|
Post by Just Plain Curt on Mar 10, 2007 21:25:44 GMT -5
Hi Everyone, Maybe just one perception, possibly a wrong one at that, but has anyone except me noticed a huge dip in the number of familiar names, both on general camera sites and former soviet union camera sites? Tonight I've been exploring and thinking and besides the trend towards digital I notice less and less of the names I'm so used to seeing both contributing to different sites and even bidding on eBay. Sure some folk are tapering back as Gene said, or trying out digital as Wayne is enjoying, but where are all the posts both here and on several different forums (Yahoo, BestStuff, Nelsonfoto, Photo.Net) from all the folk we know and/or recognise? Sites like Alfred Klomp's Russian cameras, one or more prominent Zorki sites, other sites being given up or left in the care of someone new, I know things change but??? Wondering if I'm missing the boat here, or just feelin' a bit old tonight. In the last month or so, almost everything film related that I bid on, I'm being outbid by amounts that seem unrealistic to me so someone must still be using film but where are they? I've seen common SLR's (not classic Nikon F's, Canon F1 etc.) with a modest 50mm, an aftermarket 135mm and cheapo zoom go for upwards of $50-100 US so either the interest is there and not the people posting on the net, or something else??? Cameras I've bought for under $15 US for years I now see every day going for double and triple that. Even broken cameras for parts are selling for almost what I've been buying working cameras for so the interest must be there but where are the people who use them? Every photo site I see these days is mainly digital photo work (and more power to them, photos are photos as long as they make you happy) so other than myself and a few others, who is using these and where the heck did they go? Maybe as I said, just my perception but these days I print copies of everything of interest on every site I visit since lately there are more and more broken or rotten links out there and eventually less and less info of use. Anyhow, without sounding like Andy Rooney, that's my rant for now.
|
|
|
Post by Just Plain Curt on Mar 10, 2007 21:49:10 GMT -5
P.S. On another topic, wanted to share one of the best Brownie Camera links I've ever come across: members.home.nl/brownies/ hopefully it will work.
|
|
|
Post by kiev4a on Mar 10, 2007 22:56:02 GMT -5
The Soviet camera following has really tapered off. The Beststuff Russian Camera forum was THE place three years ago. Guys like Jim Blazik, Jay Javier and Nathon Dayton were on there daily along with many others. Now you are lucky if there are four new posts a week. Probably eight out of 10 posts on the P.net Nikon Forum are now about digital (that may be conservative).
In the past year there has been a real acceleration of the digital trend in high end cameras--much faster than I thought it would happen. I figured it would be another five years before digital really hit stride in SLRs. But I would be willing to bet Nikon's F6 is the last film "F" model slr the company makes. Same with Canon.
A couple of weeks ago I saw a PBS special on a National Geographic photographer who shoots all over the world but is based in Nebraska. When the story was filmed he was still shooting film. I emailed him to say how much I liked the program and he admitted he has since gone digital.
I'm have to admit I have hit the digital trail. Last year I shot somewhere between 50 and 75 rolls of film. I'm guessing this year it will be 10 maximum.
I haven't noticed any stabilizing or increase in ebay film camera prices. They continue to go down to the point where even top notch Nikon and Canon film bodies that cost close to two grand 18 months ago get few bids in the $500 range. Just sold my F4 in excellent condition with several accessories for $285 and considered myself lucky. I won't sell my F3 or Fm because I like them more than what they would bring moneywise (and I have a number of manual focus lenses I can use on them) I'll hang onto my Soviet cameras because they are part of the history of a society that no longer exists.
Will I buy any more film cameras? Highly unlikely. My next goal probably will be a D200 Nikon--it will meter with my manual focus lenses.
I have loved shooting with film for 50 years. I can remember when Tri-X was introduced and had grain the size of small rocks (but man it was fast compared to everything else). I remember the first time I held my very own, brand new Nikon F. I remember hearing a Leica M shutter at 1/2 sec for the first time--mechanical perfection.
Given the speed with which digital is picking up, I believe within three years Kodak will shut down film manufacturing -- probably sell the right to a Chinese company. Fuji won't be far behind. Film will be available for a long time but probably at a higher price (supply and demand). Three years from now I suspect 80 percent of the 1-hour film processing machines in the Wallmarts and Walgreens will be gone, replaced by Kiosks where you can get prints from your digital memory cards. That will be the real killer. Those machines require regular maintenance and chemicals and people to operate them. It simply won't be cost effective to keep them running. The only reason it is now is the people who use the disposable cameras. It's not the true film camera shooters. Most of the 35mm film displays in stores have shrunk to one quarter the size they were 18 months ago.
