why won't film just die already?!

[pixmedic]

I was casually browsing the eBay and noticed that old film cameras are commanding ridiculous prices.
an old Olympus Muji II going for $200, Yashica T4 (zeiss) trading for $400...and the Contax T4 (my old love) going for $1500 to $2000.

Why are people still clinging on to film in the age of far better digital technology?

For me, I won't give up film because you can't get the luster and depth in the black with an ink jet print that you can with a silver oxide paper print. Look at an Ansel Adams, there is detail even in his darkest shadow, the black has a shine/shimmer, not flat like an ink jet.

Fair. But a lot of these film shooters are just using Fuji superia 400 in a old point and shoot camera

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk

Really? Point and shoot? The film shooters I know use regular SLRs or TLR like Rolleis. Do you have any actual statistics to support this assertion?

The Re-Emergence of the Instant Camera in Our Instagram World

 

[limr]

I was casually browsing the eBay and noticed that old film cameras are commanding ridiculous prices.
an old Olympus Muji II going for $200, Yashica T4 (zeiss) trading for $400...and the Contax T4 (my old love) going for $1500 to $2000.

Why are people still clinging on to film in the age of far better digital technology?

For me, I won't give up film because you can't get the luster and depth in the black with an ink jet print that you can with a silver oxide paper print. Look at an Ansel Adams, there is detail even in his darkest shadow, the black has a shine/shimmer, not flat like an ink jet.

Fair. But a lot of these film shooters are just using Fuji superia 400 in a old point and shoot camera

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk

Really? Point and shoot? The film shooters I know use regular SLRs or TLR like Rolleis. Do you have any actual statistics to support this assertion?

The Re-Emergence of the Instant Camera in Our Instagram World

While many instant cameras are just point-and-shoot, that's not what Sam and Terri were talking about.

As for the original assertion that we're all just shooting Superia in point-and-shoots, it's bollocks. These days, those of us who are still shooting film probably all have a point-and-shoot camera in our collection that we like to pull out once in a while for fun, but no, that's not all we're doing.

 

[pixmedic]

I was casually browsing the eBay and noticed that old film cameras are commanding ridiculous prices.
an old Olympus Muji II going for $200, Yashica T4 (zeiss) trading for $400...and the Contax T4 (my old love) going for $1500 to $2000.

Why are people still clinging on to film in the age of far better digital technology?

For me, I won't give up film because you can't get the luster and depth in the black with an ink jet print that you can with a silver oxide paper print. Look at an Ansel Adams, there is detail even in his darkest shadow, the black has a shine/shimmer, not flat like an ink jet.

Fair. But a lot of these film shooters are just using Fuji superia 400 in a old point and shoot camera

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk

Really? Point and shoot? The film shooters I know use regular SLRs or TLR like Rolleis. Do you have any actual statistics to support this assertion?

The Re-Emergence of the Instant Camera in Our Instagram World

While many instant cameras are just point-and-shoot, that's not what Sam and Terri were talking about.

As for the original assertion that we're all just shooting Superia in point-and-shoots, it's bollocks. These days, those of us who are still shooting film probably all have a point-and-shoot camera in our collection that we like to pull out once in a while for fun, but no, that's not all we're doing.

It was a joke. settle down

Sent from my LG-H872 using Tapatalk

 

[limr]

I was casually browsing the eBay and noticed that old film cameras are commanding ridiculous prices.
an old Olympus Muji II going for $200, Yashica T4 (zeiss) trading for $400...and the Contax T4 (my old love) going for $1500 to $2000.

Why are people still clinging on to film in the age of far better digital technology?

For me, I won't give up film because you can't get the luster and depth in the black with an ink jet print that you can with a silver oxide paper print. Look at an Ansel Adams, there is detail even in his darkest shadow, the black has a shine/shimmer, not flat like an ink jet.

Fair. But a lot of these film shooters are just using Fuji superia 400 in a old point and shoot camera

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk

Really? Point and shoot? The film shooters I know use regular SLRs or TLR like Rolleis. Do you have any actual statistics to support this assertion?

The Re-Emergence of the Instant Camera in Our Instagram World

While many instant cameras are just point-and-shoot, that's not what Sam and Terri were talking about.

As for the original assertion that we're all just shooting Superia in point-and-shoots, it's bollocks. These days, those of us who are still shooting film probably all have a point-and-shoot camera in our collection that we like to pull out once in a while for fun, but no, that's not all we're doing.

It was a joke. settle down

Sent from my LG-H872 using Tapatalk

Um...huh? I am settled. I am just responding first to your link and then to Sam's claim.

 

[terri]

Dunno how posting a link to an article without comment is supposed to induce a guffaw, but whatever.

Leo gets it. I simply wanted Sam to comment further on what I took to be an overly broad, almost dismissive, comment. He's the OP, after all.

 

[Solarflare]

I was casually browsing the eBay and noticed that old film cameras are commanding ridiculous prices.
an old Olympus Muji II going for $200, Yashica T4 (zeiss) trading for $400...and the Contax T4 (my old love) going for $1500 to $2000.

Why are people still clinging on to film in the age of far better digital technology?

Well, first of all: because. Surprisingly people dont actually need to justify what they're doing.

And why do you bother to browse for film cameras if you look down on people who use them, anyway ?

Meanwhile film has a nonlinear behavior towards light that cannot be fully emulated by digital sensors. For example digital sensors have a much harsher reaction towards overexposure than certain types of film.

