Where is the future of Leica M body or film camera?

Discussion in 'Leica and Rangefinders' started by dan d. chang, Oct 12, 2005.

  1. read news about Agfa film will soon stop make film and went belly
    up. Kodak and Ilford have the same satuation. If we have digital M
    body match to film quality, who will buy Leica M body or other film
    camera? If we look at the dark room, traditional dark room is almost
    dead, enlarge paper will getting harder to find, chemical hazard is
    another prolem. digital dark room print quality is very near the
    traditional dark room print and give the advantage to retouch image
    in the computer.

    If in the future, someone can make high quality E-film to fit the
    charmber of the film camera, maybe these film cameras get second
    life, the digital waves come faster than I have expected
     
  2. As long as people enjoy it, someone will make it. It is not a prohibitively advanced
    technology. If eventually the very large companies stop providing it, there will certainly be a
    boutique industry around it. Either way, will still have many years before that might happen.
     
  3. Quick, Dan! Sell me your soon to be obsolete Leica gear at rediculously low prices before they become absolutely worthless! (The sky is falling. Oh my!)
     
  4. Dan, you should read the news more carefully. Agfa in fact had meetings with their bankers yesterday (Oct 11). The news was that the bank is expected to approve the split and sale of Agfa Photo to two different groups, one out of England that wants to continue the paper/film production, and a German entity (backed by Cerberus, a huge investment firm) that wants to continue production of their minilabs. (this can all be found at Forbes.com). As well Ilford has refinanced and is considered to be, for now anyways, on fairly solid ground. This is what I hate about the 'net...people who read one article, and then don't do any follow-up.
     
  5. Er, to sort of quote Fleetwood Mac: "Stop thinking about tomorrow" or
    something.

    In other words, instead of fretting about the week after next, or whenever, why
    don't you go out and take some photos? Film is still available as I write this.

    It's raining here.
     
  6. Given the 5D and that digital tech is becoming so good and less expensive, and that the
    demand for simple, involved, high performance photography will always be around, and
    that Zeiss has invested into this niche, a seamless digital M body will come about sooner
    or later- one that's a digital analog of the M7. It will be full-frame and how ever many
    megapixels is current, long life battery, and mega-storage. The tech will overcome any M
    mount/lens challenges.
     
  7. I think certain film will go away- maybe color/B&W slide (I hope I'm wrong). I think color/
    B&W print film will be around, hopefully ISO 100 (gotta figure it will), certainly ISO 400 and
    800.
     
  8. SCL

    SCL

    Ho hum. The umteenth post of boring speculation. I'll send you $1 USD and you send me in return all of your film based gear, then there will be no basis for unhappiness or anxiety.
     
  9. I stoped to process my own BW film because the sewer chemical contamination problem (maybe you do not care), I have to bring these wastes to place that collect chemical waste, this increases the cost, so I start to use C41 BW film, If good digital M or DSLR come out, I am ready to switch, I can still use my lenses but M or SLR body will be useless. So send me you $1 deposition and your address I will send you my M gears when the day comes.
     
  10. I don't care. I love buying and shooting the stuff. Fuji is coming out with new emulsions. I shoot digi too and don't care either what the future of the APS sensor is.
     
  11. Dan - I don't thonk you will be sending it as you will be pushing up daisies by then
     
  12. While I will continue to shoot film (probably for the rest of my life), I'm looking forward to the digital M and getting double duty from my lenses.
     
  13. Any misinformation/disinformation about Fuji or have they just disappeared altogether along with KonicaMinolta ?
     
  14. "who will buy Leica M body or other film camera?"

    People will still be buying M body. Maybe not film camera in general. Using a Leica is a very different experience and this is what attract most people. I'll use a Leica body as long as I can find film. I won't be using any other film camera as no other bring me this particular joy of shooting.
     
  15. Dan,

    I'll quite happily use my Leica "M" gear as long as I can obtain color film and a
    somewhat reliable color lab to process it. (The latter is getting harder to find all the
    time as my experience in New Jersey this last weekend will attest.)

