Buying more cameras VS buying more film

[Ricus.stormfire]

Well it seems you guys in the 1st world get everything much cheaper, $20? that's like R140, that'll probably go for R600 - R900* here (which is $85 - $128), so that gives me better understanding as to the why, they are dirt cheap there...

*But it depends on a few factors, condition, does it come with a lens. Those quoted prices are what seller normally would ask, there are bargains sometimes, but I've been burnt by bargains in the past (Minolta X300 with 58mm f1.2, but the lens has NO aperture diaphram - permanent f1.2) Very Cheap = Broken, or very very used/abused/fungus infected lenses etc. Good ones = higher price

[MattKing]

Ricus:

That $20.00 camera was a particularly good deal. Most of the thrift store inventory consists of a variety of 35mm point and shoot cameras (some of which are quite good) for around $5.00 or old, basic manual SLRs that have seen better days.

But it is true that we get quite a bit of choice.

[Brian Legge]

If I could put money towards something, it would be buying time to shoot. Between a full time job and living in Seattle, sunlight is at a premium. Not a problem for the studio folks but I've never been able to get into portraiture and still life. I'm not good at stepping away from work, so I almost never take vacations.

In the end, I have plenty of cameras I enjoy using and film ready to go but often have a hard time getting through a roll a week this time of the year (ie October through May)

[ntenny]

Personally, my film consumption is limited by time more than by money---I could afford more film than I currently buy, but I'd never find the time to shoot and process it. So "more cameras vs. more film" is a false dichotomy for me. Your mileage may vary, in which case you probably have more time to spend on photography than I do, and I'm jealous of you. :-)

Also, the pleasure of experimenting with different equipment is one of the things that gets me out there shooting. I think quite a few of us at APUG are like this---it's not only about the resulting image but also about working with tools that are fun to use. Every time I hear a leaf shutter go "pzzt" it brightens my day a little.

-NT

[perkeleellinen]

I've managed to almost cure myself of equipment GAS by buying more film, always fresh film. One issue I have is that I don't seem to be able to shoot it quick enough and I tend to amass film. The problem is slowly sorting itself out as more and more lines get cut, there's less to try out, especially with colour.

[Moopheus]

I'd offer some additional logic, while manufacturers are running from making film at, say, 10 miles an hour, everyone except for Holga appears to be running from manufacturing bodies at about 100 miles an hour. How many models of Canon 35mm are still being made? Nikon? How many production runs do you think Schneider is making for LF lenses a year? at what cost?

The camera makers have a problem the film makers do not--they have to compete with their own existing inventory. There are still a LOT of Nikons, Canons, etc., out in the world, still serviceable and usable. You want a nice Nikon, a Schneider lens? No problem. Some stuff is getting scarce/hard to repair, but we are not close to running out any time soon. In the long run, this is a real problem--the film market can't be sustained on used cameras alone.

I have to say, of all the cameras I have now--about eight or so in good user condition--not one was purchased new.

[eddym]

There are photographers, and then there are camera collectors. A photographer only needs one camera, but lots of film; a camera collector needs many cameras but no film. Each person decides which of these they are.

(Note: the above does not mean that photographers are limited to one camera; nor does it mean that collectors never shoot film. But most people fall somewhere between the two extremes.)

[blockend]

One of the things that confounds and amuses me is the last generation of 35mm cameras to be made, the plastic fantastic autofocus SLRs of the 1990s, are also the cheapest. Okay professional models attract a premium but even consumer cameras were pretty sophisticated by the turn of the millennium and sell for buttons today.
The pay off for such cheapness is a certain degree of premature obsolescence (usually LCDs) so anyone learning to love multi-mode AF cameras had better stock up. Regarding film I also admit to a degree of panic buying. My impression is other film users also buy in bigger multiples than they actually need to encourage manufacturers to continue production.

[yeknom02]

Basically, I always ask myself if the new camera I'm about to pick up gives me something new that I'm lacking. For 35mm, I have an autofocus SLR, a manual focus (because it's lighter), a rangefinder (because it's quiet), and a toy camera (because it makes a unique image). In medium format, I have a TLR (quiet, though I need to repair the viewfinder hood) and a Hasselblad (pristine quality). I'm also going to try a 4x5 monorail so I can experiment with movements. Oh yeah, and there's also a Polaroid camera for the few instant shots I want to do.

Basically, each camera has something unique that it can offer me, so I don't think I have too many. I also don't think I need any more cameras, and won't buy anything else until I come across something I'm missing. (New lenses are always an option, though) I buy film only when I run low, and there is always some in my freezer.

[Christopher Walrath]

The only GAS I suffer from is a good spotmeter at this point. Cameras, good. Lenses, good. I have plenty of film and paper for now. Been a slow year. As to film cameras, not many new cameras are produced (compared to days of yore). If someone is concerned about the future of being able to use those cameras then spending resources on medium seems a no-brainer. The majority of film cameras being bought are secondhand. Film and paper, on the other hand is a necessity in order to insure their continued use.