Is the market for used LF cameras growing?

Discussion in 'Large Format Cameras and Accessories' started by Mainecoonmaniac, Dec 8, 2017.

  1. brent8927

    brent8927 Subscriber

    Messages:
    379
    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2005
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I also have the digital revolution to thank, though I bought my 501c around 2003-4, which if I recall was still really early in the shift for professionals (especially wedding photographers) from film to digital, so I don't think I had the full benefit.
     
  2. brent8927

    brent8927 Subscriber

    Messages:
    379
    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2005
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    It's based on what others have told me about their personal experiences. I've not run into any photographer who argued digital was superior to 4x5, but I suppose it's inevitable it will catch up someday. I don't talk with many photographers (non of my friends are really into it), so it's possible that day is here and I'm just not aware of it.

    Either way, in my experience digital B&W can't compare at to B&W film--whether scanned or printed in a dark room. Color seems to be a different story, though I do feel color film also adds a much a nicer quality to colors than digital. For whatever reason the trend in a lot of the digital photography I see today is ultra-contrasty ultra-sharp appearing images. I guess maybe it's similar to the fad with Velvia--personally I was/still am more into the look of prints from Portra and Ektar.
     
  3. jnanian

    jnanian Advertiser Advertiser

    Messages:
    23,177
    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2003
    Location:
    paswonquitte
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Groups:
    im sorry but there is so much that is wrong with this statement ,, sure the technology of "digital" will catch up to the resolution of film
    but that isnt what photography is. at a certain technical " how big can i blow this up" argument i guess it is important. i have a local colleague who
    stitches together enormous digital files to get even bigger digital files for trade show stuff for clients who rely on "details" but i think in the end it is all
    smoke and mirrors because you can see one thing and your brain tells you its another. the classic example of this is
    that dumb email that went around IDK 10 years ago that was all completely mispelled and it said something like " if you can read this, it is kind of funny
    cause there isn't one word even remotely spelled correctly " and it was like 2 paragraphs long ..
    personally i couldn't care less if digital can be as resolved as a 11x14 chrome / negative image .. i will never own a computer as long as i live
    that has that much memory or hard drive / scratch disk space .. and what is the point, to take photographs of your puppy or cat doing something "cute"
    or a sunset ? obviously these are meaningful photographs to a lot of people and i mean no disrespect .. in my lifetime i have been around 3 puppies
    and a gaggle of kittens and the more sunsets and rainbows the better, it shows we are still on this planet ... but as far as i am concerned
    puppies and unicorns farting rainbows isnt' really what photography is about.
    its about something that cant' be explained. and you can do that with a scrap of paper and some light.
     
  4. faberryman

    faberryman Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,241
    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2016
    Location:
    Nashville
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    And your point is?

    Reminds me of that Barbara Streisand song: "Feelings, nothing but feelings..."
     
  5. RalphLambrecht

    RalphLambrecht Subscriber

    Messages:
    9,923
    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2003
    Location:
    K,Germany
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    couldn't agree more.
     
  6. brent8927

    brent8927 Subscriber

    Messages:
    379
    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2005
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I thought I more or less said the exact thing you just said, so I'm not sure what was wrong with my statement. I agree photography is much deeper than sunsets and other "snapshots." My photos all have a story behind them--it may be a story only I know, but it's a story nonetheless.

    My point was to answer another poster. I don't understand why that offends you, but if it did, I apologize. And as I said above, photography, to me, is absolutely about feelings and emotion. Isn't all art?
     
  7. Patrick Robert James

    Patrick Robert James Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,352
    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2012
    Shooter:
    Med. Format Pan
    A lot of it has to do with the fact that people who bought their LF gear over the last decade have no desire to sell it. They will own it the rest of their lives which creates an issue with supply, especially since they cherry picked the best gear because they could at the time. The good stuff was only a couple bucks more than the crap. Now that the good used gear has been taken, you are only seeing the crap, more or less.

    Any yes there are advantages to film over digital, but I don't think there is a point to discussing it anymore. People are going to go with their egos and see what they want to see.
     
  8. wyofilm

    wyofilm Subscriber

    Messages:
    82
    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2017
    Location:
    Wyoming
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Regarding LF photography there is an amazingly large number of Youtube channels dedicated to a thoroughly un-modern subject. Usually (though not exclusively), their workflow is hybrid, where LF negatives are scanned. Then there are other, more general photography channels where to keep content fresh LF cameras are brought in. The LF channels are mostly relatively small in viewership (some are pretty big); whereas, some of the more general photography channels are pretty large. I would say that there is an increased exposure (pun, no pun?!) to LF. At least on YouTube the LF crowd are mostly under 35 yo.

    Have these channels caused an uptick in LF photography? Easy to imagine, yes. For sure the intrepid cameras are getting good "air' time.
     
  9. ic-racer

    ic-racer Member

    Messages:
    8,186
    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2007
    Location:
    Midwest USA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Why don't people take their digital discussions elsewhere?
     
  10. Alan Gales

    Alan Gales Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,712
    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2009
    Location:
    St. Louis, M
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    Ian, I tried to google the article I read but I couldn't find it. It wasn't Luminous Landscape but by someone who actually liked film. They tested the IQ180 back (80 megapixels) to 8x10. The Phase One back fell short but not by far in their tests. In real world shooting the limiting factors with 8x10 being vibration from wind and diffraction from stopping the lens down too far sometimes.

