Film VS Digital
But I wanted an interchangeable lens 35mm rangefinder, I liked the way I shot when I photographed with a rangefinder, I was loose, relaxed. Maybe it was something about not having that viewfinder black out? Maybe it was the quiet shutters? Maybe it was the way that people tended to ignore you with this small, quiet camera in your hands? I started researching different rangefinders:
I really liked the Zeiss, but I couldn’t find too many people with long term impressions on the camera, I found some initial reviews and tests, and everyone mentioned the camera in comparison to the comparable Leica M (in this case the M7 – both cameras have electronic shutters and are battery dependent), but in most of these reviews there was this undertone of “This camera is good, but it’s not a Leica”. Maybe because most of the reviewers also owned one of the various Leica Ms, so they basically were saying (without saying), “This is a good camera, but not enough to replace my Leica.” And it wasn’t a common enough camera that you could happen to run into someone shooting with one so at least you could cop a feel on it (camera feel is very important!) And not having a store locally that I could just run to check one out, left me with only the option to buy one, and then hope I could get back what I paid for it if it wasn’t the camera for me, not really a chance I wanted to take.
I wasn’t too initially high on the RF because it was a motor driven camera, and I really wanted a rangefinder with a manual advance lever, so I dropped it from my consideration without giving it too much thought.
The Voigtlander Bessas were priced right for my budget. At this point was really interested in buying a Bessa R3M + the 40 1.4, which would allow me to slide into the world of 35mm Rangefinders with a complete setup for the price of a Leica M6. Through a local film photography Meetup group, I was actually able to handle a R3A. It was nice, I didn’t shoot it as I didn’t want to waste someone else’s film, I liked the feel of the camera and the viewfinder, but something just wasn’t right. I couldn’t put my finger on it. But I started shopping for a R3M anyway, my want of the rangefinder was trying to trump my instincts and this odd feeling that I had about owning a Bessa. This feeling had nothing to do with the build factor, or the rangerfinder base length, or the viewfinder magnification, or any of those technical things that people put so much stock into when making a camera purchase.
Months after I was able to handle that R3A, I went to an Instant film photowalk at the State Fair of Texas. One of the other photographers there, just happened to bring his Leica M6.
I asked if I could hold it
I brought it up to my eye and looked through the viewfinder, the framelines and patch were sharply defined. The Bessa’s was just as sharp and defined, and the viewfinder was just as clear, but looking through the M6, was just…different…
I felt the solidness of the body, it felt like one piece of metal, you could feel the craftsmanship (I know the M6 isn’t one of the classic Ms – where you REALLY can feel the craftsmanship, so I’ve heard….just go with me here)
The instant my hands touched that camera, the moment I looked through the viewfinder, I immediately knew what was wrong before, maybe I knew all along and I just didn’t want to admit it to myself…
I wanted a Leica
Any other M-mount rangefinder would just be a substitute for the camera in my heart I truly wanted. There are thousands of different camera models out there in the world, and we only have a set number of years on this Earth to photograph, so why would you want to waste them shooting with a camera that is a substitute for the camera your heart truly longed for? Even if it’s something that you have to wait and save up for?
A lot of people tend to look at own a Leica like owning a luxury automobile, expensive on the front end, expensive accessories (aka lenses), and expensive on the upkeep. I think of a Leica as one of those cameras you buy and you feel satisfied, even before you take a single shot with it, mostly because you know that with the upkeep, it will pretty much outlast you. It’s a ‘Forever camera’; that gives you a sense of satisfaction that you bought the camera that you truly wanted in your heart.
But, let’s face facts. MOST Leica’s are expensive luxury cameras (notice I said most)
So, yeah, when you look at those 3 cameras which Leica are still producing and selling as NEW (and expensive or not, props have to be given to anyone producing new film [and 35mm film cameras at that] cameras in 2017…). So for the most of us, these cameras are well out of our reach, so used is the way to go!
Okay, so given the fact that used cameras shoot just as well as new cameras, what are we looking at? I started out looking for a M6 which used run anywhere from $1200 to $1500 with some a little lower, some a little higher. I also was looking at the classic M4 which fell around the $900-$1100 range, only differences being that the M6 had 28mm framelines and a meter. I didn’t want the older M3 or M2 models, because I wanted the modern rewind knob and didn’t want to deal with the removal take up spool. The only camera I did not even consider was the M5 and that was simply because it wasn’t the classic M body style, although I’ve read somewhere that it has one of the best in-camera meters of any Leica, even the newer models. I was on eBay, KEH, B&H and Adorama almost everyday looking at M4s and M6s and lamenting the fact that I didn’t have the money for either of them.
