[Leica] "No one is using film" Seems an odd comment

Tue Oct 2 14:27:59 PDT 2018

Film has gotten hard to get in Portland, not because stores do not stock it, they do, ProPhoto, Blue Moon, Citizen’s Shutterbug Chain and ShadowSmith regularly report folks coming in and buying hundreds of dollars worth of film at a time. Fortunately, I have a freezer full.

The PDX Camera show last weekend was flooded with all ages seeking film and film cameras…the film stocks, even decades out of date, were selling for $3-5 a roll of normal stuff…and gone by noon…

Mark R may prefer digital for his work and workflow which is awesome…but…I miss the old days say 2005-2011ish when I could pick up a Hasselblad 500c Chrome 80 12 back for $150, a Nikon F3 for $40…film sales have grown for several years now year over year…which is good. 

But then I am weird as I still use Leica SM and R cameras and lenses and Olympus OM and Rollei and Minox to 8 x 10

And film and digital Leica M

And Film and FX Digital Nikon

And Fuji X…

Oh, BTW the Svema thin poly base “120” can be rolled onto existing 220 paper ends…I am trying to talk them into spooling 220 as a stock item

Mark in PDX
who is loading TMax into his Rolleiflex 3.5 as we speak (a heck of a trade from the show, a 500EL with A24 and Kiev NC2 for a NEW (literally) old stock 3.5 Automat 2 with Xenar ad the other guy was happier than I am) 

> On Oct 2, 2018, at 2:16 PM, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> wrote:
> 
> Up until this century I shot a ton of 220 Plus X in my Hasselblad 220 backs and sometimes my twin lens Rolleiflex 2.8 F but when it came to 35mm I shot T grain films as they were far sharper and far finer grain which at that size I felt was needed. The high rez 35mm studio or tripod film I used in the end was Neopan 100 Acros. They stopped making it in April as no one is buying it. The reason why no one is buying it is that digital photography is a far superior technology making far superior results than any film at very small fraction of the cost.
> I never miss it.
> 
> Plus x as as I recall was one of the very few films in which the iso number on the box was not the iso you should use as the shadows were too thin but were fine if you shot it at an even 100 like all the other medium speed films. And that is with all kinds of film developer combinations. All under exposed at iso 125.
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Mark William Rabiner
> Photographer
> 
> On 10/2/18, 4:41 PM, "LUG on behalf of Lluis Ripoll via LUG" <lug-bounces+mark=rabinergroup.com at leica-users.org on behalf of lug at leica-users.org> wrote:
> 
>    Jim,
> 
>    Kodak Plus X was one of my favorite films, four years ago I’ve purchased expired but still working, I have tested a lot of films: Eastmann Double X 5222, ORWO 74 and 72, Bergger, Adox Silvermax, Tri-X, Foma, and finally I’ve been back to the classical FP4 and HP5, with classical developers too D-76/ID-11, FP4 and HP5 are great films but they don’t deliver the Plus-X look….., it is a shame. Someone said me to test Kenmere but I have not yet tried. We have to say R.I.P. to the Plus X, enjoy your three last gems!
> 
>    Cheers
>    Lluis
> 
> 
> 
>> El 2 oct 2018, a les 22:28, Jim Hemenway <jim at hemenway.com> va escriure:
>> 
>> Hi Folks:
>> 
>> I'm down to my last three rolls of my beloved Kodak Plus-X film.
>> 
>> Can anyone recommend an Ilford film which is similar to Plus-X... perhaps FP4?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> Jim Hemenway - still using film, but saving my pennies for the new Pentax full frame,
>> hopefully before my expiration date.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> 
> 
>    _______________________________________________
>    Leica Users Group.
>    See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information