[leekil]

Conservative ballpark estimate for fresh retail 35mm film + lab dev + scan is US$1 per frame.

It's between $0.25 and $0.50 if you send it to Dwayne's photo. Variation depends on the film cost.

[Digitalis]

As you might guess, I'm a sucker for brushed chrome and silver.

I'm a sucker for Ebony heartwood and solid Titanium.

[pathdoc]

voluptuous and functional distillations of the finest jet age mechanical and industrial design

Make America Nippon Great Again!

[Wheatfield]

It takes a good amount of film to equal the cost of one digital camera... Digital is definitely cheaper if you do spray and pray shooting, but film wins on equipment cost.

I dunno. I sold my Fuji X-Pro1 on the used market for a few hundred dollars. That probably works out to a couple of dozen rolls of film with processing.
Or are you comparing new digital equipment to used film equipment?

[Lord Lucan]

Switching mounts is neat, but not at the price they're asking for.

It is neat for them as they can make mount types according to demand, but not of much use to most of its users who will only ever use one mount. Are people really going to swap its front plate in the field because they are carrying a K-mount 50mm lens, a Canon 28mm, and a Nikon 100mm?

ebay is awash with film cameras that no-one wants, even good working ones. It's crazy to start making more. I notice that the kickstarter goal is £100,000 (and they have now reached it) but I would have thought that no-where near enough to finance a project like this.

[Wheatfield]

Are you referring to the Ebony view cams? I suppose they are attractive in the way that a 1902 State Landau is compared to less tricked-out horse-drawn carriages, fine examples of craftsmanship, but ultimately rickety and unwieldy 19th century technology.

The great postwar mechanical SLRs are more like a 58 Corvette or a 61 Ferrari California, voluptuous and functional distillations of the finest jet age mechanical and industrial design.

None of which would shoot anything bigger than a postage stamp sized negative with the questionable quality that always goes along with them. The Ebony, like all view cameras, is a tool for the results oriented photographer who doesn’t mind working a little harder for huge quality gains.
To make a silly comparison, since that seems to be the way things are done these days, the Ebony is a nicely outfitted RV, while the mechanical SLR is a tent. Having used both, I will go with the RV any day.

---------- Post added 11-10-17 at 08:19 AM ----------

It is neat for them as they can make mount types according to demand, but not of much use to most of its users who will only ever use one mount. Are people really going to swap its front plate in the field because they are carrying a K-mount 50mm lens, a Canon 28mm, and a Nikon 100mm?

ebay is awash with film cameras that no-one wants, even good working ones. It's crazy to start making more. I notice that the kickstarter goal is £100,000 (and they have now reached it) but I would have thought that no-where near enough to finance a project like this.

I bet they end up making the cameras to order on a 3D printer, and the 100K went into the purchase of that equipment.

[dsmithhfx]

I bet they end up making the cameras to order on a 3D printer, and the 100K went into the purchase of that equipment.

Yeah, I haven't priced camera factories lately but...

[dsmithhfx]

a tool for the results oriented photographer who doesn’t mind working a little harder for huge quality gains

Also you gotta love how portable and inconspicuous they are.

[Mistral75]

First stretched goal: £150,000.

At 150%, not only are we introducing the Reflex App, but due to high demand, joining that target now is the Minolta SR/MD mount.

Second stretched goal: £200,000

Ultimate Stretch Goal at 200% is for a Black powder coated Reflex.

[Wheatfield]

Also you gotta love how portable and inconspicuous they are.

As long as you are willing to compromise a whole lot of quality for that.

[dsmithhfx]

As long as you are willing to compromise a whole lot of quality for that.

We may disagree about what constitutes "quality"...

[pathdoc]

As long as you are willing to compromise a whole lot of quality for that.

It boils down to what's good enough for you and the sort of pictures you're taking. I don't see any large-format film camera ever handling exposures at the rate a 35mm even of 1960's vintage can, for example. Unless you're staging it very carefully, large-format is not the preserve of action shots.

[Wheatfield]

We may disagree about what constitutes "quality"...

We may, but I believe that I'm correct and you are not.
So there.

---------- Post added 11-10-17 at 10:54 AM ----------

You're missing the point. We were talking about aesthetics of the equipment, not the size of the image it takes. Aside from advances in shutters, LF cameras have gone through relatively little in terms of design improvements for over a century, and there are loads of ways that they could be improved to function better and look prettier. It simply hasn't been done since the advent of practical enlargement of MF and even "good enough" 35mm film killed LF use for all but a small subset of art and architectural photographers.
Heck, when was the last time you saw a photojournalist carrying a Graflex, which even a the end of its run midcentury was much less of a Rube Goldberg contraption than a standard view camera like the Ebony?

Your RV comparison is completely backwards, too, since your entire argument boils down to size of the negatives LF can make. It's more like comparing living in an empty circus tent to living in a modest classic polished aluminum Airstream. Yes, if your only concern is size, the tent beats the trailer by miles. But even if the tent is made from the finest silk from China and brocaded with pure gold thread, the Airstream costs less, looks better, is climate controlled, has a bathroom and stove, is much more easily moved, and has you sleeping in a bed rather than on the ground among the elephant dung. Sure, you won't be able to set up your trapeze in it, but the vast majority of people looking for non-permanent housing aren't aerialists.

I happen to think an Ebony is more aesthetically pleasing than a mechanical manual camera. My RV comparison was in reference to the typical automotive reference that crops up every time someone wants to confuse things by making a comparison that isn't relative to the topic.
Would it have helped if I had mentioned that said tent would be a 5x7 foot two man unit?

---------- Post added 11-10-17 at 11:00 AM ----------

It boils down to what's good enough for you and the sort of pictures you're taking. I don't see any large-format film camera ever handling exposures at the rate a 35mm even of 1960's vintage can, for example. Unless you're staging it very carefully, large-format is not the preserve of action shots.

However, it has been done, and done without staging anything.

[dsmithhfx]

We may, but I believe that I'm correct and you are not.
So there.

---------- Post added 11-10-17 at 10:54 AM ----------



I happen to think an Ebony is more aesthetically pleasing than a mechanical manual camera. My RV comparison was in reference to the typical automotive reference that crops up every time someone wants to confuse things by making a comparison that isn't relative to the topic.
Would it have helped if I had mentioned that said tent would be a 5x7 foot two man unit?

---------- Post added 11-10-17 at 11:00 AM ----------



However, it has been done, and done without staging anything.

Pretty silly comment to make in a thread about a new 35mm film camera.

[leekil]

I'm a sucker for Ebony heartwood and solid Titanium.

LX Titanium with grip? Hasselblad Lunar?