Returning to Photography

[TMcG1959]

Over a period spanning some 25 years I have shot exclusively with Rolleiflex T and 3,5f cameras which I still have. I don;t own a digital camera though I snap all the time with my smartphone which gives instant, pleasing results.

I prefer film to digital but if I start shooting again I presume the cost of digital equipment certainly outweighs the cost of film processing etc

 

[pbromaghin]

3.....2....1....Wait for it.

 

[Paul Ozzello]

It depends what you want to do. Do you shoot color or black and white? Do you print? Would you have the film scanned? I use a smartphone and digital camera for my travel photography but I can't get the look I want for my artwork with digital so I still shoot MF film. I don't think you'll save any money by getting a digital camera and if you like the look of film better I think you already answered your own question.

Over a period spanning some 25 years I have shot exclusively with Rolleiflex T and 3,5f cameras which I still have. I don;t own a digital camera though I snap all the time with my smartphone which gives instant, pleasing results.

I prefer film to digital but if I start shooting again I presume the cost of digital equipment certainly outweighs the cost of film processing etc

 

[mark]

I guess the bigger question is why are you taking pictures? I own film and digital cameras. Both have their +s and -s, so what you want in the end is going to lead you down one or both paths.

 

[Eric Rose]

The cost of ownership for a digital camera totally depends on what you want to do with it. If all you are going to do is take family snaps and the occasional batch of holiday photos that won't go beyond a computer screen, then your cellphone is all you need. If however you want to make blowup to say 11x14 then any of the midrange DSLR's or better P&S's will suffice.

Personally I use digital for all my colour work and film for 90% of my B&W. I also do a far amount of video work so need a tier one digi camera for that.

It's all about ROI and only you can quantize what Return means for you. It doesn't have to be a monetary value.

Welcome to Photrio, a place where BOTH digital and analog can live together. For the most part . For some it's a religion and you will run into them.

 

[1kgcoffee]

Film all the way in terms artistic quality. But if you want digital, the bodies can be found inexpensively and old mf lenses adapted.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I use my Hasselblads for serious [sirius] work. The iPhone is used for getting parts for vehicles or home repairs.

Welcome to APUG Photrio!​

 

[removed account4]

Welcome to Photrio, a place where BOTH digital and analog can live together. For the most part . For some it's a religion and you will run into them.

+ 1 !

Just make sure you are having a good time, that's the important part..

 

[campy51]

I recently started shooting medium format b&w film and I find it much more of a PITA than digital but it's also rewarding when you get a good photo. I scan the decent ones into the computer and then print from there and have been very happy so far. The ones I print have a look that digital only doesn't seem to match, at least to my eyes, but I may be fooling myself, but who cares. I have converted some color to b&w but it just doesn't look the same. I mostly have been shooting pictures of my 2 year old grand daughter but she moves so much it's been hard. It's winter here and hope the warm weather will result in some good shots.

 

[John Galt]

I use my Hasselblads for serious [sirius] work. The iPhone is used for getting parts for vehicles or home repairs.

Welcome to APUG Photrio!​

LOL! good one

 

[WILL WORK FOR FILM]

I too struggled with this dilemma. decided to just get a cheap film camera for light duty work. Well that exploded into a flurry of black and white film developing and then the creation of a makeshift bathroom darkroom followed by the acquisition of a Pentax 6x7 med format system. I am not at all sorry that I have decided against a digital workflow. But, I am just an amateur having fun with it. The only problem I run into is that in my neck of the woods there is only one camera shop and they largely ignore analog materials. 90% of my film, chemicals and papers are ordered online.

 

[faberryman]

The only problem I run into is that in my neck of the woods there is only one camera shop and they largely ignore analog materials. 90% of my film, chemicals and papers are ordered online.

It is not really a problem. You can get anything you need in two days.

 

[Alan9940]

I shoot film for B&W work--been shooting film for 55+ years and I still love it--and digital for color work. I shoot everything from 35mm up to 8x10 and print B&W in the wet darkroom and color via the desktop. I did print color in the darkroom back in the Cibachrome days, but don't want to mess with it nowadays. I use my iPhone for family snaps, record keeping, and the occasional video.

 

[Sirius Glass]

The only problem I run into is that in my neck of the woods there is only one camera shop and they largely ignore analog materials. 90% of my film, chemicals and papers are ordered online.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/
https://www.freestylephoto.biz/

 

[warden]

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/
https://www.freestylephoto.biz/

Do they ship for a reasonable cost to Ireland?