    I'm learning more about scanning color media into digital all the time and see no
    need to pitch my Leica gear into the river Thames yet.

    -jb
     
  16. Fuji has a new film coming out soon.
     
  17. I guess that's why when wet plates took over the market from the cumbersome Daguerrotype process suddenly everybody stopped making oil paints, water colors, brushes, India ink, pen nibs, canvas, water color paper----Oh! Wait a minute! Isn't high quality water color paper favored by digital photographers for the base of their prints? Well over a century later, too!
     
  18. HEY DAN! I agree that film is obsolete and environmentally unfriendly, additionally it is sending a lot of precious silver down the sewer never to be recovered. As a tribute to the once vibrant film industry I have decided to set up a private museum of the cameras and lenses that made film famous, and make images of and by these lenses avaiable to users of these forums. Therefore I will offer you a handsome remuneration for your DR Summicron. Please let me know how much you will take for it. It should be worth at least fify or so bucks, but I just might go for more. Think about it! ( :^]>
     
  19. Particularly if it has the goggles with it!
     
  20. It should be obvious, but apparently is not here, that film will be harder and harder to find and develop. Who cares what Kodak just said, but what they did say was, that film sales are declining much more rapidly than they ever predicted. The assumption here is someone will pick up the market for film at some point, but the world wide demand will be so small and declining that the economies of scale necessary to maintain a factory and distribution system will not be feasible. Additionally, RF film photography should give way to digital RF bodies which will eliminate a small niche segment for film that still exists. Since computer interfacing is the prevalent mode in photography whether one shoots film or digital, the sale of scanners is a good barometer of the future of film use.
     
  21. Gee Dan, you're just a fountain of mis-information. B&W chemistry (dev, stop and fix) are relatively harmless and in fact when the dev and fix are put down the drain (in home user amounts) they actually tend to counteract each other. A typical drain cleaner or toilet bowl cleaner is more detrimental to the eco-system than B&W chemistry (not including the heavy metal toners such as selenium, which should be taken to a waste disposal facility). A few years back I attended a conference on just this...photo chemicals and their environmental impact. Here's an interestng fact...in a city of 500,000, a single large industrial chrome replating company (car bumpers and that sort of thing) was dumping more hazardous waste into the river than all the 1-hour labs in town combined, but because the photo labs are all at your local malls (and highly visible) they get picked on while the chrome replating shop (probably on the outskirts in some industrial area) isn't noticed.
     
  22. distribution=internet+FedEx; factory exists if enough demand worldwide.
     
  23. There is a chrome plating shop just several blocks down the street from where I live. The people that run it all have their teeth falling out. Even when this stuff goes through the sewage treatment plant, the heavy metals and other contaminants are still around. It is notable that medical imaging facilities employ special attachments to recover the silver washed out in film processing. I am not aware of any attempts to recover such contaminants from plating operations.
     
  24. BOB: Perhaps my irony was lost on you. Didn't you see my emoticon, particularly the frown?
     
  25. Film will be about for a long time (you can still get glass plates) and as for pollution the quantity of (fairly benign) chemicals involved in BW processing is minimal. As said before household cleaners etc. are much more hazardous especial considering thier universal use.

    Dan, keep your M stuff and get back to home BW processing!
     
  26. I'm with Dan C. and Bob H; I closed my studio, sold all the photo stuff and bought my first pottery wheel this morning...NOT.

    Regards,

    Frank M.
     
  27. rj

    rj

    My traditional dark room is almost dead? I hope it doesn't die soon, I'll have to get a crane and flatbed truck to get it to the cemetary.

    TROLL
     
  28. Sorry Dan F...I was addressing Dan C.
     
  29. Dan;some links for you---http://www.fotokemika.net http://www.mahn.net http://www.ilford.com Dan,stop listening to all the marketing hype to get you to go digital. If Kodak,or anyone else abandon the market,some one else who sees a chance to make a buck will step in to take their place. And film and it's chemistry is now a "mature" technology,it doesn't require a lot of research to bring new products to market.
     
