Going to go cold turkey... Ditching digital

Shoot both, they compliment each other. Unless your doing your own wet printing your film is going to become digital at some point anyway. These days you need at least 4x5 to beat digital, is that what you want to lug around?
Sounds to me you had the wrong digital equipment. I still shoot medium format, and always will. But if you want to do it justice develop your own film and at least do your own B&W wet printing. Invest in a good film scanner so you can send your color images to a pro lab for printing on conventional paper. It's going to get very expensive, be prepared to go the distance or stick with digital.

That Hexar AF is an outstanding walk around camera.Can't believe they were not more popular in the day. I can see how you miss that one.

I would say don't ditch ALL your digital gear, keep say one camera and sell the rest.
I am thinking of getting maybe a Fuji XT-10, to complement my 35mm cameras, i have never actually owned a DSLR or a Mirrorless Digital camera.

I sold my DSLR's after my daughter quit pitching fast pitch softball. Since I am no longer shooting sports I picked up a little Fujiflm X100s for family snapshots and Ebay photos. You might like something like that or you can do like most people and use your Smart Phone if you need digital.

Well, not returning to film because I never left. Have a DSLR someplace in a box, don't know where at the moment, we just moved. My total digital footprint now is a I-phone 6 and that's enough for what I want it for. Film cameras are all play toys I've accumulated over the years just because they were cheap and interesting, not near enough time to use them all, even a little. In my 69th year I'm about ready to dump about 90% of the whole smash. Just keep my OM and Pen stuff and 4X5 to dink around with because you can build most of what you need in 4X5.

Ditching digital cameras not always good thing. I just took solar eclipse pictures and posted it quick. But "ditching" is not bad either, because these days cameras like Fuji seems to depreciate in the price as fast as Canon consumer DSLRs models. Well, almost. My DSLR in particular works just as it was nine years ago, I won some prizes with it, was published, but now it costs under 200$ instead of above 1K$ then it was new. I paid for EOS300 300$ in 2002, sold it lens in 2012 for 70$ and I think camera itself is still worth on $30 in 2017.

Overpaying for nothing special TTL metering in M6 is often the case with "ditching digital" folks I have observed here and where. They are ditching it, but wants the digital camera perks. If you are ditching digital for real, get M4 or M2 and pay less for camera more for the lens to get better negatives.

If Leica is only to make the "ditch" louder, it might be cool for publicity on forums, but if RF isn't your thing, better results will be achievable with F series Nikon SLR and E series lens.
It is possible to take SLR like pictures with more expensive Leica RF, but it is less possible to take RF like pictures with cheaper SLRs....

Oh, Fuji X series cameras have nothing to do with RF, but X100 and Pro X are more like AF P&S with framelines in VF located at the camera's corner. So, this G2 might be closer. Do they still service them? Leica, they do.
If you are ditching working cameras, it is good idea to get something still working and still supported instead. Isn't it?

I don't know why you call it cold turkey. Sounds more like fresh turkey meat instead of imitation turkey made from soybean paste. I never try to convert people away from digital; but some of backpacking companions have dumped their DLSR's once they saw my prints after the trip. Yeah, I mostly shoot view cameras; but even my lil' handheld Fuji 6x9 RF will skunk digi by a country mile.

Ko.Fe. said:

Ditching digital cameras not always good thing. I just took solar eclipse pictures and posted it quick. But "ditching" is not bad either, because these days cameras like Fuji seems to depreciate in the price as fast as Canon consumer DSLRs models. Well, almost. My DSLR in particular works just as it was nine years ago, I won some prizes with it, was published, but now it costs under 200$ instead of above 1K$ then it was new. I paid for EOS300 300$ in 2002, sold it lens in 2012 for 70$ and I think camera itself is still worth on $30 in 2017.

Overpaying for nothing special TTL metering in M6 is often the case with "ditching digital" folks I have observed here and where. They are ditching it, but wants the digital camera perks. If you are ditching digital for real, get M4 or M2 and pay less for camera more for the lens to get better negatives.

If Leica is only to make the "ditch" louder, it might be cool for publicity on forums, but if RF isn't your thing, better results will be achievable with F series Nikon SLR and E series lens.
It is possible to take SLR like pictures with more expensive Leica RF, but it is less possible to take RF like pictures with cheaper SLRs....

Oh, Fuji X series cameras have nothing to do with RF, but X100 and Pro X are more like AF P&S with framelines in VF located at the camera's corner. So, this G2 might be closer. Do they still service them? Leica, they do.
If you are ditching working cameras, it is good idea to get something still working and still supported instead. Isn't it?

Click to expand...

EOS 300 35mm i assume, not digital? i was wondering more or less what it was worth today as i've got a 35mm '99 EOS 300, not worth a lot huh.

bimmey said:

That Hexar AF is an outstanding walk around camera.Can't believe they were not more popular in the day. I can see how you miss that one.

Click to expand...

I think mostly they were too expensive to appeal to the consumer market so therefore were not so popular. But they are a bit of a cult camera now. A high end point and shoot with superb optics and all manual capabilities. I paid $900 for mine in 1993, my partner at the time was a camera buff and he said "you have to buy this"! I think in thinking about the Leica I was looking for a good walk around street camera.

Minoltafan2904 said:

EOS 300 35mm i assume, not digital? i was wondering more or less what it was worth today as i've got a 35mm '99 EOS 300, not worth a lot huh.

Click to expand...