Somewhere along my search for my Leica, I became aware of two other models, the M4-2 and M4-P, these are generally thought of the ‘lesser’ Leicas because they were manufactured in Canada instead of Germany (due to Leica looking to cut down their manufacturing costs after the fallout over the release of the M5). The resulting bodies were made with stainless steel components instead of the hand polished brass materials, because of this, these two cameras can be a great bargain and generally can be found anywhere from $600 to $1000 depending on their condition. $600, that’s what I was talking about! So I began to search for the M4-P (as it was generally regarded to be the better of the two), and after a few weeks, I started to lament again, because I couldn’t find anything in the lower cost range, and then one day I went to Adorama.
And there was a G rated M4-P for $579
I knew it would take me 3 or 4 days to pull all the funds for it together, so I was hoping that it would still be there!
Those 3 or 4 days ended up being two weeks…
I just knew I had missed out!
I went back to Adorama’s used section, and there it was! It took me about .5 secs to hit “Add cart” then “checkout”
The two weeks ended up also being good because I was able to also get a Voigtlander 35 2.5 pancake lens to start out with, I like to call this the beginner’s Leica package, the M4-2 / M4-P and that 35 2.5, you can get out of the door with that around $1300 or so, and you’re ready to roll when it gets there.
I keep tabs on the tracking, anxiously awaiting when it would arrive on my front porch:
Opening the box and looking at everything, I had a weird feeling of buyer’s remorse, which is something that I never felt before with ANY camera purchase. I went over the camera to see why it was only $579, because looking at it, it was in almost perfect condition! I only saw one flaw, a dent on the top panel in front of the cold shoe. I ran through the shutter speeds, to my naked eye, all speeds looked right on. The only thing that really troubled me was the dent, could that mean that the rangefinder was out of alignment and run me another $200 or so for an adjustment?
The next nice day we had I went into downtown Dallas and burned a couple of rolls of Portra 400 to test everything out. Rangefinder was aligned and all shutter speeds were good! Because I was still feeling my way out and just testing the camera none of the photos I took are worthy of a second look, so they are not being shown here! But now that I had a Leica, what was I going to shoot with it?
To Be continued…
These are my Holgas, there are many like them, but these two are mine…
You’re responsible for my first experience using film bigger than 35mm, you changed me forever, I want you to know that…
Before I met you, I was a different type of photographer:
I was uptight
I was dogmatic and rigid
I made my photographs a certain way, with a certain type of camera. It had worked for me for over ten years, and I hadn’t planned on changing anytime soon. Until I returned to college in 2004 to pursue a BFA in Photo, and you were a requirement for my intermediate photo class. You were boxy and plastic, you felt cheap, hell you looked cheap.
You were also uncompromising, you asked me to do a lot but you gave me so little to work with:
You asked me to let go, let go of that sense of control, of those set in ways that I had. Besides, you didn’t have a range of 8 f-stops, you didn’t have a shutter speed of 1/2000, you didn’t need to make sure you were in perfect focus.
You weren’t about all that technical minutiae
You were about feeling the photo
The motto that was frequently associated to you and your similarly equipped brethren was “Don’t think just shoot”. I always hated that saying because it made everyone who chose you to make their work look as if they didn’t have a clue of what they were doing. And some didn’t, to them you were just an inexpensive toy to have fun with, and that’s okay. If there’s one thing missing in photography these days it’s fun.
But there were others, many others who saw the uniqueness of the photos you produced as the element they needed to create their statement to the world. Those hazily sharp / unsharp images could be interpreted as a dream, or a nightmare; there was always that additional layer of meaning that the viewer was confronted with. Maybe that’s why people either loved or hated the photos you made, you weren’t a tool that made literal photographs.
I bonded with you immediately, you were that fresh start that I didn’t know I needed. I was hooked from that first roll of Tri-x. Soon, you were all I wanted to shoot with. Maybe it was those larger negatives, maybe it was the freedom I felt when I was photographing with you.
Now the news is that more of you are going to be produced. The factory in China that manufactured you just up and destroyed and scrapped all their machinery. All retailers informed Holga fans that once their stock was gone, that was it. That’s a shame, you were the perfect teaching tool in today’s progressively digital world. Who knows how many more generations of artists you could have influenced… We had over 30 years with you, but that wasn’t long enough. Now, you’ve been relegated to a footnote in the history of film photography, a victim of the massive digital photo industry that won’t seem to stop until it’s consumed all that is analog, after all film is now a niche, and the Holga was the nichest of niches….
Me? I’ve neglected you over the past couple of years. When I load up to go shoot, I see you lying there, a thin layer of dust starting to settle over you. You’ve been waiting for me to load you with film. To continue working on that project we were so excited about years ago. And I pause for a moment, thinking about all the photos I’ve made over the last ten years with you.