  30. Semi-auto pistols "killed" revolvers as the standard law enforcement sidearm at least a decade ago, yet revolvers are still being made and the cartridges are still available. Centerfire arms "killed" cap-and-ball in the late 1800s, yet percussion caps, bullet molds and the specific type of powder they use is still available. Cap-and-ball "killed" flintlock muskets in the late 1700s/early 1800s yet replicas of them are still bought and shot by enthusiasts. Gunpowder "killed" the bow-and-arrow sometime after the reign of Elizabeth I, how hard is it to find one today? Ballpoint pens "killed" fountain pens in the 1950s yet fountain pens and ink are still made and sold. Color film "killed" b&w in the 1950s too. Just like TV "killed" the cinema, automatic transmissions "killed" the stick-shift, and we all know that horses became extinct after the Model T "killed" them. Yup, digital will kill film. No doubt about it. Better sell all those film cameras. Heck, why bother, they're already worthless. Just smelt 'em.
     
  31. As for enviromental hazard, some of the chemical is carcinogenic, I did reviewed the MSDS(material safty data sheet.
    Mr. Flander,

    I do enjoy argue with you about the DR optical QA is better then rigid, unfortunately, I can not convince myself to believe it. after a lots of shooting both DR/Rigid, I can not find any difference, it is not scientific, but I can not convice myself DR is better than Rigid. I do not want to carry extra weight, so rigid is the answer. I am trying to e-mail Mr. Erwin Putz ask him about this rumor.
     
  32. Ben Z , oct 12, 2005; 03:58 p.m.
    Heck, why bother, they're already worthless. Just smelt 'em.
    Thanks Ben
    I prefer to donote to Mr. Flander's museum when the date comes at least I can get some tax relief, right ? Mr. Flander?
     
  33. Dan:
    I love the idea of an Efilm that slots into the traditional 35mm camera chamber. I was just
    talking about it to a friend the other day thinking I was the only person in the world who
    had the idea!!!
    Where did you hear about it? Surely it is the way to go, instead of 'throwing the baby out
    with the bathwater' when you dispose of your entire camera just because the sensor is
    obsolete. Seb.
     
  34. Actually, Andrew, the Fleetwood Mac line is "DON'T stop thinking about tomorrow. It'll soon be here . . . sooner than you think." LOL
     
  35. The e-film idea has been around for a very long time and has been discarded as unworkable. Perhaps you'll see this when the memory cards, processors and support circuits are small enough to fit entirely in the film gate along with the sensor, the battery fits in the film chamber and a one-size-fits-all control panel connected wirelessly to the sensor unit can be attached to the tripod socket... but by then the film cameras still in working condition will be few.
     
  36. "Actually, Andrew, the Fleetwood Mac line is "DON'T stop thinking about
    tomorrow. It'll soon be here . . . sooner than you think."

    Yes, Bill!

    I knew what the line was but I was just trying to make the point, slightly
    humourously, that I don't think it's very productive to waste time worrying
    about what's going to happen the Leica M.

    My M3 is still going great guns and, anyway, a huge meteor is going to wipe
    us all out and then disonaurs can take over again and they can argue about
    digital versus film.
     
  37. from glass plate to film the overlap peroid was about 40 years, The film to digital transition will be shorter than that. yes you still can get glass plate, but who will use it? I was thinking get a few more Leicas M and nikon RF's but the digital waves scare me away, So I will just shoot film every day enjoy the availablity of these film, I will still buy lenses but film camera body? I do not know. perhaps I should just by a S3-2000 and use it everyday.
     
