Price of used 35mm equipment

"The Dave©" wrote:

Dennis O'Connor wrote:
It is not the end of the world - and I have added to my C330 bodies,
lenses, recently for pennies on the dollar, so I'm pleased...
IF I choose to go seriously digital I will keep my F5 bodies and
simply add D1X, or whatever, to the body count and keep shooting...
It's like the stock market - on paper I may have a loss but until I
sell it's only scribbles on paper - and it may go up..

Same here. My plan is to make the digital jump this spring, either the
Digital Rebel or the 10D. I plan to still keep my EOS5 and Yashicamat,
though I may sell my Rebel 2000. I still see myself wanting to shoot
film from time to time, though I'm sure it will be less and less.

When I bought my first digital SLR I thought I continue to shoot some
film too from time to time. I was wrong. After a year of shooting
virtually none, I sold off my film bodies. Now all I have left is a
fridge full of film that I've been selling off slowly to my students who
still have film cameras. However, I'm going to have to push it out the
door faster as 3/4 of my students now are shooting digital compared with
last year's crop when only 1/4 were!

Steve Kramer
Chiang Mai, Thailand
http://www.photoenvisions.com


--
"The voyage of discovery lies not in seeking new horizons,
but in seeing with new eyes." - Marcel Proust

The Spectre wrote:

Hi again,

I realize digital is the reason but that digital SLR these guys are lusting
over will be yesterdays news in 6 months just like computers and other
consumer electronics. No matter what 35mm film is still a much better medium
than digital for "quality" images right now.

One of my clients had printed a panorama digital that I put together
from 4 images taken of his resort into a 10 foot by 3 foot advertisement
poster in the airport. I don't need any more quality than that. )

The image began in NEF format shot on a Nikon D100. Each of the 4 shots
was post processed into a 20 megabyte TIF image at 300 DPI. These were
stitched together using a panorama program, then enhanced using 'Genuine
Fractals 3.0' into a 600 DPI 60"x18" image at several hundred megabytes
(sorry, I don't remember the exact figure) and placed on a DVD-W along
with several other shots for his brochure. The post processing for the
entire shoot (including making the panorama and enlarging it) took less
than two hours. His printer did the rest. When you fly into that
airport, this advertising billboard looks just fine. Film? Enjoy it.
Personally, I don't have the time to waste.

Steve Kramer
Chiang Mai, Thailand
http://www.photoenvisions.com


--
"The voyage of discovery lies not in seeking new horizons,
but in seeing with new eyes." - Marcel Proust

"Don Coon" wrote in message
news:NcGGb.39845$VB2.80430@attbi_s51...
Straight out of the camera film may be higher quality but the "digital
darkroom" wipes that advantage out easily. I couldn't imagine going back
to
film, scanners, etc. IMHO, the end product of my DSLR is higher quality
than film.

Sigh........I remember how I lusted for my film scanner. Now all the negs
and slides are scanned and I'm burnin' up pixels like there was no tomorrow.
Except for restoration jobs, I don't remember the last time I even powered
up the flatbed.
Joe Arnold

"Paul Rubin" wrote in message
...
That url didn't make it, can you post the complete url? Thanks.


Bad wrap...try this...http://tinyurl.com/2l3u8



It appeared that Nikon was letting the F6 program
slide because of the death of film, but rumors are that they have
resurrected it and will be introducing it within the year as a pro body
with
the choice of multiple digital backs as well as a 35mm film back for the
holdouts, if there are any left by the time it's introduced.

That sounds extremely unlikely to me. Chances are they just scaled
back the development. It will probably be more like an F100 upgraded
with the D2H's AF system.


My understanding is that the AF system in the D2H came right out of the F6
program. The rumored F6 has that AF system and a replaceable viewfinder too
along with a rumored 6-9 mp Nikon digital back, a Fuji 11mp full frame back,
and at some point down the road a high ISO back.

HMc

"Howard McCollister" writes:
That url didn't make it, can you post the complete url? Thanks.

Bad wrap...try this...http://tinyurl.com/2l3u8

Thanks. The comparison of film with 8mm movies is valid. 8mm movies
are not dead, but have gotten mostly-displaced by video. As another
example, you can still get analog wris****ches (mechanical with gears
inside) but almost everyone wears electronic watches these days.
(Even the quartz watches with analog dials and hands actually have a
digital circuit inside).

That sounds extremely unlikely to me. Chances are they just scaled
back the development. It will probably be more like an F100 upgraded
with the D2H's AF system.

My understanding is that the AF system in the D2H came right out of the F6
program. The rumored F6 has that AF system and a replaceable viewfinder too
along with a rumored 6-9 mp Nikon digital back, a Fuji 11mp full frame back,
and at some point down the road a high ISO back.

I can certainly believe that about the AF sensor. However,
interchangeable film and digital backs just sounds a little bit
unlikely. It would probably be used mostly in digital mode, so why
would they put in a film transport system? I can believe that an F6
and D3 would use many of the same components, and I can barely believe
the idea of a D3 with interchangeable digital backs and no film
transport.

From: "Paul Rubin"
Newsgroups:
rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.pho to.marketplace.35mm
Sent: Thursday, December 25, 2003 8:24 PM
Subject: Price of used 35mm equipment


"Howard McCollister" writes:
That url didn't make it, can you post the complete url? Thanks.

Bad wrap...try this... http://tinyurl.com/2l3u8

Thanks. The comparison of film with 8mm movies is valid. 8mm movies
are not dead, but have gotten mostly-displaced by video. As another
example, you can still get analog wris****ches (mechanical with gears
inside) but almost everyone wears electronic watches these days.
(Even the quartz watches with analog dials and hands actually have a
digital circuit inside).