    Like I said. I have never used a 100mp back. It would be interesting to compare it to my 8x10 but I'd still keep the 8x10. I can't afford the $30,000 for the digital back and even if I could I don't think I would enjoy the process. I'd hate to have to tether it to a laptop just to see the effects of my camera movements.
     
  11. If I were interested in digital backs, a digital Hasselblad back costs $60,000US which I neither afford nor justify. So why waste my time looking at digital 4"x5" much less a 8"x10" digital back.
     
  12. Alan Gales

    Alan Gales Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,712
    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2009
    Location:
    St. Louis, M
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    It's just a medium format digital back. You can put it on Hasselblad or a large format camera. I doubt they would ever make a sensor as big as 4x5 or 8x10. The medium format digital backs are not even as large as 6x6 film.

    I'll never get one either. I just find it interesting. Must be the nerd in me! :smile:
     
  13. It would have to be 6x6 and affordable before I would even start getting interested. I stopped following the new Hasselblad releases years ago.
     
  14. Sponsored Ad
  15. fdonadio

    fdonadio Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,126
    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2015
    Location:
    Atibaia, SP - Brazil
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I don’t think it’s feasible to make a sensor that big. And, even if it is, the price will be so high that only a handful will justify such an “investment”.

    One interesting thing I saw is adapting a scanner to the back of a view camera. Works great for “reproduction” work and still life or product shots. Also makes for some “creative” stuff with moving subjects.
     
  16. gracjan

    gracjan Subscriber

    Messages:
    15
    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Location:
    Poland
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I bet that's because nobody calls that a "digital photography" any longer. Digital is just a "photography" now, and it's rather us here who are distinguished by the rest of the world with a "classic" or "analog" attributes.
     
  17. OP
    OP
    Mainecoonmaniac

    Mainecoonmaniac Subscriber

    Messages:
    4,700
    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2009
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I hate to admit this, but in the earlier days digital photography, camera manufacturers made improvements to dynamic range and number of pixels. Now, my old iphone 4S does a pretty good job and I'm pretty happy with quick and dirty photos. I think a lot of photographers are really tired of the constant upgrading just for megapixels. As photographers shoot more megapixels, it opens up a whole can of worms like storing the RAW images and having the computer power to process the images. As you can see, with 40MP, a person can easily print a 16x20. The rest is just excess pixels unless you want to crop into the image.
    https://improvephotography.com/34880/how-big-print-with-megapixel-camera/

    I shoot both digital and analog. I look forward to processing my film whereas I dread doing post-production with my digital shots.
     
  18. jnanian

    jnanian Advertiser Advertiser

    Messages:
    23,177
    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2003
    Location:
    paswonquitte
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Groups:
    hasselblad might not make one, but there is a guy in california
    who makes them and is bringing them to market .. eventually
    can't remember his name thought. and they aren't for wallet-lightweights.
     
  19. OP
    OP
    Mainecoonmaniac

    Mainecoonmaniac Subscriber

    Messages:
    4,700
    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2009
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Now, this is interesting.
    https://www.megapixelsdigital.com/digital-backs-on-wooden-field-cameras-fun-in-the-sun/

    These digital backs are for rich cats. But take a look at the digital and analog comparison. If you shoot digital and your highlights are blown out, there is very little chance for recovery. If you shoot BW neg film, a photographer can recover highlights in the darkroom or event through scanning if your highlights aren't "bullet proof".
     
  20. Yet another reason to shoot film.
     
  21. Chan Tran

    Chan Tran Member

    Messages:
    3,075
    Joined:
    May 10, 2006
    Location:
    Aurora, IL
    Shooter:
    35mm
    I don't know if the market is growing but shooting LF makes a lot more sense now than before.
     
  22. OP
    OP
    Mainecoonmaniac

    Mainecoonmaniac Subscriber

    Messages:
    4,700
    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2009
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    So true. But realistically, I think shooting film isn't always practical. I have shot commercial work since the film days, but I'm sure it's all digital. I'm sure all commercial photographers have probably ditched their LF cameras. I was able to pick up a Sinar 8x10 P for about $600. I'm sure it was a commercial shooter that couldn't use it anymore. Back then, I saw few on eBay. Now, they're harder to find. But that does not necessarily mean that there's a demand or there's a shortage either.
     
  23. fdonadio

    fdonadio Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,126
    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2015
    Location:
    Atibaia, SP - Brazil
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    It depends on so many factors. I shoot film, but I am a hobbyist. Hobbies are supposed to cost something and, in the end, it's not that expensive for me. I shoot 35mm, medium format and 4x5 — the latter mostly in black and white.

    I don't see photojournalists ever getting back to film, as much as I don't see event, wedding and schoolbook photographers going back either. It's impractical and way too costly for anyone to be competitive in the market. For editorial work, film is feasible, but not always desired — especially by the editors, now used to check the results immediately.

    For mostly everything else — "art", landscape, portraiture, architecture, etc. — film is a realistic option.

    No need to say, but this is my opinion. :wink:


    Cheers,
    Flavio
     
  24. OP
    OP
    Mainecoonmaniac

    Mainecoonmaniac Subscriber

    Messages:
    4,700
    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2009
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    My opinion too. That's why my opinion is analog photography has now matured into a fine art process like etching and lithography. That's fine by me!
     
  25. Andrew O'Neill

    Andrew O'Neill Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,325
    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2004
    Location:
    Coquitlam,BC Canada
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    If I had 60K (77K CDN....gulp) to get rid of, I'd throw it at large format film. That should keep me happy for quite a while...
     
  26. Shooting digital is practical for remote sensing from spacecraft which is what it was originally designed.