Buying more cameras VS buying more film

[IloveTLRs]

I say buy both. Buy film to send a message that it's still in demand, and buy cameras to keep them shooting.

I like buying cameras, especially if it keeps them out of the hands of my local, unscrupulous dealers.

 

[removed account4]

buying flm / paper or cameras is the easy part ..
using them is the hard part ...

 

[ruilourosa]

the material object is part of every photographer fetishism. i own a awful number of cameras, nikon f90x (2), f2, f3, fm2, pentax me-super, spotmatic, lx, minox gt, olimpus mju, minolta rf himatic, lomo lca, horizon, hasselblad 500 & 501, fuji ga & gw, ikon zeiss 645,mamiya pro tl, holga, a toyo g and an old burke and james 8x10 and a lot of lenses for some cameras. do i need them all? no but i like my cameras and i feel better having them. On the rail is a ikon zeiss RF 35mm or a Leica M they are atractive objects and perfect tools. i do not own a digital camera...

film: i usually shoot a lot and buy a lot, usually foma, agfa and tri-x but also some color film! i have to feed the cameras.


do not worry if people are buying cameras, no one is asking how many brushes had picasso or how many graffiti paint cans has bansky or how many gallons of paint did seurat used

 

[ruilourosa]

joe lipka

you should carry a dark cloth changing bag!

i just own 15 film holders (4x5) and just 2 8x10"

 

[pentaxuser]

Well it seems you guys in the 1st world get everything much cheaper, $20? that's like R140, that'll probably go for R600 - R900* here (which is $85 - $128), so that gives me better understanding as to the why, they are dirt cheap there...

If it is any consolation I have never seen any decent cameras for the equivalent of $20 in the U.K. but then again I have never seen or been offered good enlargers or other good darkroom equipment which were otherwise going to a rubbish dump.

Bargains may be scarcer in the U.K. than the U.S.

pentaxuser

 

[eddym]

I always advised large format photographers that buying more film holders was more important than buying more lenses. This comes from the simple fact that having more opportunities to photograph (directly linked to the number of loaded film holders you carry with you) will make you a better photographer. Therefore, having more film available to you and the willingness to use the film will make you a better photographer. The only thing more equipment does for you is complicate the entire photographic process and will result in making fewer photographs.

Play it as you wish. This is how I see it.

Same view from here...

 

[mjs]

While there's always a certain attraction to attractive things (Gimme!!!), I try to remember that I'm a photographer, not a camera collector, and that for me a camera is a tool, not a precious object itself. This helps me to resist the continual urge (look! Shiny!!!) to acquire similar but slightly different tools suitable for any number of projects which I may or may not ever initiate.

In other words, I try hard to remember that every dollar I spend on shiny new widgets is a dollar I can't spend on film, paper, chemistry, or travel and sometimes I succeed and sometimes I don't. It doesn't help that my wife keeps bringing home these ancient (but so cool!) cameras, lenses, meters, filters, etc. she finds in her travels and I have to use them, if only to find out whether or not they work.

I'm grateful, though, that I didn't come to this understanding until after I had tried large format.

But it's hard. Sometimes very, very hard.

Good luck! Perhaps you'll find more willpower than I seem to have!

Mike

 

[Moopheus]

While there's always a certain attraction to attractive things (Gimme!!!), I try to remember that I'm a photographer, not a camera collector, and that for me a camera is a tool, not a precious object itself. .... It doesn't help that my wife keeps bringing home these ancient (but so cool!) cameras, lenses, meters, filters, etc. she finds in her travels and I have to use them, if only to find out whether or not they work.

That's the thing--I don't consider myself a collector. Most of the gear I have was acquired for use, not display. It's just that, as your wife is seeing, these days there's so much gear just floating around and piling up like snowdrifts that you can have six cameras before you even blink, and there's so much left over you're not keeping anyone else from having six cameras either. Spending money on these things isn't keeping me from using more film or paper.

And yes, it's true you don't really NEED much gear. A good photographer can make a good photo with any camera, but that doesn't mean there's no difference between cameras. The pictures I take with my 4x5 may not be artistically superior to the ones I get with my Diana, but they are going to be different.

 

[2F/2F]

I don't need five 35mm cameras...but it has helped having five or more on many occasions. Redundancy can be key if you are seriously using your equipment day in and day out in various situations, which I probably do at least twice a year when traveling by road. It sounds crazy, but having six 35mm SLR cameras with me on a trip comes quite in handy. I shoot three main ones (two old F-1s and a Nikon F), with 28, 50, and 135 lenses, all loaded with the same film.I keep these out of the case and within easy reach. However, I also keep a low-light body/lens combo (55mm f/1.2 loaded with Delta 3200), and a long telephoto body/lens (200mm f/2.8) loaded and in the case. I also keep a loaded AE-1P backup body in the case to quickly take the lens from a broken body without much wasted time. AE-1Ps weigh nothing, cost nothing, and can save the day if the situation arises (which it has, for me). In the situation I was in, my subjects were changing constantly, and so was the way I was shooting. I almost always find myself needing at the least an additional dedicated low light body, as my standard film is 400, but I use 3200 for low light. Fooling around with unloading film halfway through a roll is not something I want to do every time night time rolls around. I find it highly helpful to not have to change lenses all the damned time. Personally, I find having multiple camera bodies 100 times preferable to swapping lenses all the time.

