ETA I'm blessed to have multiple film labs nearby, but I could definitely save money by developing my own film again. The Lomography Daylight Developing Tank system looks like it could be a promising alternative to the JOBO tanks I used once upon a time:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XyGh79YLqlkI was watching that video on the developing tank last nite. It looks interesting but you can only do 1 roll at a time. I'm thinking of getting this when I set up for film processing  AGO Film Processor Review | Film Developing Made Easier? Pricey, but you can use 2 or 4 roll Patterson tanks. I figure until I actually retire 2026, I'll just process film at the local camera shop since I won't get much time to shoot film anyway. 1-2 rolls a month won't break the bank. |
|
I shoot small (35mm) medium 6x6 and 4.5x6, and large format 4x5. I absolutely LOVE shooting film. One of my Hasselblads shot with my Minolta SRT Super 35mm Attached File A bit of palm frond art work shot on my Hasselblad 500CM. Attached File A bottle of Blanton's shot on my 4x5 Calumet monorail view camera. Attached File |
When the hammer drops, the BS stops!
Support the Heller Foundation! www.hellerfoundation.com
Support the Heller Foundation! www.hellerfoundation.com
|
Originally Posted By Hard_Rock: I shoot small (35mm) medium 6x6 and 4.5x6, and large format 4x5. I absolutely LOVE shooting film. One of my Hasselblads shot with my Minolta SRT Super 35mm https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/224/IMAG0040_jpg-3476913.JPG A bit of palm frond art work shot on my Hasselblad 500CM. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/224/7D1A9304-2_jpg-3476916.JPG A bottle of Blanton's shot on my 4x5 Calumet monorail view camera. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/224/7D1A9279-Edit-2_jpg-3476917.JPG Nice |
Member
Joined:
May 2023
Posts:
147
EE: 0% (0)
TX, USA
|
Originally Posted By DonFlynn: Good price on the F2. I would check the foam on the mirror return, those tend to dry out over time. Does the meter work? I notice that's the DP-1 viewfinder for pre "AI" lens. I have both the F2 and F2a (AI version) and actually prefer the older model. Unless you plan on getting a AI model film Nikon you can find deals on older non AI lenses. You care for it, and it'll go to your grandkids. My 1st 1 I bought new runs like a champ, it's become a "safe queen" since I have the F2a I bought in 1982 used plus I snagged a 3rd F2a 20 years ago cheap from someone going digital. I'm trying to justify a Leica M6. I lucked out on my current M3, older gentleman (I'm 66) was in a camera shop before Xmas trying to sell it to them and the shop didn't want it since they only carry digital. I asked him what he wanted for it with the 50mm lens he had on it and he said "$1200 dollars" I told him "give me 20 minutes, the bank is down the street" I had in get it CLA'd and that cost $800 for both, but $2000 bucks later I have a nice Leica M3 again like I had in the 80's. Now my problem is I got the itch for a M6 and some extra money coming in next month from a profit sharing check (I work at the local Ford tranny plant now). We'll see. Yeah the light seals and mirror foam were toast when I got it. I found a light seal kit on eBay that came with the foam for the mirror. I spent a hour going through and replacing all the seals in it and went out and shot a test roll using the light meter for exposure and it worked well.    I plan on getting some more of the older pre Ai lenses. Currently I have 28mm f3.5 and a 50mm f1.4 for the F2. Unfortunately the 50mm has oil/grease on the aperture blades so it shoots almost wide open no matter what the aperture is set to. I just got done cleaning some fungus out of a new Minolta Md lens I got in the mail this morning and was planning on cracking open the 50 after for a cleaning. Unfortunately I don't have precise enough drivers for the fasteners on it so looks like I'm waiting for the amazon man. |
Member
Joined:
May 2023
Posts:
148
EE: 0% (0)
TX, USA
|
Originally Posted By djohn: I feel your pain (LOVE your images, btw) Here's an older RZ67 scan from when I was still doing test shoots: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/28207/scan053_shiny_side_down_11x14ga-3476255.jpg And cross-processing expired slide film because I really hated money. Now that I'm older, wiser, and poorer, I'm considering the new Pentax 17, a half-frame 35mm camera, which would give me much less resolution (and even more grain), but would be much more affordable (72 frames per roll) and portable. Given current prices of vintage Olympus PEN or Canon Demi cameras in decent working condition, I can almost justify the $500 price tag. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/28207/Pentax17Banner-3476219.jpg ETA I'm blessed to have multiple film labs nearby, but I could definitely save money by developing my own film again. The Lomography Daylight Developing Tank system looks like it could be a promising alternative to the JOBO tanks I used once upon a time: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XyGh79YLqlkThank you! I appreciate it.I recently watched some videos on the pentax 17 its an interesting idea but I don't think ill end up getting one. Id be stressed trying to fire off 72 frames per roll
