Zeiss-Ikon IS good news

[kosmoskatten]

This thread is turning into the good old "the end of film is near - isn't it" debate.

 

It wasn't the purpose of the thread, but since we are here I might chime in;

in our fairly busy lab/camera shop people keep asking "film is dead - right?"

"you aren't shifting any film cameras anymore - right?" ..."no one is using film

nowadays - right?". Partially wrong. The net drop in developing and printing of

regular film is 10-15% over the past two years - not annually, but altogether.

We are still quite busy with good ol' film. In our lousy line of business the

digital revolution is a shot in the foot; people take more pictures but develop

less. And they want the same quality they got from film but for a fraction of the

price, with the price being the number one consideration - not quality. (It's

digital - so there's no difference in quality they've been told, so why pay

more?)

 

Unfortunately what they hand in for printing doesn't look good, with the

exception of a few people who have taken the time to get the most out of their

cameras. Then the results range from acceptable to very good.

 

True is that over the past two three years digital has come to dominate

camera sales over here in Sweden with the major chains digital sales totalling

up to some 95% of cameras sold.

 

True is also that an increasing amount of amateur photographers are sick and

tired of the crappy output from their p&s or slr style hybrids and are turning

back to film. Honestly.

 

Most of them are amateurs with some dedication to photography and the type

that is fairly quality minded. The are not ready to jump into digital slr's as they

either can't afford it yet or are afraid they will become obsolete in a year and

have decided to hang onto their existing gear for the time being.

 

These people also recognize the advantage of the p&s digital cameras for the

casual-not-so-important snapshots and also realize that their good old SLR

still delivers the goods for the "serious" pictures. They know what they can get

with film.

 

Of course digital has made quite a few good old analogue labs close down,

that is sad but unfortunately just the way things are. There are not many labs

around anymore that can cater to all needs (professionals and amateurs

alike) and there is a degenerative development in the lab business with the

new mainstream digital printing booths and people who don't know what they

are doing behind the machinery.

 

As for me, I have realized what a huge advantage digital can be in some

situations and use digital and film side by side. However, it isn't the time saver

it's cracked up to be and I still prefer the look of film and the output from my

Leica R and my Hassy SWC. (Though I often resort to the hybrid solution;

scanning my 120 negs before printing). Straight prints from the Hassy and

scanned ones still look stunning whatever digital camera lurks around the

corner. I don't have the "rush rush" mentality either so I don't mind the small

wait what with developing and all.

 

Also I have used some high end digital SLR gear for some jobs and, sure it is

plenty good, but for most of what I do film is just fine. And color consistency

(calibration, calibration, calibration) throughout the chain in digital is a b*tch.

 

Also, we are still selling old Nikon FE's, FM2's, Canon AE1's and the likes to

people in all ages - some because they feel they want a last shot at film and

some because they love shooting B&W, the general concern is that film is on

the verge of becoming a thing of the past but as many have stated there are

millions and millions of film based cameras out there - they won't vanish over

night. Sure some of them might end their days in "lesser" developed

economies but there will be a market for film for many years to come in a

global perspective. Surely there will be less to choose from and it might even

be more expensive but even around here in Sweden which is to be

considered a well developed economy, with front line technology in many

areas, people still hand in 3-15 rolls of film from their last trip - together with a

cd with the digi shots. And if there would still be a few million cameras around

in India, South America or wherever ten years from now film could be

imported and I don't think Kodak or Fuji is considering dropping film from their

production line just yet - I have a sneaking suspicion they still make quite

some money from it.

 

I am not saying film will prevail forever but we won't get rid of it just that easily.

Not unless we all panic and scrap our cameras and go buy digital.

 

Gee I do wish digital was as good as film, with the same "look" and with less

hassle and affordable and practical and I'd dump my obsolete gear and be

happy ever after. But we aren't there just yet.

 

Keep shooting, and, start with me for writing this tedious contribution to a

never ending debate.

 

regards, Henke (15% digital 85% film, roughly)

 

 

[nathan_dandar]

I think those saying this is going to kill Leica should look at it in this way:

 

1. It's competition, Leica will respond back with improved gear, better marketing, lower prices, new innovations, all of the above, or something else entirely.. This is good!

