Kodak reports increasing professional film sales

[larrydressler]

<p>:) Dave..</p>

[Karim Ghantous]

<p>I don't know if this deserves its own thread or not so I'll post it here: interesting how film bypassed analogue video (though if you're staying with SD it has advantages...). Or maybe it isn't. I mean, we had this interesting period where video cameras got smaller and took VHS-C or 8mm tape. And editing was probably more troublesome than 8mm film and with crappy effects. Then we had floppy disk based Mavicas (cool but crap). All those formats, with the disadvantages of film but none of the advantages, are gone.</p>

<p>So basically if you want to match 16mm film you need 2K RAW - which for some stupid reason people have bypassed for fad cameras like the 5DII with its soft image and 4:2:0 H.264 mastering output. To match 35mm you need 4K+.</p>

<p>Super 35 (2-perf height) is about 5.7Mpx or a bit less (this accords with 135 format with its equivalent of 24Mpx or so on Ektar 100). RED EPIC (and therefore Scarlet-X) is 8.9Mpx (don't know if that is from 5K or 4K mode). But REDs are APS-C or equivalent.</p>

<p>For stills, MF film outperforms 80Mpx MF sensors (or matches them).</p>

<p>So there you go.</p>

[peterbcarter]

<p>It should have its own thread as it will derail this one. I am tempted to reply, but this is as far as it goes.</p>

[rossb]

<p>I don't know anything about video myself. Currently I do not own one. I suppose with a grand child on the way I should buy one but I think I will skip it and let my daughter and husband take care of that part. They have lots of gadgets for everything. <br>

Or maybe I could sell my D200 and DX lens and buy a fuji x10 for snapshots and video. That might work out. I hardly use the D200 anyway. The Fuji would make a handy travel camera and I could carry it around on my bicycle day trips. The D200 or F100 is to bulky to take with me however I did on Thanksgiving anyway. I carried the F100 on a 3 hr bike ride with two of my daughters. I took some photos of them, a barn and a cow. I saw two bald eagles in a tree but they were 300 yards away on private property. So I just squinted at them. </p>

[Ian Rance]

<p>I have been using a Nikon D7000 recently and whilst it is fun to use it will not replace film for me - but will be used where needed. I have just ordered 30 rolls of Kodak and Fuji to keep me going for a while.</p>

[rossb]

<p>30 rolls is a good chunk of film. That's about what I shoot in a year. </p>

[peterbcarter]

<p>Not really. I get about 25-30 rolls out of a 100', and I go through at least 2 a year (not including the 120).</p>

[Karim Ghantous]

<p>If I shot film for every assignment I had for this year, I estimate that I'd have used 50 36exp. rolls (this is in addition to personal work, experiments etc.).</p>

<p>Mind you, I don't make my living from photography so at most I'd have no more than two assignments in a month. If I were full time I'd no doubt be shooting 100 rolls a year or more... although it gets hard to estimate how much film you will shoot for non-existent projects!</p>

[robertgiles]

<p>I cannot find b&w film period in my town and Kodak film is nonexistent in Wal-mart, Target, Meijers, etc. There is a Murphy's Camera store 25 miles away and there isn't any discounts on anything there. Kodak has returned to their humble beginings, shoot the film and send in the camera. Are there any film makers in our neigboring countries south of the border? Why not? It couldn't possibly cost as much as in the USA. Just a thought. </p>

[david_burgess2]

<p>I get all b/w and most color film from BnH. I have used film since 1968, I do have Nikon digital but for me film will always be first. I also Ive noticed used film cameras are still selling well. C-41 at our Wallmart is bad, lots of trash at times. I taught my daughter to do all my b/w developing. I do not think I willever see the end of film, but others may know more.</p>