  38. SCL

    SCL

    Hey Dan - I like the deal you offered...tell me where to send the $1. :)
    I think you're overreacting to change, which we all occasionally do. I sold my stickshift roadster in 1966 and bought automatic transmission vehicles until 2002, when I bought a new roadster with stickshift...even though well over 95% of the US (where I live) had converted by now to automatic. The old technology had been improved, supported by several major manufacturers, and reintroduced to the public. My point is that if you want to go with popular demand, nobody will stop you. Film will be valued by proportionately few, but it won't disappear. Leica M bodies will be treasured for what they are, well constructed pieces of machinery which look nice and are ergonomically delightful to use. They won't be mainstream. "Silicon Film" company tried to deliver E-film to fit the M camera chamber and went bust after announcing this amazing product (I was on their waiting list). I bought some quality digital gear and more quality film gear and enjoy both...adaptability..........
     
  39. Dan, I'm afraid you misunderstand my DR/Rigid comparison. I am aware that for optical design purposes they are identical. The lens cells are interchangeable to the extent that ACTUAL focal lengths are properly matched to the focusing mount. This has nothing whatever to do with the corrections and remaining aberrations of the lens itself. It has only to do with the greater focusing accuracy required at at close-up ranges. I am anxious to learn of Mr Puts's position. Please advise me when you get his response. Thanks, DF
     
  40. If you are worried about flushing metals down the drain get a silvermagnet or put a piece of steele in your fixer container.

    XTOL is biodegradable. Avoid developers that use methol.



    feli
     
  41. Aren't they still shooting motion pictures on film? That's how this whole Leica thing got started anyway. We just might have to start buying 400 and 1,000 ft rolls, or get "short ends" from places like Studio Film Exchange.
     
  42. Stephen Lewis , oct 12, 2005; 06:06 p.m.
    Hey Dan - I like the deal you offered...tell me where to send the $1. :)
    Thanks Stephen, if you are live in NYC you can hand to me your $1 deposite :)
    I am thinking about Polaroid, when SX-70 came out, it is stylus, expensive, Polaroid still available, I do not know how long, but how many people still use it? My debate to myself is DO I need to continue to buy these expensive film camera, like Nikon SP, S3, Leica M2R for for daily use? at this point maybe not, I prefer to buy lens.

    Mr. Flander
    In theroretical, your point may stand, but guessing is just guessing, e-mail to Mr. Puts has been bounced back....
     
  43. www.filmemporium.com is the place to look for 35mm motion picture film.
     
  44. Al Kaplan , oct 12, 2005; 08:47 p.m.
    Aren't they still shooting motion pictures on film? That's how this whole Leica thing got started anyway. We just might have to start buying 400 and 1,000 ft rolls, or get "short ends" from places like Studio Film Exchange.

    Al
    motion picture move to digital too
     
  45. We still have Fuji who not only make film, but actually research and develop new film!

    I really like Natura and Fortia.
     
  46. Aren't they still shooting motion pictures on film?
    Most of them. For now. Maybe not forever.
    Doesn't matter anyway. Exposed and processed motion picture film has very poor archival properties.
     
  47. Selenium is not a heavy metal. It is not even a metal, but a non metal like Sulphur/Sulfur. It is necessary in small amounts in the diet of animals. The Selenium compounds we use at working concentration are toxic by ingestion, inhalation, and skin absorbtion, but for occasional non industrial use, diluted, I don't feel any guilt about it running away into the system.

    On the subject of M retirement and redundancy without compensation, yeah, I worry all the time; worry worry worry....
     
  48. rj

    rj

    "If in the future, someone can make high quality E-film to fit the charmber of the film camera,..." - And why not just make high quality film to fit into the chamber of a film camera?
     
  49. >Doesn't matter anyway. Exposed and processed motion picture film >has very poor archival properties.

    Uhhh, no. The new Estar based stocks from Kodak have a life expectancy of 500 years. It's the older stuff, in particular from the 70's, that's really bad. That and nitrate prints.

    feli
     
  50. 500 years sure beats CD's and DVD's as a secure storage solution by what? 495 years to 498 years? With a decently processed Eastman Double-X B&W emulsion on that base it'll outlast me for sure.
     
  51. Al, they are starting (on a very limited basis) to shoot movies digitally, with something called the "Viper". A lot of talent does not like the process, because it makes everyones skin look like hell. Movie sets also have to be built to a much higher standard.