|
|
Originally Posted By DonFlynn: I'm toying with getting a Leica M6. it's a chunk of money for sure but I do like the idea of the built in meter. I really wanted a M5 when I was doing it in the 80's but couldn't afford it back then. Now, I can afford a decent used M6 or MP to go with the M3. I've been researching film scanners and a Plustek 8200 or 8300 look like my best bets for 35mm scanners long term. I'll also set up a film developing setup when I retire. Odds I'll do that before I get a M6 since it makes more sense to have that since I have plenty of 35mm's to choose from I have a M6 arriving Monday. It would've been here yesterday but fucking Customs held it up and FedEx apparently fucked some shit up they had to fix with Customs. I hear nothing but good things about the M3. I wrestled over that myself. Single stroke? Double stroke? In the end, I bought the M4 instead. Love it!I've been looking at the Plustek scanners also. I ended up getting the Valoi Easy35 and I use my Fujifilm X-T30ii with it. It's a very fast setup and the results are great. I just wish they didn't want $500 for the 120 version. I just got a film holder that'll do 120 and 35 but I need to get a copy stand to use it. Originally Posted By DonFlynn: I was watching that video on the developing tank last nite. It looks interesting but you can only do 1 roll at a time. I'm thinking of getting this when I set up for film processing https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ji2vdzFRiwPricey, but you can use 2 or 4 roll Patterson tanks. I figure until I actually retire 2026, I'll just process film at the local camera shop since I won't get much time to shoot film anyway. 1-2 rolls a month won't break the bank. |
"The answer to crime is always cows." -Cheesebeast
|
I spent 25yrs as a commercial photographer. Yes, I miss the film days. We shot all formats but I really miss my 4x5 Sinars. Photography in it's purist form. That's how you really get an appreciation for the mechanics of optics and how cameras work. Negative film could be forgiving but chrome not so much. Exposure had to be spot on. Bracketing and clip test was mandatory for perfect results. Man, we went through lots of polaroid film and that stuff was expensive. Then we bought our first digital camera. It was a Kodak/Nikon body (don't remember the model). 6 megapixel I believe. Paid $24,000 just for the body back in 1999. But we paid for it and shot the heck out of it with lots of catalog jobs. I sold the body on Ebay in 2008 for $900. Digital does not hold it's value.  We had no idea that digital would overtake as quickly as it did. Never figured a pixel would ever match a silver halide grain for sharpness. Later we purchased a digital back (24 megapixel) for our Sinar cameras and it worked great. It would do multi passes taking advantage of the actual 3-d shape of a pixel and created super sharp images. However heat/noise was always an initial problem. |
|
Originally Posted By Sc00t3r: Yeah the light seals and mirror foam were toast when I got it. I found a light seal kit on eBay that came with the foam for the mirror. I spent a hour going through and replacing all the seals in it and went out and shot a test roll using the light meter for exposure and it worked well. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/583900/0228Getzan-R1-27-28_JPG-3477584.jpghttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/583900/20250202_152507-3477585.jpghttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/583900/0228Getzan-R1-09-10__1__JPG-3477573.jpg I plan on getting some more of the older pre Ai lenses. Currently I have 28mm f3.5 and a 50mm f1.4 for the F2. Unfortunately the 50mm has oil/grease on the aperture blades so it shoots almost wide open no matter what the aperture is set to. I just got done cleaning some fungus out of a new Minolta Md lens I got in the mail this morning and was planning on cracking open the 50 after for a cleaning. Unfortunately I don't have precise enough drivers for the fasteners on it so looks like I'm waiting for the amazon man. I would look at KEH and see what lens they have in stock. I got a nice 50mm pre AI Nikkor for around $80 bucks to use as a "display" lens for a F body before Xmas. They also get F2 viewfinders in once in a while, you could upgrade yours if you ever need to. I bought a F2a finder last summer when I thought the 1 on my 1 F2 was going out and ended up getting that fixed, I'm using the spare finder on a F2 body I bought off Ebay that's getting CLA'd now |
|