Heh...I confess I wear a Rolex watch. Entirely analog - no battery or
crystal.


My understanding is that the AF system in the D2H came right out of the
F6
program. The rumored F6 has that AF system and a replaceable viewfinder
too
along with a rumored 6-9 mp Nikon digital back, a Fuji 11mp full frame
back,
and at some point down the road a high ISO back.

I can certainly believe that about the AF sensor. However,
interchangeable film and digital backs just sounds a little bit
unlikely. It would probably be used mostly in digital mode, so why
would they put in a film transport system? I can believe that an F6
and D3 would use many of the same components, and I can barely believe
the idea of a D3 with interchangeable digital backs and no film
transport.

Actually, it makes a lot of sense to me as a marketing move. They don't have
to abandon the professional film ranks, yet they maintain the flexibility to
position themselves for the digital future. There's nothing new about
interchangeable backs, I had that option on my OM-4 twenty years ago. My
guess is that the F6 body was already cast to accomodate a film transport
mechanism, just as the N80 (basis for S2 Pro, D100, Kodak 14N) has space for
a film transport (as will the N85-based D200 and S3 Pro).

Look at http://www.bythom.com/2004predictions.htm

HMc

"PhotoMan" wrote in message
.. .

"Don Coon" wrote in message
news:NcGGb.39845$VB2.80430@attbi_s51...
Straight out of the camera film may be higher quality but the "digital
darkroom" wipes that advantage out easily. I couldn't imagine going
back
to
film, scanners, etc. IMHO, the end product of my DSLR is higher quality
than film.

Sigh........I remember how I lusted for my film scanner. Now all the negs
and slides are scanned and I'm burnin' up pixels like there was no
tomorrow.
Except for restoration jobs, I don't remember the last time I even powered
up the flatbed.
Joe Arnold

Lucky you : ) I scanned the "400 best" slides last winter as defined by my
wife. Then we visited her mother who lives 640 miles away. That resulted in
about 200 more but only because I kept insisting on "only the 10% best".
Thought that was done when suddenly about 200 more show up from her cousin.
Have touched those yet and maybe I'll just be stubborn : ) The last straw
was the discovery during a remodel project of maybe 200 more of our best
slide she had pulled decades ago to have prints made. Will it ever end??
Think I'll break the scanner or sell it on Ebay!

"Howard McCollister" writes:
However, interchangeable film and digital backs just sounds a
little bit unlikely. It would probably be used mostly in digital
mode, so why would they put in a film transport system?

Actually, it makes a lot of sense to me as a marketing move. They
don't have to abandon the professional film ranks, yet they maintain
the flexibility to position themselves for the digital future.

I really don't think they have to care about that. A professional who
buys an F6 probably intends to put $10K in film and processing through
it every year. S/he won't mind buying separate film and digital
bodies if needed.

There's nothing new about interchangeable backs, I had that option
on my OM-4 twenty years ago.

A digital back (there are some available for MF and LF cameras right now)
is much more complicated and cumbersome.

Look at http://www.bythom.com/2004predictions.htm

That article is interesting but purely speculative.

Paul Rubin wrote:
"Howard McCollister" writes:

However, interchangeable film and digital backs just sounds a
little bit unlikely. It would probably be used mostly in digital
mode, so why would they put in a film transport system?


Actually, it makes a lot of sense to me as a marketing move. They
don't have to abandon the professional film ranks, yet they maintain
the flexibility to position themselves for the digital future.


I really don't think they have to care about that. A professional who
buys an F6 probably intends to put $10K in film and processing through
it every year. S/he won't mind buying separate film and digital
bodies if needed.


There's nothing new about interchangeable backs, I had that option
on my OM-4 twenty years ago.


A digital back (there are some available for MF and LF cameras right now)
is much more complicated and cumbersome.


Look at http://www.bythom.com/2004predictions.htm




That article is interesting but purely speculative.

So is speculation concerning the demise of film, yet that doesn't stop
the tech prone people from predicting films demise as though it were a
certainty.

Nick

"Paul Rubin" wrote in message
...
"Howard McCollister" writes:
However, interchangeable film and digital backs just sounds a
little bit unlikely. It would probably be used mostly in digital
mode, so why would they put in a film transport system?

Actually, it makes a lot of sense to me as a marketing move. They
don't have to abandon the professional film ranks, yet they maintain
the flexibility to position themselves for the digital future.

I really don't think they have to care about that. A professional who
buys an F6 probably intends to put $10K in film and processing through
it every year. S/he won't mind buying separate film and digital
bodies if needed.

There's nothing new about interchangeable backs, I had that option
on my OM-4 twenty years ago.

A digital back (there are some available for MF and LF cameras right now)
is much more complicated and cumbersome.

Look at http://www.bythom.com/2004predictions.htm

That article is interesting but purely speculative.

Sure, it's speculative, but the guy doing the speculating is a highly
regarded Nikon-based writer and photo professional -- an industry insider
with a good track record at short term "predicting" aspects of the digital
photgraphy market place. I don't propose his speculations as gospel, but I
do think that where there is smoke, there is often fire...

Good point about the cost of separate film and digital bodies realtive to
the yearly amount of film, though. I realize that a digital back would be
more complicated than the old data back or 250 shot roll back for my OM2 or
OM4. Relative to your first point, maybe it wouldn't have to be a
change-in-the-field situation. Maybe you would buy the F6 as either a
digital SLR, or a film SLR, depending on whether you bought it with a
digital back or film back...

HMc