The decline and fall of 35mm?

[Paul Howell]

I see 35mm as an endangered species. Used gear is being bought up and used up, with a only few entry level 35mm SLRs being made and not carried in most stores so new shooters will continue to dwindle. At this point the Rebel and the Nikon 2000 (?) are still available as are a few chinese cameras, unless there is a strong demand I dont see anyone reintroducing entry and mid level 35mms. MF may not be far behind.

 

[copake_ham]

I see 35mm as an endangered species. Used gear is being bought up and used up, with a only few entry level 35mm SLRs being made and not carried in most stores so new shooters will continue to dwindle. At this point the Rebel and the Nikon 2000 (?) are still available as are a few chinese cameras, unless there is a strong demand I dont see anyone reintroducing entry and mid level 35mms. MF may not be far behind.

You're only looking at the half-empty part of the glass. And like most everything, the good old law of supply and demand remains in force.

The presence of eBay, KEH and other web-based sources for used 35mm film gear have changed the equation. It is true that there are few new 35mm film cameras being made - but in large part that is because the remaining demand for such gear (admittedly a declining trend) is being met by the used gear market.

For example. the mass migration of PJ's to digital has resulted in a huge supply of Nikon F3's, F4's and F5's being sold in the secondary market over the past few years. I have bought three F3's and two F5's this way and what I've noticed is that the prices have m/l stabilized (about $300 for a late-model F3HP with a 50mm/1.8 lens and approx. $700 for a F5 body only).

Anyone interested in getting a 35mm film camera today can get a lot more camera for her dollar on eBay now than she would have gotten in a new purchase 5 or so years ago. Also, used prices are so much more realistic now than when you went to the local camera shop and they were priced so high as to "push" you to buy new instead.

All in all, I like to think the glass is half full and figure the best way to keep 35mm alive is to keep shooting it!

 

[Paul Howell]

The presence of eBay, KEH and other web-based sources for used 35mm film gear have changed the equation. It is true that there are few new 35mm film cameras being made - but in large part that is because the remaining demand for such gear (admittedly a declining trend) is being met by the used gear market.

For example. the mass migration of PJ's to digital has resulted in a huge supply of Nikon F3's, F4's and F5's being sold in the secondary market over the past few years. I have bought three F3's and two F5's this way and what I've noticed is that the prices have m/l stabilized (about $300 for a late-model F3HP with a 50mm/1.8 lens and approx. $700 for a F5 body only).

The glass is only 1/2 full until the used market disappears as cameras are bought, added to collections, damaged, lost, or become unrepariable due to a lack of parts. Folks do not buy F3, 4 or 5 to take a high school or entry level college class. More and more high schools are closing wet labs and going to digital systems because students cannot easly find film cameras.

 

[roteague]

Even some serious photographers are not aware that 35mm cameras are still being made. I met one in Fiji, a decades long Nikon user, who had never heard of the Nikon F6 - and was surprised when I showed it to him (and let him handle it).

 

[waynecrider]

I don't think that there is ever going to be a problem getting and using 35mm film cameras. Wasn't it last year that Canon came out with one or two new ones? The problem that will arise will be film prices going up and up. In fact I am considering buying 100ft at a time and rolling my own;.... Wait a minute.... flashback.... Ohhh yeaaa

Personally I just had a FT3 cla'd to use. Cameras like these and others will last a long long time, and there's so many of them that parts will be around if needed. The cameras you have to watch parts for are the ones that didn't have hugh sales or ones that had notoriously bad meters, and even then a handheld works fine.

 

[telkwa]

I shoot about 50/50 35mm and 120, and I've found that the 35mm forum is a bit strange. It's sort of as if the 35mm forum posters would rather talk about their gear and how great it is, while the MF forum posters seem more interested in learning about things other than what they already have and know. Sorry if I've offended anyone.

 

[waynecrider]

You would have to think that gear talk may be what keeps 35mm going. But there is plenty of that in MF and LF too.

 

[Paul Howell]

I don't think that there is ever going to be a problem getting and using 35mm film cameras. Wasn't it last year that Canon came out with one or two new ones? The problem that will arise will be film prices going up and up. In fact I am considering buying 100ft at a time and rolling my own;.... Wait a minute.... flashback.... Ohhh yeaaa

Personally I just had a FT3 cla'd to use. Cameras like these and others will last a long long time, and there's so many of them that parts will be around if needed. The cameras you have to watch parts for are the ones that didn't have hugh sales or ones that had notoriously bad meters, and even then a handheld works fine.

