Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/11/09
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Didn't see it. Apologies. Although my response was meant to be at least mildly amusing...But must have missed...:-) -----Original Message----- From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org [mailto:lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of Seth Rosner Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 1:10 PM To: Leica Users Group Subject: Re: [Leica] Summilux vs. Summicron B.D., did you miss the smiley ? I WAS kidding about the "wasted" film. Seth ----- Original Message ----- From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net> To: "'Leica Users Group'" <lug@leica-users.org> Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 11:51 AM Subject: RE: [Leica] Summilux vs. Summicron > Three reasons - First, it is the first roll of slide film I've had in > a 2 1/4 since about 1965! Second, I'm playing with the camera and want > to see what the results will look like. Three, I long ago digitized > the cat to death. :-) But I'm amused by your question, because if you > don't think that 90 percent of the folks on this list aren't using > their $5000 Leica M body-lens combinations, and slide film and print > film to often take equally silly photos, you really are out of touch > with LUG reality. You are, of course, correct, that digital makes much > more sense in that you can just delete, delete, delete and then reuse > the same CF card to take more meaningful images. Not that photos of > our favorite felines aren't meaningful. Hell, I'll bet that photo > books of cats outsell Selgado's books by about 1000 to 1. > > Speaking of, a zillion years ago I remember sitting with some friends > in the Wash Post cafeteria trying to come up with the perfect book > idea- an instant bestseller. As I recall what we finally settled on > was "Lincoln's Gay Nazi Cat's Diet and Exercise Plan." :-) > > -----Original Message----- > From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org > [mailto:lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf > Of Seth Rosner > Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 11:45 AM > To: Leica Users Group > Subject: Re: [Leica] Summilux vs. Summicron > > > Why you "waste" 6X6 slide film on furry felines is beyond me, B.D. > > Think of how much easier and cheaper it would have been in digital - > delete, > delete, delete. ;-) > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net> > To: "'Leica Users Group'" <lug@leica-users.org> > Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 11:05 AM > Subject: RE: [Leica] Summilux vs. Summicron > > >> And Seth - I think you are absolutely right about the New Zealand >> story >> - that has the ring of "urban digital legend" to it. ;-) >> >> And I just returned to the keyboard having wasted 10 minutes wasting >> two frames of 2 1/4 slide film on one of our cats... :-) >> >> Best >> B. D. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org >> [mailto:lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf >> Of Seth Rosner >> Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 10:50 AM >> To: Leica Users Group >> Subject: Re: [Leica] Summilux vs. Summicron >> >> >> B.D. >> >> I don't think I disagree with one thing you wrote. Except that I >> suspect >> >> that the LHSA member who couldn't find film in New Zealand had an >> agenda or was looking for film in the wilderness. I simply do not >> believe that one >> >> cannot find film to buy in N.Z. >> >> Seth >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net> >> To: "'Leica Users Group'" <lug@leica-users.org> >> Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 10:16 AM >> Subject: RE: [Leica] Summilux vs. Summicron >> >> >>> Hi, Seth - I have said many times that I suspect there will be film >>> around during our life-times. The fact that Kodak and Fuji will >>> continue to manufacture film is hardly surprising, given the number >>> of >> >>> film cameras out there. >>> >>> Far more telling however - and even I find it astonishing - is your >>> friend's experience. That is the reality. >>> >>> Beyond that, digital appeals top far more than editors and P&S >>> throw-away freaks. In fact, many editors have been resisting digital >>> - >> >>> particularly magazine editors. Digital doesn't appeal to people >>> because it symbolizes anything - it appeals to people because it >>> gives >> >>> the overwhelming majority as good or better results than they got >>> with >> >>> film, cheaper and faster than they got those film results. You seem >>> to >> >>> forget that most