I am pretty much set with two handfuls or so of 35mm cameras, and I do think that having any more might be far less important than film. However, I do think that I prefer to work with an extensive kit that is ready to use quickly and easily, and which will allow me to easily handle the loss of equipment due to its failure. Two of the great benefits of 35mm are the size and cost of the equipment. All of that equipment I mentioned fit into one case, with the exception of a loose Nikon F. Additionally, adding it up in my head, all together, the equipment cost me under $800, so it is super easy to justify the gluttony in that respect.

The only 35mm SLRs I have that I don't really use are my Spotmatic, my K1000, and my EOS 3. I got them just because they were dirt cheap. I got the Spotmatic and K1000 for $5 each (with lenses!) just to serve as a base for any interesting and cheap M42 or K mount lenses that might come my way. I got the EOS 3 for sharing lenses with digital equipment, since I have one really nice EOS lens. However, I find myself using it as rarely as I use digital, even though it is an outstanding camera.

 

[ntenny]

It doesn't help that my wife keeps bringing home these ancient (but so cool!) cameras, lenses, meters, filters, etc. she finds in her travels and I have to use them, if only to find out whether or not they work.

*boggle*

I hope you realise how lucky you are to have this "problem"!

-NT

 

[mhcfires]

*boggle*

I hope you realise how lucky you are to have this "problem"!

-NT

Most photographers have the problem of a spouse who is very critical of all that "stuff" coming into the house. I don't have a wife, but my GF does complain about my cameras, accuses me of being a hoarder. She also complains about the lack of space in the garage refrigerator, wants to know why I have to have so much film in the freezer. The freezer part is mostly film, with a bit of food. Of late, the film has really started to invade the food half. Polaroid/Fujiroid can not be frozen, so those boxes are in the fridge, I couldn't get all my ReadyLoads into the freezer, so they are in the fridge, and I still have about 12 4x5 Tri-X film packs. I have managed to keep film out of the wine cooler ( it is full of beer!)

 

[MattKing]

It occurs to me that at least part of the problem might be that for a lot of us, obtaining much of the inexpensive but desirable stuff used to take a lot of time, and involve a lot of waiting and saving.

I remember working (part time) for a good portion of a year to pay for my first medium format camera (a Mamiya C330 which I still have).

 

[Moopheus]

It occurs to me that at least part of the problem might be that for a lot of us, obtaining much of the inexpensive but desirable stuff used to take a lot of time, and involve a lot of waiting and saving.

Indeed, when I was a wee lad and desired an Olympus, there was no way I could pay for it. Now I can get one for a (relatively) trivial amount of money, because of increased earning power, depreciation of the gear, and decades of inflation.

 

[hpulley]

The funny thing is that for bodies at least, the top end models that I can finally afford I've found to have very nice bells and whistles but really I must admit that they don't take better pictures most of the time. In specialized ways they can have a higher shutter speed or something but really a lot of my buying I know is because I just want that body that I've always wanted. I really shouldn't have wanted it that badly it seems.

For glass I wish the stuff was even cheaper! There are still lenses that are too expensive even after waiting decades...

 

[ntenny]

I don't have a wife, but my GF does complain about my cameras, accuses me of being a hoarder.

Well, Mike, I gotta observe that every time I buy something with a part missing, you turn out to have one or two of them sitting in a back corner somewhere! So either I choose my purchases wisely or...well, rather than "hoarder" I might say you're "amply prepared for every eventuality".

My wife is actually pretty understanding, as long as I keep the camera gear from exploding all over the house. It helps if I provide the occasional displayable camera; old Voigtlaender folders look quite nice on a shelf, for instance.

-NT

 

[eddym]

Indeed, when I was a wee lad and desired an Olympus, there was no way I could pay for it. Now I can get one for a (relatively) trivial amount of money, because of increased earning power, depreciation of the gear, and decades of inflation.

...an Olympus??? When I was a wee lad and desired a candy bar, I had to beg my mother to buy me one! I had no idea what an "Olympus" was!

 

[dehk]

I have a camera problem. I can not stop buying thrift store and garage sale cameras. Usually they are cheaper than a roll of film.
I also have a lot of "dead format" cameras.
Get real I'm never going to use my Ansco Pioneer. But it came with a lot of flash bulbs that i gotta have for 10 bucks.
So is my Argus 75 for $5 dollars. and My Kodak Tourist II for 75 cents. I have to rescue them!!
But there are camera that I use from those sales. 9 dollar Petri 7S. 10 dollar Olympus Pen EE. 30 dollar Minolta 7000. I can not refuse. Once again, i have to rescue them....

 

[Moopheus]

...an Olympus??? When I was a wee lad and desired a candy bar,

I was taking photography classes at summer camp when I was 8 or 9, and the teacher had one. I was using an Argus, and my dad's old Silette.