Film better not die anytime soon...

[gee-bug]

...because I just bought two more Leica lenses! Actually, traded my 75

Summilux for a minty 50 Summicron and a 28 Elmarit. Along with my 35lux, I

finally have the classic 28, 35, 50 combo. I've had a 50cron before, and swear

I'm not letting this one go. I'm not too familiar with the 28E, so would

welcome any comments/thoughts about it.

 

I had been seriously considering selling off all my Leica gear to get a D200 or

30D setup. I was really torturing myself over it. My wife said she could

practically see the angel and devil on my shoulders duking it out. The angel

representing Leica, and the devil, of course, digital.

 

An aside: at the recent Cherry Creek Arts Festival here in Denver, I was very

happy to see many film-only (including 35mm) photographers exhibiting. Is film

making a comeback in the fine art world? Maybe it never left, but I seem to

remember a lot of digital-only photogs at the same art show a couple years ago.

 

Thanks for reading, I'm giddy with new Leica lens excitement and just had to

share.

[tom leoni]

Yes, you and me both, my friend. This week I bought a f2 Summicron, a NOOKY set and a stupid $100 hood for my 50mm Elmar. A devil looking suspiciously like Oskar Barnak appeared in a dream and told me that the more I spend on his equipment, the more photogenic my circle in hell will be...

[nels]

"...the devil, of course, digital"

 

Of course.

 

"Is film making a comeback in the fine art world?"

 

What comeback? No one ever accepted digital images as fine art. The esteemed members of this prestigious forum are wise enough to know better.

[35mmdelux]

film never left fine art and digi is making headway. We don't all paint w/ the same oil/acrylics/brushes anyway.

 

In any case " Film better not die anytime soon..." was also asked in the late 19th century when 4x5 began to replace 8x10. It will become a niche market.

[Brad_]

<I>...and the devil, of course, digital.</I><P>

 

<a href="http://photoshopnews.com/2006/07/13/digital-craze-shutters-photo-lab/">

This (ex) lab manager</a> no doubt agrees with you.

[blowingsky]

Ken, I found the 28 Elmarit (3rd gen)to be an amazing lens. It is high contrast and sharp, of course, and is incredible with slide film in terms of color transmission. I've had to make adjustments in my M6 in-camera meter readings to allow for the wide view (as opposed to, say, the 50 'cron) as it takes in more areas containing light value.

 

Where it really shines is with B & W. I've used HP5, XP2 and the Kodak 400 (c-41). Have not used T-Max yet.

 

If you take care to keep the camera level, you might not even see distortion.

 

It is truly a gem.

[al_kaplan1]

Brad, if film is dead why do you keep haunting the Leica Forum? Go take another shower with the boys. Cool off. Snap a towel or two!

 

We all know that in a changing market some business will fall by the wayside. The drugstore no longer sells 122 Verichrome, or film packs either. I have no trouble finding sources of B&W film, paper and chemistry. Yeah, people bitched when Ansco replaced Ardura paper with Allura, then changed their corporate name to GAF. A lot of PJ's were upset when DuPont stopped making SX Pan, and a lot more people got upset when they stopped making Velour Black and Varilour paper. We survived. The world didn't end.

[Brad_]

<I>Brad, if film is dead why do you...</I><P>

 

Huh??? I've never said film was dead. Try and chill Al, that artery on your forhead is

pulsating again - it's a warning...

[calebcondit]

Nels, are you referencing digital printing or just digital capture. Because Wolfgang Tillmans' show at the Contemporary Museum in Chicago recently was full of digital prints, and the Colombia College Contemporary museum of Photography has many Digitally made prints. Saying something isn't accepted as art is silliness.

 

If Duchamp has a found urinal in a museum, what's stopping me from shooting with a webcam and printing on an office laser printer if I want? I don't normally confront people on Pnet, but this is too much. You may not like digital work, but it's not negated as a piece of art.

 

If you think archival is the only part of the equation that makes something valid to show in a museum, go look at paintings Jasper Johns made on newsprint with encaustic at the MOMA.

 

What validates something as a piece of art has been all mixed up in this post-post modern age, but you can't ignore those you don't agree with-they won't go away.

 

(By the way, I'm printing my scanned 4x5s right now on archival hannemuhle that will probably last longer than the contact prints I had made).

 

calebcondit.com

[jtk]

Don't bet on D200 or 30D now, they're about to be discontinued. IMO.

Look at Sony.

[nels]

"You may not like digital work, but it's not negated as a piece of art."

 

My wet-darkroom buddy Captain Al will perhaps explain better how passionately I hate digital. There's no two ways about it. Sorry.

[tom_madilao]

I was shooting both digital and B&W (film). One thing I found is that my investment in digital system now is worthless (after a couple of years), and on the other hand my Leica gears still commence high value. Recently I visited Tokyo, and I can ensure you that film is still alive and kicking. In most of the camera shops I visited I saw rows and rows of refrigerators containing films. Initially I have the urge to get the latest DSLR like D200 to upgrade my D100, but I think, as long as I have a scanner, I can still have digital images when needed.

[__jon__]

>Brad - , jul 14, 2006; 05:30 p.m.