people don't shoot 25 iso slide film with Leica Ms >>> using the latest aspheric lenses - they shoot with disposable film >>> cameras (speaking of throw-away) and with point-and-shoots costing >>> less than $100. >>> >>> The real digital story is that digital delivers on the >>> never-quite-fulfilled promise of Polaroid - it's true instant >>> photography. And, as I mentioned in my response to Mark Rabiner, with > >>> the arrival of the new Epson, Canon - and I just saw an ad in this >>> morning's paper for a similar product from Dell - people are being >>> offered their own 4x6 'labs' for about $150! If you're not a >>> Leicaphile, or someone who has a real need for film, or an artistic >>> interest in it, why would you want film when you can have a $150 >>> appliance at home that for $.29 a print cranks out 4x6s every bit as >>> good or better than the 4x6s you got at the corner lab - that were >>> often pretty crappy, dust covered, and scratched? >>> >>> As to shooting film and scanning - which I did for about five years, >>> yes, it's a great way to go if you want to shoot film. I still do it >>> on occasion, and I'm sure I will continue to do it for some time to >>> come. It does not, however, offer many of the benefits of digital >>> that >> >>> go beyond cost and speed - but those sure are huge, important >>> benefits >> >>> of digital. >>> >>> I think that those of you for whom money is less of a concern than >>> it > >>> is for most people greatly underestimate the importance of cost in >>> this film-digital equation. I shoot professionally, but when it comes > >>> to my personal shooting, cost is an enormous part of the equation; I >>> have to think about my son's college tuition, and all my other >>> expenses, when I shoot for myself. And digital allows me to totally >>> ignore the cost part of photography - I can carry a camera with me >>> all >> >>> the time and shoot my brains out - without spending a penny. I am >>> definitely shooting more now that I am shooting digital than I was >>> shooting when I was primarily using film. And the more I shoot for >>> myself, the better my photography for clients gets - and the more my >>> digital bw work looks like my film bw work. ;-) >>> >>> Yes, Seth, film will be around as long as we will - but with every >>> passing year it will become more and more exotic and, I suspect, more > >>> expensive. Just as the price of digital storage and printing is >>> dropping, and will continue to drop up to a certain point, so the >>> cost >> >>> of film and processing it will continue to rise. >>> >>> If you like film, shoot it. Enjoy it. Revel in it. But don't allow >>> your personal enjoyment to keep you from seeing the reality that we >>> are living through one of those major moments in the technical >>> history >> >>> of photography in which the medium of photography moves from one >>> form > >>> of image capture and storage to another. >>> >>> B. D. >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org >>> [mailto:lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf >>> Of Seth Rosner >>> Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 8:39 AM >>> To: Leica Users Group >>> Subject: Re: [Leica] Summilux vs. Summicron >>> >>> >>> Hi B.D.: >>> >>> At the LHSA Leica Akademie meeting last week, I sat next to a member >>> who >>> >>> said that in New Zealand recently, he couldn't find a place to buy >>> film and had to buy a cheap digital to record his trip; added that >>> film would be dead in two years. >>> >>> The following day Karen Sweet, Kodak representative, gave a >>> power-point presentation on Kodak's doings in imaging, both film and >>> digital. An astonishing array of world-class digital products and an >>> equally astonishing array of up-dated old and brand new professional >>> film emulsions, in 35mm and other formats. During her talk and the >>> ensuing q&a I could not help thinking >>> of you. >>> >>> Take a look at the Kodak website for their film palette. Then talk >>> about >>> >>> film's demise. >>> >>> It is clear that professionals and editors to whom speed and ease of >>> transmission is critical are working, perhaps close to exclusively, >>> in >> >>> digital. Equally clear that a majority of p&s consumers in the west >>> will >>> >>> choose digital for its ease and cheapness, and because it almost >>> symbolizes the disposable, throw-away world we live in. >>> >>> IMHO, Ted's current methodology is the very best combination of >>> quality and >>> ease: film capture, then scan, edit and print digitally. >>> >>> My strong bet: neither Kodak nor Fuji will leave the film business >>> in > >>> our lifetimes. >>> >>> Seth LaK 9 >>> >>> Had a wonderful time; wish you were her. ;-) >>> >>> Seth LaK 9 >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net> >>> To: "'Leica Users Group'" <lug@leica-users.org> >>> Sent: Monday, November 08, 2004 10:48 PM >>> Subject: RE: [Leica] Summilux vs. Summicron >>> >>> >>>> First off, Marc, while I like the E-1, I wouldn't lose a >>>> nanosecond's >> >>>> sleep if digital turned out to be the passing fancy, or whatever it >>>> is >>> >>>> some of you seem to believe it is. I love film, love my Ms. Just >>>> like >> >>>> the people who loved their daguerreotypes loved those plates, and >>>> just >>> >>>> like the speed graphic shooters loved their film holders. >>>> >>>> But as much as I hate to burst your bubble, film is indeed dying. >>>> Tell >>> >>>> the folks at Ilford and Kodak that film isn't dying. Of course >>>> there > >>>> are sixteen trillion film cameras out there. But that has nothing >>>> to > >>>> do with whether film is dying. I'm sure you'll go on shooting film >>>> until the day you die, but that doesn't mean that it isn't the >>>> previous capture medium. The question isn't how many film cameras >>>> still exist, the important question is - at what rate is the number >>>> of >>> >>>> digital cameras increasing every six months, and how does that >>>> compare >>> >>>> to the number of film cameras being sold? >>>> >>>> As to the Nikon F6 - Yes indeed, it is due out - and I will place >>>> money on the fact that Nikon will, within 12 months of the >>>> introduction of the F6, announce a digital back for it - probably a >>>> full-frame digital back as they don't have one yet. No major camera >>>> company - other than Leica - will introduce a pro film camera that >>>> is >> >>>> not also a digital camera. For Gds sake, Nikon F5s and Canon EOS1ns >>>> are being virtually given away these days. >>>> >>>> Another sign of the ascendency of digital is the printers that >>>> Epson > >>>> and Canon are now churning out for the home market that crank out >>>> 4x6s >>> >>>> at apx .$29 a piece - just pop in your CF card, or hook up your >>>> camera, and print away - no computer necessary, no knowledge of >>>> photoshop necessary. Your own "60 minute" photolab in on your own >>>> kitchen table. >>>> >>>> Yes, the reality is that film is now the domain of hobbiests, a >>>> small >> >>>> number of documentary photographers and some art photographers. >>>> Kids > >>>> aren't buying film point and shoots now Mark - they're buying >>>> digital >> >>>> P&Ss and camera cell phones. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org >>>> [mailto:lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On >>>> Behalf > >>>> Of Mark Rabiner >>>> Sent: Monday, November 08, 2004 9:24 PM >>>> To: Leica Users Group >>>> Subject: Re: [Leica] Summilux vs. Summicron >>>> >>>> >>>> On 11/8/04 3:52 PM, "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net> typed: >>>> >>>>> That used to be the beauty, Vic. But alas, with the dying of film, >>>>> it >>> >>>>> is no longer true. While Leica equipment may hold its value better >>>>> than most film equipment, it is no longer holding it the way it did > >>>>> even a year ago. M6 TTLs purchased for $1995 were selling for >>>>> about > >>>>> $1450 in near mint condition - now they're down to about $1150 - >>>>> if > >>>>> you're lucky- and used M7s, which are now selling for, what, >>>>> around > >>>>> $2800, are only worth approximately 50% of their new priced once >>>>> they've been driven off the lot. So if you're going to invest $2500 > >>>>> in >>>> >>>>> a 50 1.4 lens, you damn well better love that lens. ;-) >>>>> >>>> >>>> Film is not dying BD. >>>> I think its great you are on a roll with your Olympus E but lets >>>> keep >> >>>> our perspective on the whole thing. The film market is being >>>> moderated >>> >>>> or minimized. AS there are other technological options which appear >>>> more popular for many uses. That's all. >>>> >>>> There are 10 billion (last count) cameras out there which all use >>>> film >>> >>>> to take pictures and plenty of people who are going to want to use >>>> them for quite some time. >>>> >>>> The Nikon F6 is due out soon. >>>> New film cameras are being introduced every day. >>>> >>>> And the ones made last year still work. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Mark Rabiner >>>> Photography >>>> Portland Oregon >>>> http://rabinergroup.com/ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 > > > _______________________________________________ > 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