 

[Eric Rose]

Do they ship for a reasonable cost to Ireland?

Heck they don't even ship for a reasonable cost to Canada!

 

[johnha]

I have shot exclusively with Rolleiflex T and 3,5f cameras which I still have.

Assuming the Rolleis are serviceable, I'd suggest shooting some film through them as a first step, see how you get on. Digital is very convenient but the process is devoid of soul, ritual or patience compared to film. Ultimately it depends how much & what you shoot and what you want to do with the images.

My most used digital cameras are a pair of compacts I use for documenting my travels, for creative purposes I much prefer film (usually 120 over 35mm).

 

[slackercrurster]

Over a period spanning some 25 years I have shot exclusively with Rolleiflex T and 3,5f cameras which I still have. I don;t own a digital camera though I snap all the time with my smartphone which gives instant, pleasing results.

I prefer film to digital but if I start shooting again I presume the cost of digital equipment certainly outweighs the cost of film processing etc

Sure, digital (good stuff) cost a fortune. When my Nikon F was stolen in the 1980's I replaced it with a new Pentax K1000 body for $99 and bot a used 50 mm for $25 and was back in biz. You can still get a K1000 body cheap and a used 50mm lens for about the same thing. Back in the day we could buy 100 feet or Tri-X, Pus-X or FP4 for about $7 or $8. Film was nothing to shoot then.

If you want to get into digital cheap, get a used Oly M43 or a Pentax 12mp - 16mp cam. They produce nice photos and are pretty cheap. I keep buying lotto tickets to hope I can get some new digital gear.

 

[neilt3]

If your going to shoot black and white developing your own is the simple and best value way to go .
A Patterson developing tank , a changing bag and some chemicals is all that's needed , very easy to do .
If your doing colour , either develop in batches with a developing chemical's kit , usually 12-15 rolls at a time , or send them away for developing .

Do they ship for a reasonable cost to Ireland?

Most of what I get is mail order / internet , deliver anywhere in the British Isles ,
https://www.firstcall-photographic.co.uk/
https://www.silverprint.co.uk/
https://www.discountfilmsdirect.co.uk/
https://www.theimagingwarehouse.com/

The last time I went into a camera shop ( in Warrington town center ) and asked for a roll of (any) 120 B&W film the kid replied that they only had 125 in B&W and 400 in colour .
I had to explain that he was talking about ISO rather than film format and they only had 35mm film , as in 135 , and not 120 roll film .
He struggled to understand the concept .
I don't know why , in digital you have ISO's and different format sizes up to medium format cameras , working in a camera shop he should have a basic understanding of this .
Very poor .

 

[JWMster]

My two cents: It's not the cost of your medium per se (camera), but the cost of the total infrastructure. Your level of expectations, and the cashflow you commit to feeding them may well determine how closely you can approximate your ambition. If you're ambitious in terms of the sorts of images you want to make, then the camera and the medium are probably the least expensive parts of the journey you're about to embark on. Locations, travel, lighting, training, experience maybe even models or crew - all these things can cost significantly more. Antique gear isn't expensive in onesies, but before long, there's a backup or an alternate. And then there might be a darkroom with its chem sets, an enlarger, an inventory of film, paper, printers, scanners, dedicated inks.and heaven knows what. First thing you know, that $400 camera bargain's spawned a gear buying spree. And even if you decide to save by outsourcing, you convert the fixed to a variable cost. And as much as outsourcing might sound convenient, there seems to be lot less quality services and availability can be an issue, too. More true the pickier you are. So you may very well have to do as much of the dirty work yourself after all. Which brings it back to digital, the computer, and its workflow vs. film, the darkroom and its workflow. Then there's the likelihood that you may end up with a mix like many of us hybrid folks. Hybrid in the pursuit of the "best of both" probably ends up with a workflow that's (in truth) the least efficient. And so here I am.