The main market in the future for film cameras will be COLLECTORS not shooters. Sure, collectors also shoot some film but if you are like me, you have a bunch of film cameras but only shoot with a few of them. Of my 40 operating Soviet era cameras I have only shot film with maybe 10 and most of it was shot with three cameras.
Sorry to be so pessimistic but the times they are achangin'. I was raised in the printing industry and started out casting hot lead type. It was replaced by photo typsetters and plates burned from negatives. That has been replaced by computers that burn material directly onto plates (another reason Kodak film is in the dumpster). I started with a manual typewriter. It was replaced by electrics which were replaced by standalone "electronic typewriters" which were replaced by computers. Now typewriters are worth about as much a 4 megahertz Radio Shack TRS-80 computer.
When we were kids a lot of us listened to big, upright vacuum tube-powered radios which were replaced by big, heavy tube powered TVs which were replaced by transistors, then solid state electronics and LCD and Plasma screens. And I don't even want to try to explain what has happened to telephones and automobiles!
Bottom line, barring the sun giving off a huge electro magnetic pulse that fries every solid state circuit on Earth, film cameras are headed the way of the tube radio, the manual typewriter and the standard transmission. They will still be around but you will have to be willing to work a little harder if you want to use one.
|
|
bobm
Contributing Member
Posts: 36
|
Post by bobm on Mar 11, 2007 5:33:44 GMT -5
Over here in the UK, I can't remember the last time I saw 12 exposure 35mm rolls being offered for sale. @ Curt: What I've noticed is the massive interest in M42 mount glass from the DSLR boys like myself - finite supply + infinite demand = higher prices. It seems to be predominantly WA glass too that gets all the interest - over here as an example, Flektogon 20s have gone for well over £100, Flektogon 25s you hardly ever see and Distagon 21s go for around £3.5k I know the Distagon 21 is probably the ultimate 20mm but £3.5k for a second-hand lens.....?
|
|
|
Post by majicman on Mar 11, 2007 11:14:21 GMT -5
I think you are right, But from what I have seen in the past everything comes back around in a huge circle. Just like black and white film, years ago that's all there was then color came along full scale after the 60's now people are shooting with black and white again, not on a large scale but it is happening. People are drawn to the nostalgia of it. give it another 15 years and people will be paying a small fortune for film cameras. I am taking full advantage of that now, People are dumping film cameras like a hot potato and I am right there. I go to every yard sale, flea market, thrift store, and second hand store I can almost every day after work on the way home. I tell every one I know that I need old film cameras working or not. I have had people just give them to me and the ones I have to pay for I do so at a low rate. The majority of people are really no longer interested in film it's to time consuming to some when you can turn a digital on and shoot. We are a fast paced society now {many time unfortunately} When you can pick up a popular name brand camera like Pentax, cannon,mamiya ect, for $15. with a 200mm zoom I will take advantage of it all day long, and wait for the circle to come back around then cash in on it. A lot of my hobbies I turn into an investment like that, so it becomes both fun and profitable. alot of old things like vacuum tube-powered radios and manual typewriter just to name a few are being brought up by collectors for a lot of money. just check out the price of old lunch boxes that you took to school 25 years ago, they are being sold for huge amounts of money to people that want to take a walk back down memory lane, I have brought a number of lunch boxes that are popular with todays kids and will sit on them for another 15 years or so and then sell them for a huge profit, especially if they have never been used. So buy, buy, buy and the circle will come back around and you can profit from it. And yes in the near future most of the 1-hour film processing centers will be gone
|
|
|
Post by kiev4a on Mar 11, 2007 12:30:09 GMT -5
majicman: I have to disagree with you on this one. Granted, there will be a dedicated group of film camera collectors down the road. But I wouldn't nase my retirement on my camera collection (unless they are mint Leicas). Kodak folders from the 1920s still aren't worth anything. Old technology, in general, hasn't developed a following. Maybe as we get farther away from the mechanical era that will change but A LOT of camers were made in the 20th century and I can't believe there will be that large a group in 15 or 20 years interested in collecting the stuff. It will be a buyers market for a long time.