I learned to shoot with my father's Zeiss Contaflex and Pentax ME Super when around eight years old. He had a plethora of lenses that I learned to use to the max after several years and a lot of money in films and development. Got to a point where I rarely missed a shot. Then I got a Pentax K10D and later a K5 (both can use the old Vivitar lenses we used in the Pentax film camera). The convenience of checking the image right after, taking several photos without worrying about running out of film, playing with different settings to and choosing which suits the conditions at the time best, etc. made me switch definitely to digital. I also don't do any post-production in my photos (PhotoShop and alikes). They are what I take. I still have the old cameras he gave me but they just seat in a dry box. The Pentax DSLRs and their lenses also moved to the dry box as I now prefer the convenience of a Sony RX100 M7, an Insta360 and a Hover X1 drone, all in my pockets. I really don't see myself going back to film. |
|
Originally Posted By UncleMeat: Then we bought our first digital camera. It was a Kodak/Nikon body (don't remember the model). 6 megapixel I believe. Paid $24,000 just for the body back in 1999. But we paid for it and shot the heck out of it with lots of catalog jobs. I sold the body on Ebay in 2008 for $900. Digital does not hold it's value. Certain cameras do. It's all about timing and maybe even a little influence through social media. |
|
I processed my first roll of B&W film in junior high school about 50 years ago. Over the next 35 years, I worked at camera stores, got a degree in photojournalism, worked as a staff photographer at two different daily newspapers, and did magazine and "corporate" photography for a couple of decades. I made the transition from film to digital in the 1990s. The old film cameras were wonderful machines and I admire an old Nikon, Leica or Hasselbad as much as anyone, but digital is so much better on so many levels -- color balance, low light capabilities and image processing workflow among them. I no longer do photography on any serious level, but if I did there is no possibility that would involve film. Digital is such a better tool for making images. I can't imagine ever going backwards. |
|
Originally Posted By UncleMeat: Digital does not hold it's value. So what? Photography isn't about gear. Photography is about images. Cameras are just tools you use to make images. Cameras come and go and photographers replace gear when more effective tools become available. Film and film cameras are inferior tools for making images. They suffer from all sorts of limitations when dealing with funky/mixed light. Those limitations impact the photographer's abilities to communicate visually. Digital largely eliminates so many of the issues that made film an imperfect media. Plus, the camera to printed image workflow is so much more streamlined and powerful with digital. By almost any meaningful standard, digital technology is far superior for producing images. The only possible reason to use film today would be if doing so allowed the photographer to communicate visually more effectively that digital allows. That is not the case. I'm sure there are exceptions, but most of the film-based images I see people show off these days are crap. They are meaningless exercises in obsolete technology. There is rarely anything remarkable about the images themselves. |
|
Originally Posted By Rossi: I learned to shoot with my father's Zeiss Contaflex and Pentax ME Super when around eight years old. He had a plethora of lenses that I learned to use to the max after several years and a lot of money in films and development. Got to a point where I rarely missed a shot. Then I got a Pentax K10D and later a K5 (both can use the old Vivitar lenses we used in the Pentax film camera). The convenience of checking the image right after, taking several photos without worrying about running out of film, playing with different settings to and choosing which suits the conditions at the time best, etc. made me switch definitely to digital. I also don't do any post-production in my photos (PhotoShop and alikes). They are what I take. I still have the old cameras he gave me but they just seat in a dry box. The Pentax DSLRs and their lenses also moved to the dry box as I now prefer the convenience of a Sony RX100 M7, an Insta360 and a Hover X1 drone, all in my pockets. I really don't see myself going back to film. i disagree, I think going back to film will bring some skill back that I let erode when I went digital. Have 2-3 rolls of film vs. 2000 on a memory card forces me to go back to thinking about the shot. I also think taking the shot then not being able to preview it on a digital will help. |
|
