 Alicia McMahill |
camera question ok so this is a thing that I have seen and have yet to find somewhere...it might help to know what I am looking for:} Cameras that interchange b/w and color film. I would like to stick to Nikon and I just don't know where to look, or what I need to look at to know what I am looking at. I would like to stay with film with a bit of interest in digital. thanks for any info
|
|
|
|
||
|
robert G. Fately |
Alicia, any film camera will be able to use any film of the sze that fits that camera. For Nikon, you're talkig about 35MM film - and Kdak, FUji and a few other companies make many varieties of both color and black & white films. As for digital, this will require a completely different camera body. If you have a bunch of (relatively new) Nikon lenses, then you could get one of Nikon's digital SLRs - these are cameras that, like their film cousins, use interchangeable lenses. Or you could opt for a higher-end digital camera with a 10X zoom lens, which could be from any manufacturer since there's no issue of sharing lenses.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Alicia McMahill |
right but I am talking about a camera that has the film in the bottom...or at least I think it did.... the photographer took something off the bottom of her camera and replaced it with another of he same size...I asked what that was a bout and she said that it was her film...getting a mix of color and film. The canister looked like the body of the camera and then attached to the bottom of the camera. I don't know what the make of her camera was. any ideas?
|
|
|
|
||
|
Mark Feldstein |
Bob is exactly right of course, if you're talking about 35mm. But based on your clarification, Alicia, I think you're talking about cameras that will accept an interchangable film magazine. The rig consists of a camera lens, a body, and the magazine that attaches to the body. Film magazines can be loaded with various kinds / speeds of film, like black and white in one, color in another, transparency film in a third. The magazines aren't specific for the kind of film. Their use only depends on what you load them with. You can even get a magazine that will work with Polaroid pack film and give you instant results in black and white or color. Offhand, I can't think of any 35mm cameras that will do this, but it's a common arrangement for medium format cameras that produce 2 1/4" square or slightly larger negatives / transparencies on 120 or 220 size film. 120 if shooting in square format will give you 12 exposures to a roll while 220 will produce 24 in that size. I use a Hasselblad medium format camera http://www.hasselbladusa.com that accepts interchangable mags and Polaroid backs like I've described. Some Mamiya models like the M645 and RZ67 and others will do the same. If you've got the dough, you can also get MF film cameras that will accept a digital back. Very pricey. This what you're talking about? Take it light.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Alicia McMahill |
Bob and Mark thank you! I understood what Bob to say as true...I just think I explained it well enought the first time but Mark you hit it right on the head. I know there are different types of cameras as with medium format, 35mm cameras and so on but I haven't done much looking past new digital slr's, and 35mm's, as I have heard from the little I know of medium format and others they are a bit out of my allowance money;} but thank you for giving me a place to look for the medium format camera's and what I should be looking for;}
|
|
|
|
||
|
Alicia McMahill |
I ment to say ..."I just think I hadn't explained it well enough the first time....":} sorry
|
|
|
|
||
|
robert G. Fately |
Well, now that we're clear on the medium format interchangeable back concept, Mark's suggestions are good ones. Be aware, though, that digital in that world is rather costly - a digital back that fits a Hassy or Mamiya MF camera typically sells for $20,000 or so. The CCDs are bigger than the chips found in DSLR type digitals, and that extra cost is warranted by pros who can depreciate it and make full time use of it, but for casual "sometimes" digital shooting it can be a bit pricey.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Alicia McMahill |
well....I will have to save my allowance for quite some time to get that sort of toy;] and I have been doing a bit of looking for MF cameras I have a good background with 35mm and some digital but have no idea of what I am getting into with MF. Where do you look for film/slides? is the cost for the slides/flim the same or close to the same for 35mm? Like I said I still have a bunch to look into:} What about development? I am guessing the good old Wal-mart is not going to cut it:} Can I finda lab with the film/slides ordering or do I need to look beyond that? I am going to check with the local college...I am not sure what they have for a photo dept so I will see what info I can get here and there and keep looking:}
|
|
|
|
||
|
Justin G. |
Actually the film for medium format isn't much of a curve from 35mm. Department stores like Wal-mart, Target, Costco do not sell 120/200 film (medium format film) but pro labs and pro camera stores should/do. I shoot the 6x7 format and a average price for a roll of 120 is about $2.99-$3.99. Now here's the thing, a roll of 120 for me only gets 10 shots. For 6x4.5 gets about 12 or 16, I can't remember. Anyways the thing with MF is that it slows you down. This is good, depending on your style of shooting. The ratio off a pic worth showing off compared to the roll when I shot 35mm was about 1:36 - 1:72 meaning I got a good one every roll or two of 36 exposure film. Now it's up to around 2:10 to 4:10 meaning...that I've slowed down enough on each shot to carefully compose and expose and then recompose and reexpose that I'm getting more good shots per roll. What does that mean? Well the film is a tad more expensive to buy and process but it's helping me slow down to get good quality work. Have fun Justin
|
|
|
|
||
|
John P. Sandstedt |
Alicia - I think you saw the magic of the APS photosystem. With the APS magazine, one can easily rewind the film into the magazine and then replace it with another magazine filled with a different kind of film. Typically, the change is from print to slide [both color.] I'm not sure whether the APS system offered B&W. This interchangeability in mid-roll was a great selling point, but high end SLR's [like my Canon EOS 3] allow the film to be rewound leaving a leader. Thus, I can do that and switch films. The only trick is to remember how many exposures were taken. Then, when the partially used roll is reloaded, all that's necessary is to advance the film to a frame or two beyond the point at which ist was rewound. Since the size of the APS negative is smaller than that of a 35mm SLR [or even standard point and shoot,] large prints were a problem [i.e. didn't have the sharpness of thos e from regular film cameras. And, so, the APS system joined the old 110 mm fiasco. One other thing - APS was hard to find.