And nobody can afford a digital camera that has a large enough sensor that they could compete in resolution with large format film cameras.

 

[chuasam]

Dunno how posting a link to an article without comment is supposed to induce a guffaw, but whatever.

Leo gets it. I simply wanted Sam to comment further on what I took to be an overly broad, almost dismissive, comment. He's the OP, after all.

full disclosure: I work in the Camera industry and I do not like something that I consider to be far far less profitable.
THERE!

 

[chuasam]

I was casually browsing the eBay and noticed that old film cameras are commanding ridiculous prices.
an old Olympus Muji II going for $200, Yashica T4 (zeiss) trading for $400...and the Contax T4 (my old love) going for $1500 to $2000.

Why are people still clinging on to film in the age of far better digital technology?

And why do you bother to browse for film cameras if you look down on people who use them, anyway ?

appraising some old gear

 

[480sparky]

.....Surprisingly people dont actually need to justify what they're doing.............

Especially to ONE PERSON who doesn't agree with them.

 

[terri]

I do not like something that I consider to be far far less profitable.

ewww. Spoken like nothing but a capitalist, not an artist.

 

[chuasam]

I do not like something that I consider to be far far less profitable.

ewww. Spoken like nothing but a capitalist, not an artist.

I ne’er claimed to be an artist

 

[ac12]

Digital cameras run out of battery power
Film cameras run out of film unless they were more modern ones which have all kinds of electric wizardry in them*

Just got back from a vacation with my mirrorless.

• My mirrorless Olympus E-M1 ran about 4 HOURS on a single battery. I needed THREE batteries to shoot a full day. And I had to charge three batteries each night, which meant either two chargers and two charging shifts, or three chargers.
  
• My dSLR could easily shoot 2 DAYS on one battery.
• My 35mm film SLR battery lasted over a year. And even if the meter went out, I could shoot full manual.
• My 6x6 does not use a battery.

While you got more functionality at each change in technology, the battery capacity did not keep up with the battery drain, especially the mirrorless.

So what is worse, poor battery life and having to charge every day, or carrying MANY rolls of film?

 

[waday]

My mirrorless Olympus E-M1 ran about 4 HOURS on a single battery. I needed THREE batteries to shoot a full day. And I had to charge three batteries each night, which meant either two chargers and two charging shifts, or three chargers.

I don't mean to change course, but... was this a photography vacation or a family vacation? When I was out in snowy 30-40 degF weather, shooting all day, I only used one-and-a-half batteries. I usually never have the camera on for longer than it needs to be; I turn it off when not using it. When on family vacations, I can go two days without having to charge it, using the camera when needed. Separately, when I was out on several hikes last year, out all day shooting, I never used more than a single battery to take hundreds of shots each day.

I'm not saying that mirrorless battery life isn't worse than DSLRs (because it is), I'm just surprised at the short-ish lengths you're getting compared to me?

 

[Derrel]

My mirrorless Olympus E-M1 ran about 4 HOURS on a single battery. I needed THREE batteries to shoot a full day. And I had to charge three batteries each night, which meant either two chargers and two charging shifts, or three chargers.

I don't mean to change course, but... was this a photography vacation or a family vacation? When I was out in snowy 30-40 degF weather, shooting all day, I only used one-and-a-half batteries. I usually never have the camera on for longer than it needs to be; I turn it off when not using it. When on family vacations, I can go two days without having to charge it, using the camera when needed. Separately, when I was out on several hikes last year, out all day shooting, I never used more than a single battery to take hundreds of shots each day.

I'm not saying that mirrorless battery life isn't worse than DSLRs (because it is), I'm just surprised at the short-ish lengths you're getting compared to me?

Waday: what brand and model of mirrorless camera were you using? That could play a big part in battery life. Do you have only an EVF as a viewfinder/composing system, or also an eyelevel or "optical" type of viewfinder option? Do you have one of the new Sony mirrorless cameras with the longer, higher-capoability batteries? Some models of mirrorless cameras do not seem to have very long battery life.

Back to film and why it still exists: NOBODY (not Nikon,not Canon, not Fuji,not Sony) has ever come close to Tri-X Pan in terms of beautiful B&W tonality. Does it have grain? Why yes, yes it does! Is it the highest-acutance film available? No, no it is not! It is the most-beautiful high-ISO B&W film? Yes, yes it is!

 

[ac12]

My mirrorless Olympus E-M1 ran about 4 HOURS on a single battery. I needed THREE batteries to shoot a full day. And I had to charge three batteries each night, which meant either two chargers and two charging shifts, or three chargers.

I don't mean to change course, but... was this a photography vacation or a family vacation? When I was out in snowy 30-40 degF weather, shooting all day, I only used one-and-a-half batteries. I usually never have the camera on for longer than it needs to be; I turn it off when not using it. When on family vacations, I can go two days without having to charge it, using the camera when needed. Separately, when I was out on several hikes last year, out all day shooting, I never used more than a single battery to take hundreds of shots each day.

I'm not saying that mirrorless battery life isn't worse than DSLRs (because it is), I'm just surprised at the short-ish lengths you're getting compared to me?

Both.
Just my wife and I. She enjoyed being inside the train car, I enjoyed being on the observation deck shooting.
Because interesting shots came FAST with little or no warning, I had to keep the camera ON, most of the time.
One thing about being in a train, you can't stop to take pictures. You gotta be ready to shoot, and shoot fast.

I think the E-M1-mk2 has a longer battery life, probably by using a larger battery.