But if it's not about efficiency, then maybe jump in. The water's fine. I've had a whale of a time rationalizing one cost saving (film) expense after another, and though my iPhones keep getting more expensive, too, film costs aren't really accounted in full until you start "trading up"/

 

[Sirius Glass]

My two cents: It's not the cost of your medium per se (camera), but the cost of the total infrastructure. Your level of expectations, and the cashflow you commit to feeding them may well determine how closely you can approximate your ambition. If you're ambitious in terms of the sorts of images you want to make, then the camera and the medium are probably the least expensive parts of the journey you're about to embark on. Locations, travel, lighting, training, experience maybe even models or crew - all these things can cost significantly more. Antique gear isn't expensive in onesies, but before long, there's a backup or an alternate. And then there might be a darkroom with its chem sets, an enlarger, an inventory of film, paper, printers, scanners, dedicated inks.and heaven knows what. First thing you know, that $400 camera bargain's spawned a gear buying spree. And even if you decide to save by outsourcing, you convert the fixed to a variable cost. And as much as outsourcing might sound convenient, there seems to be lot less quality services and availability can be an issue, too. More true the pickier you are. So you may very well have to do as much of the dirty work yourself after all. Which brings it back to digital, the computer, and its workflow vs. film, the darkroom and its workflow. Then there's the likelihood that you may end up with a mix like many of us hybrid folks. Hybrid in the pursuit of the "best of both" probably ends up with a workflow that's (in truth) the least efficient. And so here I am.

But if it's not about efficiency, then maybe jump in. The water's fine. I've had a whale of a time rationalizing one cost saving (film) expense after another, and though my iPhones keep getting more expensive, too, film costs aren't really accounted in full until you start "trading up"/

What is wrong with a buying spree? I enjoy the adrenaline rush followed by the anticipation of the delivery, unwrapping, testing and then using with the rest of the herd.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

What is wrong with a buying spree? I enjoy the adrenaline rush followed by the anticipation of the delivery, unwrapping, testing and then using with the rest of the herd.

This is exactly what's driving at last some of us. In the process I've become a collector of neat photo gear in addition to owning a few pieces of photographic history (sadly not all). It is easy though to end up on the "wrong" side of the photographic journey where buying another piece overshadows use of any of it.

 

[JWMster]

Sirius / Witold: What I like is that you aren't serious. Nobody's supposed to read my drivel. Sure... it's been a couple year buying spree. THen a trading spree. Finally a shooting spree ("Wait, my wife has a gun? Uh oh."). And yes, as Witold puts it, I'm collecting a lot of antique gear and using it. Just picked up a Nikon FM2n and 3 lenses as a switch off for a Contax S2 and CY Zeiss lenses... and happy with it. Leica M's, Rollei TLR's, ancient cameras and ancient scanners. Sheesh.... the dude has ambitions to be yesterday's "not quite a photographer." Relative to collecting antique cars I guess I'm saving money and using this stuff more often? And eventually.... the spree looks like it's ending. I have found a bone of resistance to the lure of the Mamiya 6/7... and it's working... for the moment.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

Sirius / Witold: What I like is that you aren't serious. Nobody's supposed to read my drivel. Sure... it's been a couple year buying spree. THen a trading spree. Finally a shooting spree ("Wait, my wife has a gun? Uh oh."). And yes, as Witold puts it, I'm collecting a lot of antique gear and using it. Just picked up a Nikon FM2n and 3 lenses as a switch off for a Contax S2 and CY Zeiss lenses... and happy with it. Leica M's, Rollei TLR's, ancient cameras and ancient scanners. Sheesh.... the dude has ambitions to be yesterday's "not quite a photographer." Relative to collecting antique cars I guess I'm saving money and using this stuff more often? And eventually.... the spree looks like it's ending. I have found a bone of resistance to the lure of the Mamiya 6/7... and it's working... for the moment.

With regard to the "lure of Mamiya 6/7" there is the RB 67, covers both digits at once and is actually a lot less expensive (and bigger while at it). Used it last weekend to stop my pick up from rolling down the hill (guy who sold it to me said it was for taking photographs). Where there is icing there is a cake. Just got to love film photography.

 

[JWMster]

Wit: My alternative is a Rollei 6008 that I've vowed to try and use more this year. Bought the 3.5F TLR afterwards as smaller and quieter - which it is. And much as I love the TLR and find it's one camera I've really bonded with, there are times a Wide Angle or Tele would sure come in handy.. And so the 6008 lingers.... and truthfully from what I see, whenever I decide to unload the 6008 I'll be paying someone to take it off my hands who'll probably use it for a light or paperweight. Big with a crash boom bang shutter and power motor wind. Using it is like driving to the in a library with a "silent" M1 tank and turning the turret to pick out a book. Possible "overkill"? Not a chance. But the shutter does kind of sounds like a Mercedes car door: Loud, but with a very satisfying "German" engineered quality feel and "thlunk". In many ways as you said, the RB and the 6008 are far more capable. If there's no perfect camera.... there is joy in trying them all, huh?