|
|
|
|
||
|
anonymous A. |
I have also used John's technique for swapping between mono and colour mid-roll in my Canon and it isn't difficult. Incidently, my 1967 Exacta SLR lets me put an empty casette into the wind-on side of the camera, so it wound from casette to casette. It has a knife built into it to let you cut the exposed film off without opening the camera back, so swapping films is a doddle!
|
|
|
|
||
|
Alicia McMahill |
John, I am not sure what I say but the lady was going from B/W to color... or at least that much I knew to ask after watching so long that I had to go befor I got any more asked:} but from what I saw and remember it was a newer set up...new camera looking anyways. I just hadn't thought of MF camera's and that is most likely why I couldn't find anything could take a cartrige and the like for different film... I think the one she had attached at the bottem.... but let me get this right the MF camera get less shots than a 35 mm for the same film #? guess there is alot more to work on and learn and......to save up for:} Thanks for all the info....I am not sure where I am going to start...but the rist step will take me somewhere...
|
|
|
|
||
|
Mark Feldstein |
Justin, Justin, Justin. Stop buying your film at labs, buy it in quantity from a place like B&H in New York. http://www.bhphoto.com. You'll probably save 1/3 or more. If you do buy in bulk, keep it in the fridge and it'll last longer. Mark
|
|
|
|
||
|
John P. Sandstedt |
I'm no expert on MF, but I do think that certain of these cameras have, available, interchangeable film backs - this would meet your description above. And, as Bob and Mark say, MF gets pricey very quickly. Oh, that Hassleblad digital at $20,000 . . . There have been a number of threads questioning whether MF is a good purchase in today's digital world. Once, again, I think this depends on the particular person and the type of pictures s/he wants to take. As I view winning B&W prints in statewide competition hosted by the NJ Federation of Camera Clubs, it's not the digital pictures that are winning. And, since bigger prints are better, MF would be preferred [in my opinion.] I think I'm correct in the following. MF uses two kinds of print film sizes - 120 and 220, available in B&W and color versions. [I think there's also slide film available for MF (Velvia.)] 120 gives you 12 exposures, 220 gives either 20 or 24. Typical negative sizes: 2 1/4 X 2 1/4 [inches,] 6 cm X 4.5 cm, and even a 6 cm X 7 cm. So, larger prints can be made [in the wet darkroom.] But, since Bronica has discontinued several of its MF cameras, one might ask whether this format will survive for too much longer, even though Mamiya recently introduced a digital. Any pressure by proponents of digital, placed to cause the demise of 35 mm film cameras, is pushing doubly hard on MF.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Justin G. |
I believe MF will WAY outlast 35mm. 35mm is almost going now. Yeah Bronica stopped, but you still have Pentax, Mamiya, Hassy etc. and those are some BIG NAME companies. And now with the introduction of digi backs on the market by Leaf America and Sinar (sonar?) and others, the quality of those MF lenses are going to be much wanted. I don't like to tell too many people because I want my fair shair of equipment at cheap prices, but right now MF is pretty cheap for used systems. I got a whole system Mamiya RB67 for right around $500. Things I want: polaroid back $80 or so, 180mm lens $80-100 on ebay, etc. prices are pretty good. oh yeah those digi backs are gonna run ya about 15K - 30K. they're smart in keeping the prices high and out of the amateurs hands. (including myself).
