Gear Talk > Third Party Manufacturers

Photos of film's demise

<< < (5/5)


--- Quote from: symmar22 on November 16, 2012, 06:05:50 AM ---But you are right, I'll give the C41 a try for my 4x5, I'll buy a box of Ektar as well as a Portra 160 to compare. My fear is with Kodak on the bad slope, these films will likely disappear as well.

--- End quote ---

symmar22, if you wouldn't mind posting your experiences with the above it seems there are at least a few here who would be interested.  :)

I understand your view on Fuji chomes, it is a very subjective thing and everyone has their own favorites.  One of the great things about film is the ability to match a particular formula to your subject.  I suppose it must be possible to do something similar for digital with post-processing, but I'm just starting out and haven't tried messing with any of my shots yet.

As films gradually get phased out the number of options will decrease, and that will be a shame.  I'm actually rather pleased to see how many choices are still available for MF, as I have decided to stick to that format for my film shots.  Digital does what I need it to do for 35mm and will become my workhorse, and I'll break out the MF equipment when I feel like doing something different.

I've had a Bronica ETRSi for a long time, and it has now been joined by a mint GS-1 and a decent Pentax 67.  I'd like to add a nice rangefinder option and perhaps a TLR at some point.  The crazy Fuji GX680 appeals too, as does the oddball Noblex.  So many cameras, so little time... ;D

+1 on the fuji 680, but quite heavy/bulky, more for studio use, the fuji 6x9 rangefinders are fun to use, kind of rollfilm Leica M; Fujinon lenses are truly first class.

 I first switched to digital to replace the small format film, but I ended missing it, I used a Canon F-1 new, but I realized it was a bit stupid not to use all that modern EF glass I have and ended buying an EOS 1v. I have a lot of fun to use it, and will likely sell the F-1 and FD glass. 35mm film is more like a fun stuff to do for me, it hardly competes with digital for IQ, but still, I make different pictures with it.

4x5 is something else, it forces to carefully think the shot before you pull the trigger, but IMO it's worth it and competes still very well with digital IQ (I have a bunch of excellent Schneider lenses). It is simply a different kind of photography, opposite of the computerized imaging of digital work. I sometimes use 6x7 and 6x9 rollfilm backs on my linhof, since it allows me to use my enlarger (limited to 6x9) for B/W work, though I admit I got very lazy with enlargements the last 2 years, plus when I take the view camera outside, I feel it's a kind of wasted energy to make "only" rollfilms with it.

I really miss the Hasselblad, rollfilm is a kind of good compromise, and 120 films seem to be the easiest to find. Your are badly tempting me with the Fuji 680 ;)

I'll try to post some 4x5 negative as soon as I get some, but I do not have too much time for 4x5 pics these days.


[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page

Go to full version