Quote Originally Posted by analoguey View Post
But, wouldnt the price of LF anyways kept it out of reach of the avg Joe? (at earlier prices I mean, pre-digital) I'd presume that pre-digital as well 4x5, 8x10 or other LF would be quite as expensive if not more?
Even used MFs (RBs) that I heard a professional tell me he sold in 2000s didn't really go cheap -even though digital was catching up.
IDK what prices were in 2000, but by 2011 MF equipment had bottomed out. If anything, prices have since risen a bit, since the original predictions re the total demise of film have been proven overly pessimistic. But that wasn't my original point, which was actually that until today, affordable digital sensors for larger formats still do not exist, and the cost of entry is much higher than it ever was for film, while the available sensors do not even reach the same sizes that the original film provided. This means that photographers who chose larger sizes such as 4x5 and 5x7 field cameras for their unique properties might end up with NO equivalent option, should film disappear. Other niche but important applications for film, such as night photography, might end up in a similar situation. There is no digital camera that can do long exposures without two problems: battery drain and digital noise. LF lenses can happily sit open all night without asking to be fed electrons all the time. But you need film to catch those photons.

Quote Originally Posted by analoguey View Post
I'm not sure what you mean on the obsoletion bit though - phones get obsolete every 2 years - my phone has 12 times more RAM, has 5 times faster processor than my first PC(2000) but is (kinda) obsolete now - I bought it in 2012 and it was a flagship device then.
Are you saying LF-MF arent going through that cycle? MFDBs are - probably closer to 3-4 years.
By obsolete I mean you cannot obtain the materials necessary to operate them any longer, to note 126 format cameras, for example. Your examples are not quite analogous, as your computer/phone will still work, although they may be infeasible to repair if they break. For film cameras, film is an important part of the ecology within which they function. Film users were used to 72 month update cycles, not the now typical 12-18 months. The cost of MFDBs puts them in a special category of their own, one where serious amateurs are not much in the picture. Same for scanning backs.

Quote Originally Posted by analoguey View Post
I'm very happy with the Digital camera entry - I doubt I would have followed into LF or MF otherwise - Digital made analog more accessible to me! (strangely enough)
Yes, ironic isn't it? Like you, it has benefitted me greatly.