Two years ago Canon anounced that it would no longer develeop new 35mm cameras or even make improvements in its exisiting lineup. I think Cannon makes 3 35mms, the Rebel, Elan 7 and EOS 1V, Nikon the FM 10 and F6, Lieca R9, and Vivitar is still marketing the V3800 and someone is marketing the Promaster another K mount, I dont know who makes these cameras. The rangfinder line up appears to be strong, but the prices are not entry level.

 

[copake_ham]

Two years ago Canon anounced that it would no longer develeop new 35mm cameras or even make improvements in its exisiting lineup. I think Cannon makes 3 35mms, the Rebel, Elan 7 and EOS 1V, Nikon the FM 10 and F6, Lieca R9, and Vivitar is still marketing the V3800 and someone is marketing the Promaster another K mount, I dont know who makes these cameras. The rangfinder line up appears to be strong, but the prices are not entry level.

I would not expect to see much of anymore improvements of film cameras - but that is primarily due to the fact it is a mature technology.

Most what drove the advances in film gear over the past thirty or so years was the development and refinement of AF and motorized film advance - which was primarily to meet the needs of the PJ market. Now that the PJ's have gone digital the necessity for fast focusing film cameras is diminished.

The nice thing about film gear is that, if kept in good repair, a camera some fifty or seventy-five years old can take as good a picture as a new one. This "longevity" factor mitigates the problem of the lack of new film camera options.

By the way, the longevity factor with respect to film cameras is also a considerable advantage over digital substitutes.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

The Vivitar and the Promaster are Cosina products, as is the FM10, actually.

The big difference between 35mm gear talk and LF gear talk is that LF folks are arguing about which gear is better for a given task; 35mm folks are arguing which gear is better, sort of like a penis-comparison contest.

 

[jd callow]

LF users have more fun?

or they are all talk...

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

The big difference between 35mm gear talk and LF gear talk is that LF folks are arguing about which gear is better for a given task; 35mm folks are arguing which gear is better, sort of like a penis-comparison contest.

To break it further down: SLR users are about the biggest penis, whereas rangefinder users are about the sexiest penis. Sadly, none of them is gettin' any...

I find technical agonies hilarious, perhaps because I've suffered from them at some point or another (not now of course, what are you thinking!). Sharper film/lens agony, finer grain agony, bigger grain agony, max enlargement agony, bokeh agony, shadow detail agony, etc, all these self-inflicted pains lead people to so many test shots, resolution charts, light source comparisons, comparative lens tests, equipment expenses, and overall lack of commitment to picture-making.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

When I talk photography with my dad, an avid 35mm photographer, he always talks about resolution, sharpness, lens tests, etc. Stuff that makes me tired. So I try to steer the conversation to discussing something else than 35mm, namely his Hasselblad system. Then all of a sudden the subject matter shifts from technical to more about the art of photography, making prints, how good the final results are, etc.
What causes this I have no idea, but I know it's a fact. 35mm equipment is very technical to use, and I think it's just a natural progression. I used to use a nice Pentax system up until about two years ago, and now I just use if sporadically. An interesting sideline is that since I had him use one of my Holga-cameras a couple of years ago, he's slowed down the tech talk a bit.

For my own purposes, I usually ask a question in these forums when I wonder about how to achieve a certain result that I'm after. I never seem to get into the 35mm gear for that, only once or twice has that happened.

- Thomas

 

[roteague]

When I talk photography with my dad, an avid 35mm photographer, he always talks about resolution, sharpness, lens tests, etc. Stuff that makes me tired.

I'm not surprised, I think most of us like to talk about our "toys" sometimes, probably the same way some feel the need to talk sports statistics.

35mm does seem to lend itself to this type of talk, in the same way digital does. Perhaps, it is because both mediums are capable of producing huge volumes of images, so much that an individual image gets lost in the process.

 

[Paul Howell]

When I talk photography with my dad, an avid 35mm photographer, he always talks about resolution, sharpness, lens tests, etc. Stuff that makes me tired. So I try to steer the conversation to discussing something else than 35mm, namely his Hasselblad system. Then all of a sudden the subject matter shifts from technical to more about the art of photography, making prints, how good the final results are, etc.
What causes this I have no idea, but I know it's a fact. 35mm equipment is very technical to use, and I think it's just a natural progression. - Thomas

I may be older than your dad, I starting shooting with 35mm in 1965. In the old days 35mm was considered a miniature camera, film was slow and gainey, so the quality of lens was important, and Cameras were expensive. My first Retina cost my aunt about $300, that would about $2100 in 2007 dollars. As a working military and then PJ for 20 years I never considered my self an artist, but I have always thought of a camera as a means to an end, for a PJ the end is a image that tells a story. I divide folks into 2 camps: those who take picture in order to own a camera, and those who own camera in order to take pictures. There are of course many in the middle, I am now one of them, I have even started to collect Mirandas, but I still shoot with all of my cameras.