|
|
casualcollector
Lifetime Member
In Search of "R" Serial Soligors
Posts: 619
|
Post by casualcollector on Mar 11, 2007 12:49:38 GMT -5
I would agree that the prices of some cameras have increased a bit while others have come down. I think that interest in Cosina has grown since thay are among the last making 35mm film cameras and are now making some products that just about everyone agrees are quality pieces. That opinion seems to have raised interest and value in some of their lesser, older pieces. I recently tracked a clunky, mediocre, old, Argus/Cosina STL-1000 with 55/1.4 on e-bay. I'd have bid $25 for it, but I'd have been left in the dust. It closed at around $50. Add shipping, and it's much more than I think it's worth! On the other hand, I recently scored a Sears Auto TLS with 50/1.4, 55/2.8 macro, 200/3.5 tele, flash and bag for $52 with shipping. I thought that was a good value.
I think Leica, Canon and Nikon RFs will fall in value as their collectors start dying in droves and heirs put them on the market. Old pronghorn Nikkors don't seem to work on any of the digital bodies so their value has probably fallen in favor of newer AIs lenses.
In thinking about my film future, my crystal ball shows a return to black and white, processed at home, then scanned and printed. Quality developing of color neg film is hit or missthese days. I have two rolls of Kodachrome that I don't know where to get developed. I took it to Southern Photo Supply in Melbourne, FL and they were going to run it through their E-6 machine!!
Having considered the relative merits of Canon and Nikon digital bodies, I may ignore both when I eventually buy a digital SLR. I have a bunch of lenses that are either native M-42 mount (Sears, Mamiya, Ricoh) or adaptable to M-42 (Soligor - Vivitar T4). I also have a K to M-42 adapter. Guess who has the inside track to my digital money!!
Here's to living in interesting times!
Bill
|
|
|
Post by kiev4a on Mar 11, 2007 13:12:01 GMT -5
Bill:
The Pentax K10D can meter with M42 lenses and probably has the most weatherproof body of any DSLR. Cheaper than Nikon and Canon, too. If I didn't have so many Nikon lenses that might be the route I would go.
Wayne
|
|
|
Post by paulatukcamera on Mar 11, 2007 18:13:13 GMT -5
I have followed two "marker" cameras now for over a year to give me some information as to the state of the film camera market. As a collector with a lot of money "invested" in cameras, a severe downturn in prices of those that I have in my collection means it would be more sensible to "cut my losses" and sell them quickly on eBay!
So I track Canon 300ds and Nikon F100s (body only)
Reasoning? The Canon was the first DSLR to sell in large numbers worldwide. So there are lots about. It is also one of the first to have a reasonable level of pixels acceptable to Mr Average secondhand buyer as a substitute for his film SLR.
The F100 was the last of the "high end" amateur Nikon SLRS to sell in large numbers. It would be pointless tracking F6 as they have sold in small numbers. Lesser models because of their shorter product life tend to be rather more volatile. The F100 is still a very desirable camera - if it fares badly then the market is truly abandoning film - even at the lower price range.
I have watched both camera's prices as a sort of indication as to what's happening in the non - collector's SLR market.
The F100 has dropped to a new low of about £150 from £200 six months ago and £300 last year. (Range now is £140 - £180)
The Canon 300D varies much more, but seems to have settled under the £200 for a reasonable specimen - those with some minor problems dropping down towards the £100 mark.
The point of this? There a lot of film users thinking about conversion. I feel the second hand market is a better barometer of what people are buying than the demand for new cameras. The real test is - are the impecunious going to buy the best Amateur Nikon (F100) or the first reasonably priced DSLR for £150?
If the Nikon F100 keeps on falling in price, then there is not much hope for lesser models to retain even there current low values. Collector's demand seems to be keeping the prices of Nikon FE2s up, but the "bread & butter" SLRS do seem to be headed for oblivion.
That's why I collect rangefinders!
This does not affect the demand for rare collectors cameras, but the average SLR does look fatally wounded.
Anybody else tracking SLR prices?
