If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Film cameras will last far longer than electronic cameras
On 11/22/19 7:10 PM, RichA wrote:
From what i've seen electronic cameras fail outright or show performance-damaging problems in 7-10 years. Film cameras, especially manual ones keep going for 25, 50, 75 years. Some of the simplest ones from the 1800's like view cameras are still working. Failures of certain kinds in electronic cameras more than 5 years old may not be fixable and it's only the rapid advance of technology and rapid decline in value of old digitals that makes this acceptable. Now that camera companies are suffering, it's likely advancing technology will slow, meaning cameras, like in the 1970's, will have to last longer. People don't mind tossing a camera that has outlived its technological life, but they might mind if it hasn't. Out of 625 35mm SLR cameras manufactured between 1964 and 69, I have 110 that I have tested with film and are within one stop of being accurate. The remaining functional cameras have been shutter tested. About 100 show within one stop with the tester. About 250 are within one stop except for the shortest and longest shutter speeds. (Usually, the fastest and slowest speeds on mechanical cameras will go bad first.) 60 of them have two speeds on each end more than one stop out. 50 of them have additional random shutter speed issues. Finally, about 60 of them, less than 10% of these 50+ year old cameras, have issues making them non-functional. Older digital cameras will have image sensors that have been surpassed by modern ones. Film cameras can use any "image sensor" (film) on the current market; they aren't limited to what was available at the time of manufacture. -- Ken Hart |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Film cameras will last far longer than electronic cameras
In article , Ken Hart
wrote: Older digital cameras will have image sensors that have been surpassed by modern ones. Film cameras can use any "image sensor" (film) on the current market; they aren't limited to what was available at the time of manufacture. they can, except they're still not as good as outdated digital cameras. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Film cameras will last far longer than electronic cameras
On 11/22/19 9:41 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Ken Hart wrote: Older digital cameras will have image sensors that have been surpassed by modern ones. Film cameras can use any "image sensor" (film) on the current market; they aren't limited to what was available at the time of manufacture. they can, except they're still not as good as outdated digital cameras. You should really avoid general statements like that. I have a ten year old digital camera that I can beat with a Holga. -- Ken Hart |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Film cameras will last far longer than electronic cameras
In article , Ken Hart
wrote: Older digital cameras will have image sensors that have been surpassed by modern ones. Film cameras can use any "image sensor" (film) on the current market; they aren't limited to what was available at the time of manufacture. they can, except they're still not as good as outdated digital cameras. You should really avoid general statements like that. I have a ten year old digital camera that I can beat with a Holga. you should really avoid bogus comparisons. you were specifically talking about 35mm film slrs, therefore the correct comparison would be with a digital slr and not some mystery camera you're too embarrassed to even mention by name. an older digital slr can easily produce better results than your film cameras and in *far* more conditions too. how well does your camera handle predictive autofocus with moving targets. not very well, since you don't have any autofocus, let alone something capable of tracking moving objects across the frame. how about handheld photos at 1/2 second or longer. oh right, no image stabilization. sure, you could use a tripod, except that they're often prohibited and a bitch to carry if they aren't. you said you can use any film. i'm curious, what film do you plan on using for iso 6400? https://i.pinimg.com/originals/19/26...32c22bb56e3754 f.jpg https://i1.wp.com/digital-photograph...nt/uploads/201 3/12/1.jpg do you have any iso 12,800 film? http://resourcemagonline.com/wp-cont...7r-II-ISO-1280 0.jpg how about iso 102,400: https://idiotwithcamera.files.wordpress.com/2018/03/077a.jpg oddly enough, i was able to find a film photo of that very same scene: http://getwallpapers.com/wallpaper/full/7/1/f/28906.jpg |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Film cameras will last far longer than electronic cameras
In any case that is irrelevant for most people. They take
pictures with their phones, and every 2-3 years they get a new one. -- Alfred Molon Olympus 4/3 and micro 4/3 cameras forum at https://groups.io/g/myolympus https://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Film cameras will last far longer than electronic cameras
And for the rest of us, the money we save on film is
enough to pay for a new (digital) camera every few years. -- Alfred Molon Olympus 4/3 and micro 4/3 cameras forum at https://groups.io/g/myolympus https://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Film cameras will last far longer than electronic cameras
On 11/23/19 3:44 AM, Alfred Molon wrote:
And for the rest of us, the money we save on film is enough to pay for a new (digital) camera every few years. Cost of a Canon FX camera with 50mm f/1.8 lens retail new in 1964 $200. Price that I paid for most of mine used- $30 to $60 each. Cost of film and prints: 36 exposure color print film $4.50 (Walmart) Developing to negative $1.35 Printing the negatives to 10x14" $0.30 each (my darkroom, paper purchased in 300' rolls, chems purchased in 10L quantities, mixed as needed) My print size of 10x14" may seem odd, but I want a print close to full-frame (which would be 10x15"), and I find it convenient for making albums, my end result. When I shoot, I normally get 30 "keepers" from a 36 exposure roll. So, the total cost: $14.85 for film and chemicals to make 30 prints. Equipment costs: All my darkroom equipment is fully amortized, and in most cases was bought used. But I'll estimate the new price: Paterson film tank and reels- $150. Omega D2V enlarger with lens and CC filters- $800. 20" wide roller transport print processor- $3000. Total: $3950. (Actual costs were closer to $40 for the film tanks, $150 for the enlarger, and $300 for the processor.) So, my equipment costs for my darkroom are in line with the cost of a computer/monitor suited for photography, and a wide carriage printer (Remember, my preferred size print is 10" wide). I typically either mount my photos individually or mount them back-to-back and make them into an album using comb-binding. Dry-mount tissue- $0.06 each (I buy it in 300' rolls), Dry-mount press, new $450 (I paid $50 used), Comb-binder punch $125, binders $0.20 each. So, my finished cost for a 30 photo album is about $15.95. An 11x14 photo book from Walmart is $54.96, but it's currently 33% off, and that's for 20 pages or 40 full bleed photos. Doing the math to adjust the page count, it's $41.22. Minus the 33% (I assume Christmas) discount, $27.48. If you want to add my time into all that: film developing takes about 45 minutes of my 'exclusive' time (the film hangs to dry overnight, but I can do other things during that time). A print takes 4.5 minutes through the processor, dry-to-dry. Dry-mounting takes 3 minutes in the press. (I usually spend those snippets of time in light exercise.) So, my total time to develope, print, mount and bind a 30 photo album is about 4 hours. I assume this would be in line with the time to do this with digital photos. -- Ken Hart |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Film cameras will last far longer than electronic cameras
Well, a long time ago, when I still was using film, the
cost of one 10x15cm print was around 1DM (= German mark). Can't remember how much a roll of film cost. Development of the film cost a few DM if I remember correctly. Now, if you shoot 10K-20K photos/year, as you do with digital, doing that with film is very expensive. Even just shooting 1000-2000 photos/year would have been quite expensive. -- Alfred Molon Olympus 4/3 and micro 4/3 cameras forum at https://groups.io/g/myolympus https://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Film cameras will last far longer than electronic cameras
On 11/23/19 3:45 PM, Alfred Molon wrote:
Well, a long time ago, when I still was using film, the cost of one 10x15cm print was around 1DM (= German mark). Can't remember how much a roll of film cost. Development of the film cost a few DM if I remember correctly. Now, if you shoot 10K-20K photos/year, as you do with digital, doing that with film is very expensive. Even just shooting 1000-2000 photos/year would have been quite expensive. Those prices sound like reasonable retail. But it seems to me that the only way to make the "digital economy" argument work is if you don't print your digital photos. Obviously with film, you have to develop and print, or you just have some latent images in a film canister. So let's print your 1K-2K photos/year, at about 25x40cm. How much does it cost for a good quality paper and ink cartridges? Printing photographically/optically, it costs me about $0.50USD per print for film, paper, and chemicals. For 1K-2K photos/year; physical prints that I can hang, give to friends, etc; I'm willing to pay $500-$1000. -- Ken Hart |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Film cameras will last far longer than electronic cameras
In article ,
says... But it seems to me that the only way to make the "digital economy" argument work is if you don't print your digital photos. Exactly. With film you have to print, with digital you don't have to. In any case, with film, even if you print, the prints end up somewhere and usually you don't look at those images any more. -- Alfred Molon Olympus 4/3 and micro 4/3 cameras forum at https://groups.io/g/myolympus https://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Film cameras will last far longer than electronic cameras | nospam | Digital Photography | 0 | November 23rd 19 01:28 AM |
Turning film cameras into digital cameras | [email protected] | Other Photographic Equipment | 68 | May 7th 07 10:38 PM |
Digital Cameras,Cameras,Film,Online Developing,More | Walmart | General Equipment For Sale | 0 | December 17th 04 12:52 AM |
Which is better? digital cameras or older crappy cameras thatuse film? | Michael Weinstein, M.D. | In The Darkroom | 13 | January 24th 04 10:51 PM |
Which is better? digital cameras or older crappy cameras that use film? | [email protected] | Film & Labs | 20 | January 24th 04 10:51 PM |