I think that just two years ago, we were on our way to Chicago for me to attend my very first professional portfolio review, and the looks of some of the reviewers and fellow photographers when I opened my print box to reveal eighteen carefully selected 11×14 photos we had made together. We heard some positive feedback, and some negative. Of course that’s always to be expected, you’re an acquired taste and not everyone loves your flavor.
You taught me, to let go. Frame it loose. If I had second thoughts about the photo I was about to shoot, shoot it anyway. Film in the grand span of things, is cheap. I don’t often wonder about what kind of photographer I would be now if I never would have been forced to use you. Would I have eventually found my way to you?
As film photographers in 2015, we get used to addressing a certain set of questions whenever we are out shooting:
What’s that? [Or as a current meme goes – sildenafil coupons WHAT ARE THOOOOOOOSE??!] (Since most people that shoot digital are used to certain camera body types, most common being a DSLR, they are naturally curious or confused when they see cameras like rangefinders, TLRs, Large Format cameras, pinholes, Polaroids)
You can still buy film? (Why yes, yes you can…some places you can even walk into a camera store and give a person behind a counter money in exchange for boxes of film!)
Why are you shooting film? (I, personally generally answer this question either sarcastically or snarky [which I know that I shouldn’t] depending on how my mood is that day. Maybe the person is genuinely curious as to why, not trying to attack your medium of choice, but sometimes they are trying to attack your medium of choice so maybe they need a little bit of snark…)
bullforce viagra How are you going to see your pictures? Where do you get film developed? – Now, this is actually a question to be addressed…
Why do I say that? Dealing with getting film developed is seen by most non-film photographers as one of the major negative (no pun intended) reasons not to attempt the whole film photography process. As the years go by, we see lab after lab close down, labs abandoning certain processes (like developing slide film), or abandoning their film processing all together. Now there are film labs out there that are doing tremendous business, we all know them; Richards, Indie Film, viagra za zene oglasi The Darkroom, cialis dosaggio 5 mg NorthCoast, Dwayne’s, FIND, and many others. And those labs are great, there’s a reason why they are doing the business that they are. But for those of us who don’t want to mail off their film all the time (or don’t live close to these labs), or don’t want to get their hands dirty developing themselves, there used to be another option if you shot 35mm only.
That option for 35mm shooters? The 1-hr photo lab.
Remember the drugstore 1-hr photo? Drop off a couple of rolls, come back in an hour to prints (if you wanted them), some decent low res scans, and sleeved negatives! All for a fairly reasonable price.
Why would you use drugstore 1 hour processing????
Whatever the reason, the 1-hr photo lab was a nice way to experiment with different films, before you moved on to more serious shooting, or started using those same films in larger formats. Personally when I returned to film back in 2009, I was at my local Walgreen’s at least 2 to 3 times a week, adjusting back to my Nikon F3 and F4s, seeing if I liked 400H more than Portra 400, re-learning to shoot film. And that Walgreen’s got used to seeing me, the technician might say something like “nice photos” when I came back to get my negatives and scans. It was nice.
As the years passed, Walgreen’s (and other 1-hr photo places) began to stop developing film. Minilab equipment was stripped out of their stores (wonder what happened to it), and the ones that continued to develop film in store….their quality control went waaaaaaaaay down. Expired chemistry. “Technicians” that didn’t understand what film was and how it should be properly handled (I heard a story of a photographer seeing a photo lab employee using an un-sleeved negative strip to clean their fingernails).
Now many of these places are committing what to us should be the ultimate sin (even more than lab employees cleaning their nails with your negatives):
Film is now being sent out for processing, and you get a CD of scans, but…..no negatives.
They are destroyed, too much of a hassle (read: cost) to properly sleeve them and mail them back to you.
Throwaway culture has come to film photography.
But you’ve got the scans though right? Your photos are right there for you to view, and email them to your friends and family, post those suckers on Facebook, and hell if you wanted to print them you can do that too! You might be able to squeak a decent 8×10 out of those scans.
Photo CDs (even the archival ones) don’t last forever and since a lot of computers / laptops these days are dropping CD / DVD drives, you might not be able to even view them in 10 years.
But the negatives are supposed to be always there, film was designed as an archival medium, there are numerous better than viagra articles generic cialis at walmart showing photos made from 100+ year old negatives, some of them the earliest examples of color processes. Black and white examples go back even further. Our negatives are designed to outlive us.
Our great grandchildren should be able to look at old slides they dug out of a box in the garage.
Or have a print made from a 50 year old negative.
Film is write once, read many times…