Originally Posted By DonFlynn: i disagree, I think going back to film will bring some skill back that I let erode when I went digital. Have 2-3 rolls of film vs. 2000 on a memory card forces me to go back to thinking about the shot. I also think taking the shot then not being able to preview it on a digital will help. Originally Posted By DonFlynn: Originally Posted By Rossi: I learned to shoot with my father's Zeiss Contaflex and Pentax ME Super when around eight years old. He had a plethora of lenses that I learned to use to the max after several years and a lot of money in films and development. Got to a point where I rarely missed a shot. Then I got a Pentax K10D and later a K5 (both can use the old Vivitar lenses we used in the Pentax film camera). The convenience of checking the image right after, taking several photos without worrying about running out of film, playing with different settings to and choosing which suits the conditions at the time best, etc. made me switch definitely to digital. I also don't do any post-production in my photos (PhotoShop and alikes). They are what I take. I still have the old cameras he gave me but they just seat in a dry box. The Pentax DSLRs and their lenses also moved to the dry box as I now prefer the convenience of a Sony RX100 M7, an Insta360 and a Hover X1 drone, all in my pockets. I really don't see myself going back to film. i disagree, I think going back to film will bring some skill back that I let erode when I went digital. Have 2-3 rolls of film vs. 2000 on a memory card forces me to go back to thinking about the shot. I also think taking the shot then not being able to preview it on a digital will help. That's true. When I used film, I agree that I spent more time and gave a lot more thought about settings, type of film (100, 200, 400 ISO, brand, etc.) than I do now with digital. Nowadays, I just set multibracket, HDR, or set it into Manual mode, change ISO, etc. and press the shutter button. The little Sony also has many different features that somehow make me "lazier" when compared to when I shot film even though it still does beat my Pentax K-5. However, being able to immediately see the results made a huge difference when shooting my son playing baseball and getting images like the ball still bouncing out of his bat, or him diving in a swimming heat, with a DSLR that would had been a lot more difficult with an SLR. Nevertheless, film still has some kind of "magic" that digital does not. I might get my father's Zeiss out of the dry box one day, just for fun. |
|
Originally Posted By Rossi: That's true. When I used film, I agree that I spent more time and gave a lot more thought about settings, type of film (100, 200, 400 ISO, brand, etc.) than I do now with digital. Nowadays, I just set multibracket, HDR, or set it into Manual mode, change ISO, etc. and press the shutter button. The little Sony also has many different features that somehow make me "lazier" when compared to when I shot film even though it still does beat my Pentax K-5. However, being able to immediately see the results made a huge difference when shooting my son playing baseball and getting images like the ball still bouncing out of his bat, or him diving in a swimming heat, with a DSLR that would had been a lot more difficult with an SLR. Nevertheless, film still has some kind of "magic" that digital does not. I might get my father's Zeiss out of the dry box one day, just for fun. Originally Posted By Rossi: Originally Posted By DonFlynn: Originally Posted By Rossi: I learned to shoot with my father's Zeiss Contaflex and Pentax ME Super when around eight years old. He had a plethora of lenses that I learned to use to the max after several years and a lot of money in films and development. Got to a point where I rarely missed a shot. Then I got a Pentax K10D and later a K5 (both can use the old Vivitar lenses we used in the Pentax film camera). The convenience of checking the image right after, taking several photos without worrying about running out of film, playing with different settings to and choosing which suits the conditions at the time best, etc. made me switch definitely to digital. I also don't do any post-production in my photos (PhotoShop and alikes). They are what I take. I still have the old cameras he gave me but they just seat in a dry box. The Pentax DSLRs and their lenses also moved to the dry box as I now prefer the convenience of a Sony RX100 M7, an Insta360 and a Hover X1 drone, all in my pockets. I really don't see myself going back to film. i disagree, I think going back to film will bring some skill back that I let erode when I went digital. Have 2-3 rolls of film vs. 2000 on a memory card forces me to go back to thinking about the shot. I also think taking the shot then not being able to preview it on a digital will help. That's true. When I used film, I agree that I spent more time and gave a lot more thought about settings, type of film (100, 200, 400 ISO, brand, etc.) than I do now with digital. Nowadays, I just set multibracket, HDR, or set it into Manual mode, change ISO, etc. and press the shutter button. The little Sony also has many different features that somehow make me "lazier" when compared to when I shot film even though it still does beat my Pentax K-5. However, being able to immediately see the results made a huge difference when shooting my son playing baseball and getting images like the ball still bouncing out of his bat, or him diving in a swimming heat, with a DSLR that would had been a lot more difficult with an SLR. Nevertheless, film still has some kind of "magic" that digital does not. I might get my father's Zeiss out of the dry box one day, just for fun. Digital will have a use for me. airshows come to mind if I can get to them when I retire 2026. I should break down and get a mirrorless Nikon but I just bought the D7500 so I could use the lenses I have now without adaptors or worrying about some of my older Nikon lens not working on a body. |