 

2. If it DOES kill Leica, there's only one direction to point your fingers: At Leica. If they can't compete in a changing marketplace, that's their fault and their problem. They can't hide behind years of "we built/build good, specialty, legendary cameras so you can either buy what we offer at our high prices or forget it" anymore. If they want to stick around, they have to change as well. If they can't, they will die.. and I certainly won't be one sitting here crying.

[bob haight]

I only shoot film, Leicas only use film. The thing is I don't see anyone using anything but digital point and shots or SLRs at sporting events and press events. Somebody must be using film cameras, but who? The fact film manufacturers continue to scale down their offerings and maybe go out of the business entirely has got to mean something. B&H's ad in Shutterbug had pages of film cameras, now it all fits on a page or two at the back Certainly, a group of us will continue to shoot film but will we shoot enough to sustain the market. As Jay so aptly pointed out a few amateurs shooting a few rolls a week, here and there, cannot meet the mainstream demand necessary to sustain the film market. Everytime someone says all the poor folks in third world countries shoot film, someone here chimes in that they go there and it ain't so. They shoot digital too. Hopefully, film based imaging will continue for many years, but most folks do not think so.

[EricM]

"Gee I do wish digital was as good as film, with the same "look" and with less hassle and affordable and practical and I'd dump my obsolete gear and be happy ever after. But we aren't there just yet."

 

You just haven't bothered to learn how to treat it. Digital has the capability of emulating your favorite stock. Unlike film though, it doesn't work both ways.

 

The more i learn about photoshop and methods of removing information to take that 'look' away that you described, the more i get hooked on venturing into amazement and discovery. Why would i now limit my shot to film, and be stuck with PanF50 or NPZ 800, when i can make a single digital file look like any number of my favorite stocks? Very limiting film is.

[dan flanders]

If and when film ever dies it won't be due to the prevalence of dightal technology, it will be because of the scarcity of silver.

[ilkka_nissila]

Press & sports pros definitely shoot digital, they have a deadline for the next day's paper! And the quality from digital cameras at high iso values is also better than film.

 

Anything else, like magazine photography, where there is not such a rush, is different. I don't think there is any place you'd find a group of pros shooting film (because that would only happen at press events and they shoot digital), but individual photogs here and there.

 

I believe Nikon sells 400 000 film SLRS per year at the moment.

[svante.johansson]

Harry, as someone said; Do you think the Stone Age ended because they ran out of stone?

[kosmoskatten]

Eric:

But I do know how to treat digital... ...I do work with it on a professional basis.

Working with RAW files, preparing for printing/bookpublishing, scanning film

on an Imacon, doing reproductions of old pictures etc etc it's what I do.

And as for yourself I am amazed at what can be done (the touching up on old

photos have never been easier thanks to digital) but it is time consuming.

I mean like really. Some digital techniques I've picked up along the way do

work wonders but hey - it's the being stuck in front of the computer I don't

fancy. In a possibly not so distant future I might have to as there might be no

other option, but for the mean time I am happy with what I produce "straight"

from film - why should I bother to emulate it on the screen then? Waste of time.

To me that is. I don't want to have to put every single picture through the

computer, I like flipping through my prints.

 

When there is some editing to be done, that's when I turn on the computer.

When there is some small catalogue work to be done, that's where I turn

digital. If I shoot people, that's when I stick with film. Etc etc.

 

True that even in third world countries digital is growing, I have seen it too.

And most people I know have a cameraphone but still there are millions and

millions of film based cameras around and worldwide they still sell by the

millions annually. (Some one on photo.net posted some figures on that and it

didn't look to bad for film despite the fact that digital cameras have soared

beyond expectations.)

 

As for now there is something for everyone, maybe not everyone's budget -

but what else is new... I just like the seemingly endless options of today, even

with people considering film obsolete.

[jeremy_tok]

If anything, the new Zeiss-Ikon as well as all the Voigtländers and Epsons tell me that there IS a market for premium rangefinder cameras that can be served profitably. For years with the M6, Leica served this market seemingly begrudgingly, as if Leica can't pay the rent doing what it does.

 

With all these companies kicking Leica's ass, hopefully Leica will start trotting along again.