    The biggest problem is data storage. We are talking over 100 Terabytes of storage, just for the raw footage of an average movie. Everyone is very, very, very nervous about longterm storage. After much debate, the most bullet proof solution anyone could come up with, was to take the final digital cut of the movie and generate multiple negatives on Estar based filmstock, using a laser filmrecorder. Copies of the negative are stored it several locations, including a saltmine in Nevada or Arizona, which can survive a nuke strike.

    feli
     
  52. "The new Estar based stocks from Kodak have a life expectancy of 500 years."

    Hahahahaha! I'll just hop in my time machine and check!

    This is as rich as inkjet prints that are supposed to last 100 years.
     
  53. Shizam, any year now they'll be recording and processing music digitally. Odds are the bits
    won't last more than a couple years though...
     
  54. it's kind of scary when you think that there is a copy of Deuce Bigalow 2 stored somewhere in the salt mines ...
     
  55. I think you can also look as this thing as a generational deal. Young folks just taking up photography are using digital. As the older folks using film tapers off, (a nice way to put it), use of film as a mode of capture will be extremely limited as to those of us who regularly enjoy BW television and fountain pens. While you will be able to get film during our lifetimes it will continue to decline in use and become limited and more expensive. Film based hardware (ie, Leica M cameras) will not hold the same allure to collectors, if there even is such a person nowadays under 60, once film is totally out of the mainstream.
     
  56. Why should I care what the allure of Leica is to collectors? Why should I care whether young whippersnappers don't know what film is?
     
  57. I must be losing my mind then, going totally bonkers, and just imagining all those young people who are taking film based B&W photography courses at the nearby Florida International University north campus. Their biggest complaint is how hard it is to schedule darkroom time.
     
  58. I know. I was touring a prep school in Massachusetts last week and was in awe (more than my son) of their darkroom and photography department. The whole place was buzzing with young kids.
     
  59. "The e-film idea has been around for a very long time and has been discarded as unworkable. Perhaps you'll see this when the memory cards, processors and support circuits are small enough to fit entirely in the film gate along with the sensor, the battery fits in the film chamber and a one-size-fits-all control panel connected wirelessly to the sensor unit can be attached to the tripod socket... but by then the film cameras still in working condition will be few."

    The Nikon D50/Rebel XT/*ist-D are are the same size as those companies' smallest film SLRs. The FF EOS 5D is the same size as an Elan 7. So all the necessary guts fit into the bodyshell of a standard film SLR, that much we already know for a fact. Fitting all of it into any pre-existing film SLR, such as Nikon F or a Leicaflex SL, might not be possible by preserving the film-use capability, but it should definitely be feasible if the sprocket wheel, takeup spool and rewind fork were removed, the back door would have the pressure-plate removed and a section cut out for the fitting of the sensor and LCD and then permanently re-attached, or perhaps the whole affair would involve a molded polycarbonate replacement back complete with the chip and LCD. The film opening might need to be enlarged to fit a FF chip. None of this would be beyond the capabilities of any competent camera repair guy as long as the digital components were modular. It would provide an additional outlet for the component manufacturers, renewed business for the camera repair shops, and wouldn't require extensive R&D.
     
  60. ..."None of this would be beyond the capabilities of any competent camera repair guy as long as the digital components were modular."...

    yes that is where the sticking point is.
     
  61. At least a couple of times a week I'll get involved in a conversation with a student at Starbucks who happened to notice my Leicas and/or Bessa. Sure, it's largely taught as "art" these days, but film based B&W photography seems to have a growing popularity amongst art students. I seem to meet far more young women this way than men. I should ask what the split actually is in class. Hell, perhaps I should just consider dating 19 year olds again...LOL
     
  62. " ...None of this would be beyond the capabilities of any competent camera repair guy "...
    <P>
    Might be beyond the capabilities ot the camera owner to pay for these modifications (different for each camera model, plus new components) vs. the automated manufacture of a new DSLR.
     
