Latest purchase, Canon T70 with 28mm lens and 70-210mm Zoom for the princely sum of £30 ($60) off Ebay.
Clean as a whistle, just christening it with a roll of C41, and getting the hang of a motorwind. Not used one of my own before.
I can understand the urge to splash out on brand new sparkly kit, but I resist it and build up my collection piece by piece instead
"Flatter Me, and I May Not Believe You. Criticize Me, and I May Not like You. Ignore Me, and I May Not Forgive You. Encourage Me, and I Will Not Forget You."
Most likely AUD$800 would be the limit for a 35mm marque (i.e. Canon in my instance) in excellent condition i.e. EOS 1V B/O...
Happy to spend up to AU$14,000 on a LF work kit in a year or two, assuming sheet film holds in availability (that's the problem: unless you're in a capital city and know where to look, 6x4.5 sheet film is scarce in many places Downunder). I am very unsure how long film will be around for. Maybe I'm pessimistic, but many colleagues have left stalwart RVP (Velvia) for the bland chroma of sRGB digital. Even digibacks for Hassy are here.
I'd spend the going price for the film camera I wanted, whatever that would be. Film cameras seem to be mostly used, so the demand is a little less and the investment is a little lower.
My personal belief is even a used film camera, say a Hasselblad 500 series or a Nikon F2,3,4 etc. is a far better investment than a new digital system at this time. (availability of film notwithstanding)
That is the piece-de resistance! When the film goes, then what!? We're stuck with a medium (digi) we neither like nor wish to use, or will be bow at the alter of rampant commercialism ad false positives and all embrace digital as the new age way of creating fine art? I'd rather leave photography if push comes to shove.
Originally Posted by Paul Goutiere
What state of the world?. Fortunately I got out of banks and into BP petroleum, Russian gas etc many months ago so the sky's the limit.
Originally Posted by david b
Yes, I know all the other replies have been serious but a bit of ironic levity in these straitened times may be appropriate.
I fancy a P645N, a F6 and maybe a Mamiya 645D. Could I justify any of them? It's doubtful. What I could justify price-wise in relation to expenditure that I could afford to waste if I didn't use them enough, would get me much less than I have in my Pentax and Agfa Isolette 1(the latter given to me "gratis")
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Perhaps I'm only a hopeful idiot, but somehow I believe film will see me out, at least Black and White film.
Originally Posted by Poisson Du Jour
If not, and film goes, I'll join you I'm afraid.
David, it depends, if you're limiting it to new only, then, if I could afford it, I'd pick up an F6. But, if you're counting used, there's only one other body I want to grab. A functional 500C or CM with 80f2.8 and A12. I have all the 35mm gear I want, except for a couple lenses, and motor drives for the F, F2, and F3... Most I've paid was $363, including shipping from the UK for my F3P. Prior to then, it was my first FM2n @ $295 in 1991, plus 8.1% (now 9%) sales tax. Least I've paid, without getting something for free? $12.00, plus shipping for a black Nikkormat FT2 body with broken self-timer and meter that was a couple stops off.
APUG: F2AS x2, F, FM2n, Nikomat FTn, FT2
Nikkors: 18-70/3.5-4.5G AF-S DX (f/D200), 20/3.5 UD, 24/2.8 AI, 50/2 AI, 50/2 K, 50/1.4 AI, 55/3.5 Micro PC, 55/2.8 Micro AIS, 85/1.8 K, 105/2.5 K, 135/3.5 QC
- My flickr stream
I spent $15 for a 35mm Canon AE-1 (good availability of lens) which I thought was money well spent considering I was upgrading my $10 AE-1P which has shutter lag; I spent a little over $500 for my Mamiya RZ kit (from a friend who decided to stop using film). I am considering laying out the $5000+ for a full Hasselblad 501-503 film kit because I know with regular servicing, I can use it for as long as I can get film. Given I am in my low-30's agewise, I am planning on 40+ years of operation which makes the cost fairly low over the long-term, since I think we will be able to get film in the long-term, it just might not be the film we are using today (I mean, you can still buy transistor tubes for things).
The question for me is whether film cameras are now like: (1) cars that depreciate the moment they are purchased and will continue to plummet in value until they are worthless due to being unrepairable or nonfunctional; or (2) are they like hockey cards, where some items retain/gain value over time and some become worthless? I personally think most 35mm (Leica being the possible exception) and lower-end medium format cameras will be like cars and high-end medium format and large-format will be like hockey cards, valued by the few.
Once a photographer is convinced that the camera can lie and that, strictly speaking, the vast majority of photographs are "camera lies," inasmuch as they tell only part of a story or tell it in a distorted form, half the battle is won. Once he has conceded that photography is not a "naturalistic" medium of rendition and that striving for "naturalism" in a photograph is futile, he can turn his attention to using a camera to make more effective pictures.
Very wise. But I would have gone for the T90, and speaking from experience (1988-1990) it's a gem. That model remains sought after by collectors and devoted celluloid officionados alike. Even I'm looking for one to play with...
Originally Posted by Aurum
Well, decided to buy a new Arca-Swiss 4x5 camera back in July it was alot. Did I have alot of guilt buying it, sure but it will be the one camera that never is sold.
Build a man a fire and he will be warm for hours.
Set a man on fire and he will be warm for the rest of his life.
Sic gorgiamus allos subjectatos nunc.