|
|
|
|
||
|
John P. Sandstedt |
Justin - If you got your RB67 for that price, I think you've proved my point. The pressure's on MF even more than 35 mm - primarily because many, many more people have 35 mm cameras. Why is anyone be selling on e-Bay - could it be because they can't get anything for these cameras at normal photo exchanges? Or, heresy - could it be that these folks are trying to get back the cost of their new digitals - since they may not use their MFs any longer? So, if someone is planning to drop $1,000 to $8,000 on a camera, why not buy a digital. After all, one doesn't have to search for an outside photo-finisher, who develops roll film, if s'he buys a digital. I mean - that is the argument we read all through BP threads. And, seriously, do you really think Pentax, Mamiya and Hasselblad compare [in dollar size and number of cameras built] to Nikon, Canon, Minolta and Olympus - none of which offers a MF camera? Then, of course, there's Sony, HP, Panasonic, Casio and a host of "familiar camera manufacturers" whose production isn't being considered. And, I'll bet you didn't know Leica is in bankruptcy! John
|
|
|
|
||
|
George Anderson |
There will be 35mm and MF film, and cameras for it, for many, many years. Heck, you can still buy 127 film for cameras made 60 years ago. There are simply too many millions of people who still use film, and too many things that film cameras do well that digital cameras can not do, or can only do at astronomical costs. To put it into perspective, even if the market consisted only of the many thousands of camera collectors who wanted to occasionally use their film cameras, there would still be film available for sale, and processing for it. There is a lot of uncertainty in the film camera market, and some manufacturers have discontinued film camera production - while others have already discontinued digital camera production! Doesn't prove anything, and I wouldn't read too much into that. These market swings are often exaggerated: after the dust settles, predictions will be closer to reality. New products come out, others leave. Nikon reintroduced a collector edition of a 35mm rangefinder model only a couple of years ago. The manufacturing standards of some of the better film cameras are so high that a person who purchases one or more secondhand will always have a working camera in his/her lifetime. People who ride the new wave of technology take much bigger risks that their equipment will soon become obsolete. Ask anyone who paid through the nose for the very first generation Canon or Nikon autofocus SLRs what they got when they tried to sell them. Currently there are some great deals to be had in secondhand 35mm and MF cameras, for those who want to take advantage - if history is any guide, in a few years, the more desirable models will begin appreciating considerably in price.
|
|
|
|
||
|
anonymous A. |
An old technology that costs little and lets yhou get on with the equipment you have might be the answer, Alicia. A good scanner costs less than some point and shoot cameras; compred to a MF or even an interchangeable back they are CHEAP. You could scan your prints, negatives or slides and convert them to monochrone in the computer. I have just completed scanning an convertng several hundred Antartic slides and it is a very easy process.
|
|
|
|
||
|
John P. Sandstedt |
George - Couldn't agree more. But, when I bought my first first auto-focus in 1988 [Canon EOS 620] it became obsolete within 25 days of its purchase. That's because of a review that said the auto-bracketing feature [the reason I bought the camera] should be allowed to remain "on" until turned off. Stuck with an obsolete camera, I never thought of replacing it because it had the features I wanted, just not what the reviewers thought might be "better.". I continued to use it and enjoy it until I bought it's replacment, my Canon EOS 3. Seven years after purchase, it's still ranked number one or two in Canon's film line [if course, below the IV Pro line.] And, my 620 - why I keep it as my back-up, usually filled with B&W. Too many folks jsut have to have the latest camera - without regard to what's the "right camera."
|
|
|
|
||
|
George Anderson |
Yup. Tho, I wasn't thinking of your 620 as 'first gen', but rather, the 1985 Canon T-80 with its bulky lens-mounted autofocus mechanism. Nose-heavy and slow to operate, it was all the rage for a short time. Today a T-80 in mint condition WITH its AF lens might bring $110, a Canon T-90 contemporary manual-focus body only, mint: $700. Newer ain't always better.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Justin G. |
can you even compare canon/nikon with mamiya/hassy? apples and oranges.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Alicia McMahill |
Ok so I have learned almost every day from this sight and the days I haven't learned something I have been laughing (hard some days) at the side conversations you all have here! But back to the camera thing:} I am not looking to get rid of my camera (a nikon) but I was just wondering what it was that I saw.... would I love to get a mf camera...? I don't know I have no idea of what they are and what they can and can't do. At this point I do the scanning and the ps from time to time but I am just starting in the local contests and the wanting to try to go a bit further with my work. I am looking more into portraits and animals sort of things but I am working a bit at a time to get better. would I like to get a pro camera ...well yea but am I ready for one? If I really look at my work I say maybe not:{ So I will stay here and learn and work and take tons of picts, looking for a lab I like, looking for someone to bounce my work off of and trying to ....keep going:} Thank you all for the info and the smiles... this is so much fun it is hard to think of it as learning/teaching and that is what I do for a living sooooo;]
|
|
|
|
||
|
anonymous A. |
Hey Alicia! Now you've got us talking, it's time to show us watcha got! How about putting some pics on your gallery page.....
|
|
|
|
||
|
Mike Johansen |
Hello, just thought I'd chime in and add my 2 cents worth..Made the leap from 35 to medium format 10 years ago, and would never consider going back. I travel with 2 cameras: Both Fuji, the GA645w & Zi. One a fixed wide angle, the 2nd, a 55-90mm zoom. BOTH cameras have auto focus (very desirous for 56 year old eyes than just can't see too well) and aperature priority setting. So, both cameras are indeed just souped-up 35's and with 32 pics on 220, works for me. Both cameras have come down just slightly in price and are somewhere around 500-725. (ebay is a good indicator of current pricing.) Best regards and Merry Christmas 2005!
|
|
|
|
||
|
Alicia McMahill |
David,Ask and you shall receive:} Best to all for the Christmas and New Year.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Alicia McMahill |
David, well my system will not let me get a pict on here..... :{ so soon
|
|
|
|
||
|
Alicia McMahill |
ok so Ihave got my system up and going for a bit...untill I hit that wrong button again...not all my best stuff but it is recent and I am on the go to a kids ball game... but here it is
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||