Any film shooters out there? If so what do you shoot with? I shoot mainly medium and large format B&W.
I shoot 35mm through 4x5. Ilford FP4+ and HP5.
--Bob
Votrepear wrote:
Any film shooters out there? If so what do you shoot with? I shoot mainly medium and large format B&W.
Digital is so convenient that not many photographers any longer use film. I like to use film, it is what I have done for most of my life but since I began to use digital, around 2002 perhaps I have used film three times and I bet no more than that.
Last year I got rid of about 8 rolls of film I had in the freezer. They have been seating there for many months without use. There are still a few labs in my area that develop film and print from it but since their gross income comes from digital their film service has been on decline.
Film and development are now expensive while digital continues to be a more reasonable media.
When I came back to film after about 8 years digital, I thought I'd only shoot B&W, eventually settling on EOS 35mm film cameras to share with my EOS DLSRs. Favorite films include: Kodak: Tri-X 400, TMAX 400 & 100; and Ilford FP4 and Delta 400 & 100.
But, I've also enjoyed color film, particularly expired Fuji Superia 400, and fresh Kodak Portra 400, and EKTAR 100.
Is there some perceived advantage to shooting film or is this more a nostalgic endeavor? Years ago, I used to do B&W prints and color slides at home and enjoyed it very much. However, digital is what brought me back into photography after many years of lacking interest and I have no real desire to go back even though I still own most of the gear I used to shoot and process film. Not trying to put anyone down here, just curious as to why the popularity of shooting film seems to be on an upswing.
Votrepear wrote:
Any film shooters out there? If so what do you shoot with? I shoot mainly medium and large format B&W.
I shoot mostly 120 roll film. I use Pentax 645 and Hasselblad 500CM bodies. And occasionally my 4x5 Toko Nikki with rollfilm adapter back.
I only shoot transparencies though, Fuji Provia 100 and Velvia 50 depending on the scene.
Hasselblad 500c/m, Yashica 124G, Zeiss ikon, Wester NKK............EOS-1N
rehess
Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA
I shoot using the same camera I used thirty years ago - a Pentax "Super Program" - but now I use mostly Tri-X instead of the Kodachrome I used mostly then. Every time my wife asks why I am using the more expensive means to capture this moment.
I used film until 2013 when I bought the Nikon Df. I did my own color darkroom and shoot color negative films. Mainly Portra and Ektar. When I bought the digital camera my wife made me got rid of the darkroom (besides our new home is smaller) so now I still sometimes shoot film but only color slides.
I almost always shoot 35mm. A few times I shot 4x5 color negative film in a Polaroid 150.
Bison Bud wrote:
Is there some perceived advantage to shooting film or is this more a nostalgic endeavor? Years ago, I used to do B&W prints and color slides at home and enjoyed it very much. However, digital is what brought me back into photography after many years of lacking interest and I have no real desire to go back even though I still own most of the gear I used to shoot and process film. Not trying to put anyone down here, just curious as to why the popularity of shooting film seems to be on an upswing.
Is there some perceived advantage to shooting film... (
show quote)
I learned Photography shooting film. I doubt I could afford a digital back for my Sinar 5 x 4 , apart from the conversion plate for my FF and crop Nikon bodies.
rehess
Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA
Pablo8 wrote:
I learned Photography shooting film. I doubt I could afford a digital back for my Sinar 5 x 4 , apart from the conversion plate for my FF and crop Nikon bodies.
One gets new digital body to replace "FF" and smaller bodies. After only so many rolls. the new digital bodies have more than paid for film and developing not used, and user gets benefit of "chimping".
rehess wrote:
One gets new digital body to replace "FF" and smaller bodies. After only so many rolls. the new digital bodies have more than paid for film and developing not used, and user gets benefit of "chimping".
Don't understand you reference about "After only so many rolls". I will not have to buy additional bodies, I already have them. Have used the Nikon digital bodies on the back of the Sinar in studio jobs.
Just for those making comments regarding the cost of film vs. digital. I purchase film in 100ft rolls and load my own cassettes. I also develop my own film. The cost is approximately 12 cents per exposure. B and H sells the Nikon D850 for approximately $3000. That equates to 25,000 exposures of film for the price of one camera body only. It's not all that expensive.
--Bob
rehess
Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA
Pablo8 wrote:
Don't understand you reference about "After only so many rolls". I will not have to buy additional bodies, I already have them. Have used the Nikon body on the back of the Sinar in studio jobs.
Eventually you have to purchase more film.
Occasionally I shoot 35mm or 120. Usually I buy online whatever film is available for the amount I feel like spending at the moment. Fortunately, Tempe Camera is only a few miles away, so getting the 120 processed, scanned and printed isn't a huge hassle.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.