 

[copake_ham]

For me it's really quite simple. I prefer film to digital and often enjoy shooting "on the fly". When it comes to "walk around gear"; 35mm is much more convenient to carry and use than MF, much less LF.

I don't shoot LF, but do now have MF gear - but for me, MF shooting is m/l a "planned activity" whereas, when I'm just walking or driving around, I like have either a 35mm SLR or RF with me (both if I have my wife around to carry one of them!).

 

[Paul Howell]

I don't shoot LF, but do now have MF gear - but for me, MF shooting is m/l a "planned activity" whereas, when I'm just walking or driving around, I like have either a 35mm SLR or RF with me (both if I have my wife around to carry one of them!).[/QUOTE]

I have both MF and LF, but tend to use both as 35mm, old habits die hard.

 

[waynecrider]

Don't forget the Voigtlander's and the Bessaflex.

 

[Paul Howell]

Don't forget the Voigtlander's and the Bessaflex.

Bessaflex is out of production.

 

[jovo]

You would have to think that gear talk may be what keeps 35mm going. But there is plenty of that in MF and LF too.

Ever since the late '60's or early '70's, 35mm SLR cameras and gear were overwhelmingly advertised to the amateur market only to have been replaced in the last several years by digiquivalent SLRs. If you read only the advertising, you would think that 35mm and it's similarly sized digital successors were pretty much all there was to choose from. (I recently got my annual Rocky Mountain School of Photography brochure...always a very handsome publication....and every pictured photographer was using a digital SLR, and not one digital Hassie, or view camera with scanning back let alone a film camera of any kind.) So is it any wonder that 35mm gear would be the backbone of the 'hobby'? As I've said elsewhere, Outdoor Photographer (US) features nothing but SLR digicams in its editorials and advertising even though many of the portfolios are LF.

My Oly OM2sp and Leica M3 have sat forlornly on a shelf for years ever since I stopped reading ads, and bought the MF and LF gear that truly offered the quality I was always wishing for with the 35s. It's that refusal to succumb to advertising that's kept me true to film as well. I'm an advertiser's worst nightmare I think. :rolleyes:

 

[roteague]

It's that refusal to succumb to advertising that's kept me true to film as well. I'm an advertiser's worst nightmare I think. :rolleyes:

I quit buying most photography magazines on a regular basis, with the exception of Outdoor Photography (UK), mostly because of all the digital advertising.

 

[Uncle Bill]

I shoot 35mm exclusively and print from a pretty decent enlarger with condenser head and enlarging lens. I am blown away with the prints my brother makes with his medium format gear and is 4x5 Graflex but in a way I like the built in restraints of 135mm format. It forces me to be better every time I take that shot.

 

[joel dallenbach]

Popular photography dec 07 issue has a comparison between a leica Ia and a cannon d40. The leica wins in terms of photographic economy. I am on the verge of loading some leica cassettes for a recently cla'd leica II I scored on ebay. Does anyone know of a solution to the no strap lugs on the leica II? It's be convenient to have a strap with this camera, but with cooler temperatures and winter approaching, this camera fits well in a coat pocket. Perhaps I can just cut the front face off of the eveready leica case?

 

[bruce terry]

Does anyone know of a solution to the no strap lugs on the leica II? It's be convenient to have a strap with this camera, but with cooler temperatures and winter approaching, this camera fits well in a coat pocket. Perhaps I can just cut the front face off of the eveready leica case?

Good idea - Or you might find an old (collapsable lens) case for that lugless body. Some have the tripod-hole screw retainer, and the earliest have a simple-but effective inside retaining strap for the body instead of the bulkier T-screw setup.

The svelt little inside-retainer case has a continuous strap running thru leather loops underneath and around the case. The recent O serie comes with this kind of case and strap, and if you can't find an old one the Leica folks might have an O case in stock for the price of, maybe, your first born.

 

[joel dallenbach]

the Leica folks might have an O case in stock for the price of, maybe, your first born.[/QUOTE] yep this is the trouble with leica stuff, trading on birthrights doesn't fend so well for image making. Esau traded his in for a can of lentils and had to stay at home while Jacob had all the fun. At least this is what I am told. I'd hate to cut up the eveready case in a way, but for more practical reasons I may reframe from this idea because I do not trust the structural integrity of the straps attatched to this case because they very well may be over 75 years old. I wonder about the Luigi cases. Seems I haven't seen them for screw mounts etc,... Just half sized for the ms'