How cold that be? Film is not dying!
How cold that be? Film is not dying!You must be across the pond. I haven't seen film in CVS or Walgreens in years.
How cold that be? Film is not dying!
Film is certainly not dying. You can buy film in any corner drugstore or one of the hundreds of camera shops in any town. And get it processed at the supermarket, too. And pros are lining up to buy $10,000 to $50,000 film camera systems right now. Color labs are standing by to turn around 1-hour snip tests in every major city, art directors and editors have their light tables waiting for the messengers to deliver the chromes.
Film is certainly not dying. You can buy film in any corner drugstore or one of the hundreds of camera shops in any town. And get it processed at the supermarket, too. And pros are lining up to buy $10,000 to $50,000 film camera systems right now. Color labs are standing by to turn around 1-hour snip tests in every major city, art directors and editors have their light tables waiting for the messengers to deliver the chromes.
Yeah, there's only a few places in our metro area that you can get it, otherwise it's mail order only.
"Nikon got burnt hard when they re-released the S3 2000 (and S2 2005). They apparently lost money on that project, and now you can buy new/never used ones for less than what the retail was 20 years ago!" Huss
Yeah thats true but
1. they actually Did re-make a long lost RF camera *with lenses*. As good as what was made; maybe a bit better on QC.
2. Horrible timing. The flee from film was at stampede level when the S3 remake came out, and most here on APUG would agree the outlook for film photography now is a lot more 'positive' than 2005-9.
The "We lost money on it" excuse was rolled out to me back in the late 1990's when as an NPS member I entered into an email conversation with the NY head of NPS. I wanted a 200mm f/2 AF-S for wedding work and succinctly pointed out how it would fit into the lens line up and who would benefit. I was told it "would never be made since Nikon lost a lot of money with the original 200/2 lens".
Well I'm sure you can guess, a couple of years later (2004 or so) Nikon announced the AFS 200mm f/2 and would go on to sell 10,000 units. And No I was not asked to field test the new version (was a bit pissed about that since I felt I was quite vocal as an NPS member to get that lens made).
Designing and making an F4 level body from scratch these days? Ok, sure; that will be 'cost prohibited'. Making a a version of what was made by the millions as in an internal frame supporting a mirror box, shutter unit, eye level prism, a wind mechanism and a lens mount? Please, let us both laugh at that. I'm sure some 17 year old will read this and start 3-d printing the parts for a Copal shutter found in just about every Japanese SLR of the 1970's.
Agreed.
Nikon apparently had to re-tool/build new tooling to create the re-issues.
Once they were done, what did they do with that tooling? I'm hoping they moth-balled it, not destroyed it.
This will be blashphemy but... a new Nikon S in Leica M mount would do better than if it was sold in the S mount. I have a lovely S2, and there is nothing I like about that mount system, nor focusing wheel, nor lenses that spin their aperture rings as you focus that I would miss.
But a Nikon S2 type thing in an M mount? That focuses like a normal camera? Whose aperture stays in place? That has a bazillion lenses available for it? I'm in.
Oh, also add a light meter to it, otherwise people will just whine and say they can buy an original S2 for $400...
What you describe sounds kinda like the (discontinued?) Zeiss Ikon ZM....which I think would sell today if properly marketed and reasonably priced.
ScarySarcasm....I grew up around enough Jews to recognize it when I see it but I still don't think its funny.
Sarcasm....I grew up around enough Jews to recognize it when I see it but I still don't think its funny.
Oh, yeah and it's irony.Sarcasm....I grew up around enough Jews to recognize it when I see it but I still don't think its funny.
That reference to a RAW file was from my recollection about when the rules changed to prevent entries that originated on film.
As for the current rules, I would suggest this part does the same:
"Photo Guidelines
Image data files created with any device capable of taking still images, including smartphones and digital still cameras (including medium and largeformat digital cameras)."
Designing and making an F4 level body from scratch these days? Ok, sure; that will be 'cost prohibited'. Making a a version of what was made by the millions as in an internal frame supporting a mirror box, shutter unit, eye level prism, a wind mechanism and a lens mount? Please, let us both laugh at that. I'm sure some 17 year old will read this and start 3-d printing the parts for a Copal shutter found in just about every Japanese SLR of the 1970's.
If someone wants to write Nikon and ask whether a scanned film image would be acceptable, they are free to do so, but in the meantime we are working up a Photrio lather over the iron fist of digital oppression without strong evidence.
Well, in Germany you can still get 35mm film at two of the major three drugstore chains, thus practically in any town. There is no local film processing anymore, except for the few cities with labs.Film is certainly not dying. You can buy film in any corner drugstore or one of the hundreds of camera shops in any town. And get it processed at the supermarket, too.
Isn't Rossmann or DM offering processing of film by CeWe?Well, in Germany you can still get 35mm film at two of the major three drugstore chains, thus practically in any town. There is no local film processing anymore, except for the few cities with labs.
Camera stores have vanished greatly, there are even big cities without such.
The problem with well-built pro equipment from a manufacturer's standpoint is that it is well-built ! It doesn't need to be replaced very often... Even if I live to be 100, my basic FM2n will probably still be near-mint in terms of ongoing functional life.
But crap happens. I remember my original Nikon F (bought new in 1967 or '68!) that took a spill with me from my motorcycle. Afterwards, the 1/8 sec shutter speed no longer functioned--it was more like a "T" setting, the shutter would stay open until I changed the dial. Needless to say, everything else worked fine on the camera, well enough that I held off having it repaired for 5 years. But to my original point, no matter how well built a camera may be, something might occur that needs repair. And then you are at the mercy of parts availability and capable technicians with the knowledge to make the necessary repairs.Agreed - I still regularly use my 1937 Leica II, my 1956 Leica IIIf, the c1896 Underwood 1/4-plate camera and my Cambo 4x5. And I'm just building a new back for the Underwood 1/2-plate too, since Ilford still cut film I can use for it. So, that's two 125 year old cameras still in use, an almost 85 year old camera and a 65 year old camera that still work perfectly.
But crap happens. ...And then you are at the mercy of parts availability and capable technicians with the knowledge to make the necessary repairs.
...... There is very little pride in manufacturing anymore. ....End of an era.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?