 

How's that Leica treating you, Brad?

[pablito_pistola]

So, Tom, your "investment" in your digital equipment was not worth the photos you got

out of it? If you are concerned about resale value of digital equipment,

don't buy it. It WILL be worthless in a few years. It's a shame but that's the reality. I know

my brand new D200 will not be worth much in two years. But the photos I take with it will

be!

[andrew robertson]

"Don't bet on D200 or 30D now, they're about to be discontinued. IMO. Look at Sony."

 

Bwahahahahaha! Hoooo! (wipes away a tear).

 

No. Sony has a lot to prove before they can even be considered as competition to Nikon

and Canon. Their repair department has a terrible reputation. The system hasn't even hit

the store shelves yet in any meaningful way. Sony eliminated some of the unique lenses

that K-M had, frankly taking the system down a few notches in my opinion.

 

Now Pentax and Nikon are going to have to watch their backs, seeing as how they both

source their sensors (with a few exceptions on the Nikon side) from their friendly

competitor Sony. Canon and Olympusonic are free and clear, in the DSLR field anyway, as

they do not purchase Sony sensors.

[andrew robertson]

Speaking of worthless, have you folks priced a Nikon F(2,3,4) lately? Or how about a Contax

SLR?

 

The only cameras that will make you money are collectors items, or professional tools. They

are a terrible investment in and of themselves.

[randy_santos]

Thanks - this is funny- these threads are very entertaining.

I think most of you miss the point of everything.

There are much broader and interesting things all around us.

 

Film is alive- digital is here. Just make images that you enjoy and that satisfy you. Don't worry about the other guy. Show us your work instead of talkin about it all day.

 

Strange attitudes here, all photographers I know are cool and get along and encourage each other. mo matter what they're using.

 

None of the weirdness I see here. But keep it up- it's fum to read.

 

Have fun with your new Leitz lens.

[robert x]

I think that Al's problem is that he uses only a 15mm lens. It just isn't wide enough. I have

the 12mm version and am thinking of selling it on..make me an offer Al - I want to see more

of your arms in those shots. It's in mint condition........

 

;o)

 

Bob. x

[Uhooru]

"Don't bet on D200 or 30D now, they're about to be discontinued. IMO. Look at Sony."

 

Sheesh John, from what orafice did you pull that nonsense out of??? I suppose you have

some factual basis for this? (interpretation, highly unlikely, the question's almost rhetorical).

 

Pray enlighten us..

[al_kaplan1]

Sorry Robert! I tried the 12 a few years ago and didn't much care for it. I'm not even shooting much with the 15 these days. A lot of days I use my 21/3.4 SA, and sometimes I carry my Leic CL with the 40/2 Summicron. I even picked up a Voigtlander Vito CL with a 50/2.8 Color Skopar. The selenium meter still works! It was a couple of bucks at a yard sale complete with case, strap, and a little Vivitar flash.

 

I think the 15 might have just been a phase my sick mind was going through. ;-)

[harvey_edelstein1]

Ditto what Andrew R. said about Nikon manual focus film gear. Or for that matter Pentax MZ-s, and Nikon fm3a were discontinued and if you can find one of these new or like new demo it sells for more than they fetched a year ago. I have some Nikon gear in addition to my Leica stuff and the old F3hp sells real well and even the FM2n, Fe2 sell for a lot considering these are film manual focus cameras.

 

The film companies have continued to improve the films available and as far as some of my friends who went digital a few years are concerned they are tired of all the extra work to get good digital shots. Some of these guys are getting used nikon cameras because film is less dog work, more wide angle friendly, no cropping factor less computer time involved.

[larry_kincaid1]

Film has not been replaced. What has or is being quicly replaced are the labs that will produce prints from film the "old" way. All the printing is digital, meaning film is scanned and then digital printers are use to produce them. This includes my HP8750 inkjet printer via PS. What's causing the problem for me is whether to keep using film as a medium to capture the light when it has to be converted to a digital image anyway to print. I cannot complain about the digital printing process. I'm enjoying it and the new papers being produced for it. If a digital M8 comes along for $1000 that deserves the Leica M lenses and produces prints indistinguishable from those of film . . . who would not buy it? Doesn't mean I'd ever sell my M6, however, or stop using film. Don't blast me on the $1000 M8. I set that price simply to take money out of the discussion.

[brambor]

Did I just fortuitously avoid 'f vs d' threads or were we sort of doing well for a couple of months?

[EricM]

i'm sick of film. couldn't imagine ever putting a $15 cartridge into a camera and only getting 36 shots and then paying another $10 just to look at it. and then what? i have to scan it, and then clean it. and then what? i have crappy file full of noise and grain, and on a lucky day, 5 tonal ranges that can't stand being sharpened becasue of alaising. and then what? i have a pile of useless negatives or plastic boxes of slides. waste of time, environement and money. vroom vroom :) flame on....

[paul_chan4]

I was attending a small reception for a friend who was due to be relocated out of town. There was this young guy happily shooting away with a small digital p&s and he obliged with some grab shots to keep some good memories for the road. I requested for a 4R print from him and he asked for my email address! No, thank you. Yeah, film better stay around for awhile.