Paul
|
|
|
Post by herron on Mar 11, 2007 19:18:41 GMT -5
Paul: While they are not the prime movers in the film camera world, I've been tracking Mamiya prices (35mm SLR and rangefinder) for years. In some cases, there has been a downturn in prices...in others, just the opposite. On the whole, however, I'd say the trend has been down. Same for Mamiya lenses. The common ones are tailing off in price, while the long telephotos, wide angles and macros are growing. I think a lot of the sentiment here is right...digital is making a huge impact and, as soon as the 1-hour kiosk operations are no longer profitable to maintain, the cost of developing film is going to skyrocket...and it will only be the collectors who are supporting it. I use my Canon DSLR a lot now (and am even thinking of an upgrade), and my collecting pace has slowed (primarily because I already have almost all the Mamiya cameras I was seeking). I'm thinking of thinning the herd, to get rid of duplicates and cameras that I never really intended to collect anyway, but found in a moment of weakness. ----- BTW -- BobM: B&H Photo in NY still sells (at least the last time I looked, about three weeks ago) 12-exposure rolls of film...which is what I use most often to test my cameras.
|
|
jody
Contributing Member
Posts: 29
|
Post by jody on Mar 11, 2007 20:23:15 GMT -5
Remember before the one hour developer? We may go back to that but I don't belive in my lifetime which I hope is 30 or more years from now I don't think I will see the end to film maybe the one hour but not the send out. The main thing is the production of film cameras may die. But as Iv'e said before they is not one digital made that will outlast my Zorki 2 or a leica lll. The problem is digital is so easy. Taking a keeper with film is hard. I do belive I am not alone when I say that if you manipulate a photograph too much with PS you are not a phtographer per say but a graphic artist. I try to use PS for just the stuff I could do in the darkroom if I ever learn. But then again I'm no phtographer just a picture taker who collects cameras. I will continue to collect and use mine for it is a challenge to me. I also collect for myself not for profit. I sold one camera and that was a mistake I won't make again. I even had a hard time giving one to my daughter. A konica S2 and Canonnette 17 by the way.
|
|
|
Post by kiev4a on Mar 11, 2007 20:39:09 GMT -5
Ansel Adams "Photoshopped" every print he ever made. He just did it in a darkroom, not with a computer. Yes, taking a digital picture is easy. But getting a memorable digital photo is just as difficult as getting one with a film camera. The camera is only a tool.
|
|
jody
Contributing Member
Posts: 29
|
Post by jody on Mar 12, 2007 5:04:45 GMT -5
Ansel Adams "Photoshopped" every print he ever made. He just did it in a darkroom, not with a computer. Yes, taking a digital picture is easy. But getting a memorable digital photo is just as difficult as getting one with a film camera. The camera is only a tool. Im talking about digital manipulation that you cant do in a darkroom. Also memorable digital photos are easy digital is easy that is why most people now use them. Ask your average person they love the instant feedback. You know most of the time if you have the shot you want. Yes the camera is a tool but some tools are easy to use some are hard. A film camera is better built and harder to use for the average person.
|
|
|
Post by herron on Mar 12, 2007 11:00:30 GMT -5
....Also memorable digital photos are easy digital is easy that is why most people now use them. Ask your average person they love the instant feedback. You know most of the time if you have the shot you want. Yes the camera is a tool but some tools are easy to use some are hard. I'm afraid I would have to disagree that "digital is easy.' I've seen far too many snapshots taken with digital cameras that are poorly composed and ill-focused to believe that they are any easier to use for the average bloke. The only "easy" thing about them is the ability to see (and eliminate) your most horrendous mistakes right away. In that, I can agree wholeheartedly. Knowing right away that your first three shots of Aunt Midge cut her head off entirely allows you to keep shooting until you can actually find her face. But even that doesn't guarantee an outstanding image (and, by that, I mean no slight whatsoever to Aunt Midge). Whether it's film or digital, the ultimate success of the image is firmly connected to the (human) brain in charge of the camera. Wayne is right...the camera is only a tool (and some folks can't use a hammer, either). ----- BTW Jody... I do agree that too much PS manipulation can be distracting, but if used the way the classic photographers would have approached a darkroom print, it is no more intrusive than the dodging, burning and color-correction that happens in the dark.
|
|
mickeyobe
Lifetime Member
Resident President
Posts: 7,280
|
Post by mickeyobe on Mar 12, 2007 15:49:57 GMT -5
I would like to add my two cents worth but Ron has said it all.
Mickey
|
|