Film, yes. Battery (two) for it would be half price of the current value of this camera. And I can't find them cheap. But grips for AAA batteries are still available. But it will make such cute camera bulky. But it works with all EF Canon lenses.
It is too complicated, so I'm not using it. Purchased mint Nikon FG-20 and ... not using it, either. Went for street photography on previous weekend, took nothing but M3 DS and 40 Rokkor. It was all I need. Checked my contact prints yesterday, twenty one to print on 8x10.

I consider my Canon digital camera body as a useful accessory. I have lenses that will work on it (in crop mode) as well as my incredibly inexpensive Canon film bodies. If the Fuji stuff you have serves your needs for a digital "accessory" than I would suggest keeping some or all of it. The Fuji stuff looks to have a number of things going for it, including being quite compact.

My main 35mm cameras (Olympus OM and Kodak Retina IIIc) appeal to me more than the Canon bodies, so I mostly prefer to use them. And the 35mm film that comes out of them gives me higher "quality" results than even a modern full frame digital body, because I can optically enlarge negatives - and the qualities (and quality) that results from that process are more valuable to me than the qualities (and to a certain extent quality) that I can obtain with a digital file. Maybe it is the same for you.

There is no single answer.

I wouldn't recommend either. In today's world, I see no advantage to using a 35mm film cameras for anything other than fun. And since they're just for fun, I can't see any point in paying Leica or Contax money for a camera that's never going to produce the type of results you could get from a digital or medium format camera half their price. If you want one as a collector, then buy one. But if you want one as a photographer, you can do so much better, and for way less money.

I do love my 35mm film cameras though. I just took a pair of Pentax cameras with me to Kansas last weekend to film the eclipse (which got rained out). Still, I had a fun trip and got to shoot off a few rolls on things we passed by on our way up there and back. But if I ever ran across something that really caught my eye, I either pulled out my 4x5, or my DSLR (I took a lot of cameras with me). Having access to all of those different formats, I can't tell you how many times I've shot something beautiful with one of my 35mm cameras only to regret not using one of those higher resolution formats instead.

I'm not a big fan of digital cameras and really don't care for the look or process of pixels. That being said, there are many situations where a good DSLR just can't be beat. An eclipse is one of them. So are night scenes, sports, fast moving animals at a distance, spray and pray situations like a fashion shoot, air shows, auto races, professional type shoots on a strict budget/time line, etc. They're just too versatile not to own at least one if you consider yourself even a semi-serious photographer. Having said that, the DSLR is usually my last resort. I'll usually try to make it work with one of my film cameras if I can, simply because I love the look, feel, and process better. Darkrooms are so much more fun than Lightroom!

jim10219 said:

I'm not a big fan of digital cameras and really don't care for the look or process of pixels. That being said, there are many situations where a good DSLR just can't be beat. An eclipse is one of them. So are night scenes, sports, fast moving animals at a distance, spray and pray situations like a fashion shoot, air shows, auto races, professional type shoots on a strict budget/time line, etc. They're just too versatile not to own at least one if you consider yourself even a semi-serious photographer. Having said that, the DSLR is usually my last resort. I'll usually try to make it work with one of my film cameras if I can, simply because I love the look, feel, and process better. Darkrooms are so much more fun than Lightroom!

Click to expand...

Agreed! Long exposure and night shots are what I liked my X-T1 for. Plus sports equestrian events... I am not a pro photographer so it's all fun for me. Film is definitely more fun though! I would like to get better with long exposures on film. I liked the mirrorless, but I'm going to try full frame.and get a walk around 35mm.

Different formats render different looks in a print, and switching things up from time to time can really boost creativity. I admit I print 35mm only about once a year in the darkroom; but I take those images just as seriously as my 8X10 camera work. I obviously don't print them anywhere as big. But small prints can be lovely too. I shot the Nikon yesterday, and it was the ideal instrument for the location. The "best" camera is always the one you've actually have with you!

DREW WILEY said:

Different formats render different looks in a print, and switching things up from time to time can really boost creativity. I admit I print 35mm only about once a year in the darkroom; but I take those images just as seriously as my 8X10 camera work.

Click to expand...

I also like to switch from my 8x10 rectangle to my square medium format. It makes me compose differently and helps boost creativity. Of course shooting long 35mm or 6x9 would help too.

Meow7 said:

Hello again folks...

I have, maybe in an impulsive moment decided to sell all my digital gear (Fuji X-T1 and all assorted lenses and accessories) which I love but since I began shooting film again even the fabulousness of the Fuji just mostly underwhelms me. I am also selling the EOS1, the Super Fujica 6 and the Krasnogorsk K3 affectionately known as the Kalashnikov. I still have the GSW690II, GS645S and a Canon EOS 630. Oh and the Kodak 1A.

Since taking ALL my kit on a trip to the Olympic Penninsula I am worn out and geared out. Not all...

I'm looking at a Leica M6, a Konica Hexar RF ( I had a Hexar AF) or a Contax G2. The Leica will set me back far more than my sales intake. I am leaning toward the G2, it's light, has impeccable optics and can be either pretty auto or completely manual.

I'm looking for some input on these. I know the Leica is the way to go but...

Thanks
Adria

Click to expand...

The Kodak 1A is all you need.

That time when you were going to add an insightful philosophical comment then realised someone had bizarrely resurrected a three month old dead thread and there's probably nothing useful left to say.

I use a D700/D300s and a Nikon 28/105 for work that needs to be done quickly for web pictures etc, but for pleasure. leisure and satisfaction there is nothing to beat film and I am currently using a Minolta XM and XE1 with a Minolta MD 28/85 and a 24/35 You have to throttle back and THINK what you are doing when using film, it really is a tonic to keep your hand in and remind yourself what it's all about.