  63. "yes that is where the sticking point is."

    The components would need to be set in sub-assemblies with adjustable mounting hardware, to be connected with flexible conduits. The camera repair guys would only need to fit them in into the bodies and connect them. Not really all that daunting considering the engineering and electronic talent there is in the world.
     
  64. Actually I wouldn't think it would be more difficult than the problem faced by makers of aftermarket car stereos...they don't require the installer to know anything about audio electronics. Back when air conditioning and cruise-control were staring to become popular, a number of generic aftermarket units were produced that could be retrofitted to existing cars with "intallation kits" that were adaptable to most models, and that was a limited market too.
     
  65. You might want to spend $100 to put cruise control on a car worth $1000 but if you were spending $1000 to retrofit a $100 camera it's more likely you'd just get a new camera.
     
  66. Didn't we already cover this "film is dead" nonsense in another place? Digital motion picture recording information is here = http://www.dalsa.com/dc/index.asp
     
  67. I am satisfied to use film for my personal needs for the rest of my days, but it is convenient to use digital for some of my business and correspondence needs. It would seem logical the that there is room in the film chambers of my M6 for the batteries and all the electronic ganglia to support a substitute back door. A fold-out display such as that on my old Oly 5050, and a dial for setting the ISO would be nice; but I could do without the other bells and whistles that clutter up the Oly. The whole justification would be to employ a lifetime collection of LTM and Bayonet lenses. I believe that most of the agitators for the digital M are looking only for these features and any further blandishments would be extravagant.
     
  68. Film is/will be Art. Digital for the Wallmart dudes who just follow the lastest fashion in anything.
     
  69. Lets all be honest in the future,if not now, the dude shooting film is going to be the man of Art. If we are talking BW we are talking rocket fuel.

    Live with it dudes because that's the way the cookie crumbles.
     
  70. Should i buy that digital print or that High Art Silver Print.Hmm what will be worth the most as time goes by.

    Guess.
     
  71. Am M mount digital body would be nice to have for the occasional quick PR gig I still do. It sure wouldn't have to be Leica quality, though, and I wouldn't pay Leica prices. A Bessa R2-Digital at five or six hundred? I'd buy one tomorrow! We've already reached the point where the "art market" will pay a major premium for silver gelatin prints.
     
  72. "Should i buy that digital print or that High Art Silver Print.Hmm what will be worth the
    most as time goes by.

    Guess."

    OK, I'll take a guess on this.

    If the digital print is a limited edition by, say, William Klein, and the "High Art Silver Print"
    is
    by, say, Al Kaplan, I have no doubt that the digital print will have a much higher value
    (whether today or in the year2105).
     
  73. Maybe he can get away with it because he's William Klein. =)
     
  74. Sure, the price comparison would have to be between prints by the same photographer with different printing methods. At this point, though, Al Kaplan ink jet prints should be worth a fortune because of scarcity...LOL. Jeepers, maybe I should auction off the three or four that actually exist! Sign 'em and put 'em on Ebay!
     
  75. Maybe he can get away with it because he's William Klein.
    Bingo. Though I wouldn't characterize it as getting away with it...
     
  76. "the price comparison would have to be between prints by the same photographer with
    different printing methods"

    If you're talking about contemporary prints by a currently working photographer the
    medium is irrelevant - that's the point. There are many prints which are available only in
    digital form, so comparison isn't an issue. I'm not sure why young guys like you Al are so
    conservative about this - why not take a lead from the older and more experienced guys
    like
    Klein and Eggleston?
     
  77. well, getting a high price for it, anyway. in cases where a print is available as both digital
    and wet prints, i can imagine that for now, the digital print may be priced lower, but in the
    future people look back and chuckle at how silly it was that the better print cost less, or
    something like that. stuff like that always happens.
     
  78. Thanks, Doris! Flattery works! As long as the Social Security checks keep coming I don't really have to worry about selling prints. I'll be 63 on November ninth, the kids are grown, and the house is paid for free and clear. I'm having fun though. I probably should follow up on some of these offers to do a gallery show but I'm lazy.