|
Originally Posted By Bladeswitcher: So what? Photography isn't about gear. Photography is about images. Cameras are just tools you use to make images. Cameras come and go and photographers replace gear when more effective tools become available. Film and film cameras are inferior tools for making images. They suffer from all sorts of limitations when dealing with funky/mixed light. Those limitations impact the photographer's abilities to communicate visually. Digital largely eliminates so many of the issues that made film an imperfect media. Plus, the camera to printed image workflow is so much more streamlined and powerful with digital. By almost any meaningful standard, digital technology is far superior for producing images. The only possible reason to use film today would be if doing so allowed the photographer to communicate visually more effectively that digital allows. That is not the case. I'm sure there are exceptions, but most of the film-based images I see people show off these days are crap. They are meaningless exercises in obsolete technology. There is rarely anything remarkable about the images themselves.  |
"The answer to crime is always cows." -Cheesebeast
|
Originally Posted By Bladeswitcher: So what? Photography isn't about gear. Photography is about images. Cameras are just tools you use to make images. Cameras come and go and photographers replace gear when more effective tools become available. Film and film cameras are inferior tools for making images. They suffer from all sorts of limitations when dealing with funky/mixed light. Those limitations impact the photographer's abilities to communicate visually. Digital largely eliminates so many of the issues that made film an imperfect media. Plus, the camera to printed image workflow is so much more streamlined and powerful with digital. By almost any meaningful standard, digital technology is far superior for producing images. The only possible reason to use film today would be if doing so allowed the photographer to communicate visually more effectively that digital allows. That is not the case. I'm sure there are exceptions, but most of the film-based images I see people show off these days are crap. They are meaningless exercises in obsolete technology. There is rarely anything remarkable about the images themselves. Not everyone is a pro photog. Not everyone is an artist. For some of us, photography can be an indulgence. A hobby. A way to reduce stress and enjoy an activity. For some of us, photography is a way to take a snapshot in time, of family and friends and places visited. Doesn't matter if it's with a cellphone or a digital camera system or an old film setup. That photo can be a craptastic snapshot. But it's still a way to capture future memories. If it triggers a fond memory 30 years from now and makes me smile... I really don't give a damn if someone else thinks it's craptastic, doesn't hear the story, or doesn't think is worthy. And that's OK. Not every photo has to be artwork, or have a purpose that other people think is worthy, or tell a story someone else wants to hear. If it has meaning or value to the person who took the shot and their family and friends, it's all that really matters. Signed - JAFFE, craptastic hobbyist snapshooter. YMMV, yada yada yada... |
This page intentionally left blank.
|
Originally Posted By JaxShooter: I was gonna share a pic of my "new" M6 but now I think I'll just go sulk in the corner. Share IMHO, I wouldn't mind seeing it, but I'm not OP. Here's my "new" Canonets.  And my older not-much-used F3HP kit.  |
This page intentionally left blank.
|
Originally Posted By JaxShooter: I was gonna share a pic of my "new" M6 but now I think I'll just go sulk in the corner. Originally Posted By JaxShooter: Originally Posted By Bladeswitcher: So what? Photography isn't about gear. Photography is about images. Cameras are just tools you use to make images. Cameras come and go and photographers replace gear when more effective tools become available. Film and film cameras are inferior tools for making images. They suffer from all sorts of limitations when dealing with funky/mixed light. Those limitations impact the photographer's abilities to communicate visually. Digital largely eliminates so many of the issues that made film an imperfect media. Plus, the camera to printed image workflow is so much more streamlined and powerful with digital. By almost any meaningful standard, digital technology is far superior for producing images. The only possible reason to use film today would be if doing so allowed the photographer to communicate visually more effectively that digital allows. That is not the case. I'm sure there are exceptions, but most of the film-based images I see people show off these days are crap. They are meaningless exercises in obsolete technology. There is rarely anything remarkable about the images themselves. Go ahead, if he wants to feel like he's better than us mere "film shooters" that's his problem |
|
Originally Posted By JAFFE: Share IMHO, I wouldn't mind seeing it, but I'm not OP. Here's my "new" Canonets. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/113647/DSC_0697_-_Copy-3417787.jpg And my older not-much-used F3HP kit. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/113647/Z50_0036_-_Copy-3474028.jpg Originally Posted By JAFFE: Originally Posted By JaxShooter: I was gonna share a pic of my "new" M6 but now I think I'll just go sulk in the corner. Share IMHO, I wouldn't mind seeing it, but I'm not OP. Here's my "new" Canonets. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/113647/DSC_0697_-_Copy-3417787.jpg And my older not-much-used F3HP kit. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/113647/Z50_0036_-_Copy-3474028.jpg Nice |
|
Originally Posted By UncleMeat: Digital does not hold it's value. True. I just purchased a minty Canon 1Ds MkII (fewer than 2000 shutter actuations) for $400 (and probably overpaid even at that price). That camera originally sold for $8000 in 2004 - which would be over $13,000 in today's dollars. Sixteen megapixels Not as bad as the depreciation you experienced with that early Kodak digital camera, but it amused me to finally acquire one of my dream cameras (20 years late). As for film . . .  How Expired Film Club Shot and Developed Film at The Jets Throwback Game on a 1960's Film Camera TL;DW UK photographer gets invited to shoot NY Jets game with vintage cameras. Throwback jerseys and film FTW. Developed, scanned, and posted during the game. Sample photos around the 5:10 mark. |
|
Anyone else trialing/ using some of the lesser expensive respooled film stocks? One I've tried is Elektra 100 (respooled Kodak Aerocolor IV). I have a roll of Chrome 100 (respooled Kodak cine Ektachrome) loaded I'll be trying next. Have a roll of UltraPan 400 at the developer. Have a couple rolls of UltraPan 200 and Kentmere 100 to try. Craptastic snapshots using the F3HP + Ai-S 28/2.8 with Elektra 100.    |
This page intentionally left blank.
|
Originally Posted By JAFFE: Share IMHO, I wouldn't mind seeing it, but I'm not OP. Here's my "new" Canonets. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/113647/DSC_0697_-_Copy-3417787.jpg And my older not-much-used F3HP kit. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/113647/Z50_0036_-_Copy-3474028.jpg Nice F3. I have a regular F3, not the HP. It's kind of my "special purpose" camera. I'm working on a series with expired film so that body is dedicated to that project. Here's a family photo I took last night. Attached File |
"The answer to crime is always cows." -Cheesebeast
|
Originally Posted By JaxShooter: Nice F3. I have a regular F3, not the HP. It's kind of my "special purpose" camera. I'm working on a series with expired film so that body is dedicated to that project. Here's a family photo I took last night. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/97217/IMG_2176_JPG-3483455.JPG Originally Posted By JaxShooter: Originally Posted By JAFFE: Share IMHO, I wouldn't mind seeing it, but I'm not OP. Here's my "new" Canonets. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/113647/DSC_0697_-_Copy-3417787.jpg And my older not-much-used F3HP kit. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/113647/Z50_0036_-_Copy-3474028.jpg Nice F3. I have a regular F3, not the HP. It's kind of my "special purpose" camera. I'm working on a series with expired film so that body is dedicated to that project. Here's a family photo I took last night. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/97217/IMG_2176_JPG-3483455.JPG Nice looking family. I had something come so getting a Leica M6 next week took a dump. I did get this though  $1700 with tax from Roberts Photo, in excellent condition. I sent it to DAG Camera to get it checked and the battery converted from the old mercury one to a modern 1. That'll run another $600 so I'll have $2300 in it. I'll get a 35mm and 90mm lens as soon as I get it back from KEH and have a decent Leica setup if the meter works in the M5. Hopefully I can swing a M6 around Xmas this year |
|
Originally Posted By JAFFE: Anyone else trialing/ using some of the lesser expensive respooled film stocks? One I've tried is Elektra 100 (respooled Kodak Aerocolor IV). I have a roll of Chrome 100 (respooled Kodak cine Ektachrome) loaded I'll be trying next. Have a roll of UltraPan 400 at the developer. Have a couple rolls of UltraPan 200 and Kentmere 100 to try. Craptastic snapshots using the F3HP + Ai-S 28/2.8 with Elektra 100. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/113647/Scan_Elektra100_2024_10_017__2__-_Copy-3483010.jpg https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/113647/Scan_Elektra100_2024_10_018__2__-_Copy-3483011.jpg https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/113647/Scan_Elektra100_2024_10_020__2__-_Copy-3483012.jpg Nice |