    I'm old enough to remember the pleasure of printing on DuPont Varilour, the sadness when DuPont stopped making photo papers. Hell, I even remember when DuPont introduced Varilour to replace Varigam, which was the original VC paper. I still print with Varilour filters.
     
  79. "in cases where a print is available as both digital and wet prints, i can imagine that for
    now, the digital print may be priced lower"

    The artist dictates the medium, not the buyer - so the digi v wet argument is
    redundant (outside of the small-time/small-town crafts market) with current work. If the
    work is strong enough it'll sell and it doesn't matter if
    you use your own blood (Marc Quinn), elephant excrement (Chris
    Ofili), or your soiled underwear (Tracy Emin).
     
  80. (outside of the small-time/small-town crafts market)
    Isn't that what we're mainly dealing with here? Unusual materials sell much better in big cities, AFAIK.
     
  81. Doris, please, try and resist staying on-topic and share more details about your personal life
    and what pleases you. I need to know more!
     
  82. Film is dead. Long live film!
     
  83. "Isn't that what we're mainly dealing with here?"

    Aizan, apparently not. Michael used the term "High Art Silver Print", and Al referred to the
    "art market" rather than the crafts market.

    "share more details about your personal life and what pleases you"

    Brad, it would be a pleasure. In an ever changing (and sometimes combined) order, drugs,
    dancing, and (mutually) degrading sex......
     
  84. Hmmm, that was considerably more information than I needed.
     
  85. "You might want to spend $100 to put cruise control on a car worth $1000 but if you were spending $1000 to retrofit a $100 camera it's more likely you'd just get a new camera."

    Perhaps that's how some people might think, and for those people there would always be the option of buying a new dSLR. But I'll bet there are folks who would happily pay even $3000 to get a Leicaflex SL/SL2 converted to a full-frame digital rather than buying an R9 for $2500 and a 1.4x-crop DMR for additional $6500, or even $3300 for a 5D and another $100 for an adaptor where they've got to stop the lens down manually and maybe file off the back of a couple lenses to get them to mount. I'd pay $3000 to convert my Nikon F to a full-frame dig before I'd spend $1000 on a 1.5x D70S where I've got to hand-meter everything, let alone the cost of a 1.5x D2X that's as big as a hardback dictionary.
     
  86. Wow, Doris! You and I have more in common than I could ever imagine, life-stylewise! Maybe we could "do it in the street" and invite Brad along with his digital point and shoot to convert the reality of our love and pasion into moody dark murkiness with metallic looking highlights.
     
  87. What the hell! The obvious next step is to ask if there are any women reading this who'd like to get in on my sef-portrait series while joining me in some degrading sex. We could easily pose it so your face doesn't show. Then we wouldn't have to invite Brad ;-)
     
  88. This is turning into a Polish Standup
     
  89. Or a Dutch Sit-com.
     
  90. The End Of The Argument-How many motion pictures do you see that are shot on digital? Distributed on digital? Kodak basically owns Hollywood,and they continue to spend millions on film research,for HollyWood use. And that research will trickle doiwn to still photography. Same story goes for Fuji,who supply most of the motion picture film for the rest of the world.
     
  91. "If the work is strong enough it'll sell and it doesn't matter if you use your own blood (Marc Quinn), elephant excrement (Chris Ofili), or your soiled underwear (Tracy Emin)."

    A bunch of budding Michaelangelos. Buth I think then excrement has more talent than the "artist" in these cases. Apparently, in some circles, there is a thin line between art and crap. :)
     
  92. A hand created silver image or a print from a letterhead printer.

    Hmm what should i spend my money on. Tough choice.
     
  93. Yep they can also print letterheads.
     
  94. Your fine art print and letterhead to match. Go for it duds cheaper by the dozen.
     
  95. Water is the most hazardous chemical used in film processing. Lots of people drown in it eavery year!

    Robert
     

Share This Page

1111