Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-21-2010, 02:19 PM   #31
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,233
QuoteOriginally posted by Amancio Quote
Any worldwide ebay film seller to recommend?

Amancio...
For film? There are are a couple of Koreans with eBay stores that deal in film, though I don't have any personal experience with them.

I would deal locally (Brazil?) if you can to avoid shipping charges and customs duty. If nothing is available locally, Freestyle ships international as does Adorama. Maco Direct in Germany has a good selection of film and will also ship international if you prefer a European vendor.


Steve

07-21-2010, 02:43 PM   #32
New Member




Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
For film? There are are a couple of Koreans with eBay stores that deal in film, though I don't have any personal experience with them.

I would deal locally (Brazil?) if you can to avoid shipping charges and customs duty. If nothing is available locally, Freestyle ships international as does Adorama. Maco Direct in Germany has a good selection of film and will also ship international if you prefer a European vendor.


Steve
Thanks Steve!

It may not be easy to imagine but, lately, at least my experience buying good quality films, it is cheaper to buy outside Brazil, including shipping charges.

Or not? I've just bought Fujifilm NEOPAN 400 135-36 B&W and paid R$30. This is almost US$17.

Sorry for my English.
07-21-2010, 02:52 PM   #33
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,765
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
Wow! When did Bluemoon start doing E6? The $10 figure is pretty much the standard, but $3 uncut is outrageously cheap. )
It also happens to be exactly what their web site gives as the charge for 135 C41. That's the first time I've heard of a lab that charges the same for C41 and E6. The going rate online for unmounted E6 135 seems to be $6.35-8.50 US.
07-21-2010, 09:12 PM   #34
Inactive Account




Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Nanaimo, BC
Posts: 261
Were it me, I would shoot a combination of films. Ektar 100 (or Gold 100 if you can find it) for the bright sunny days, and Kodak UltraMax 400 for fast moving or indoor/outdoor shots. I love shooting Ektar, but sometimes it's hard to freeze something in motion unless you have full, unbridled sunlight pouring down on you. The results are fantastic though. Also, the Portra was a good suggestion, but I'd say go with 400VC. This still give your grain and sharpness that is orders of magnitude better than dollar store stuff, gives you vibrant (but more balanced) color when compared to UltraMax, and still has the speed to stop time should the need arise and the sun ain't shining.

Have fun on your trip! I've yet to travel to the House of Mouse myself.

07-22-2010, 11:04 AM   #35
Pentaxian
Aegon's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 1,411
QuoteOriginally posted by GeneV Quote
Adorama still has a screaming deal on it at $2.25/$2.49 for 100/200 135 36exp. I bought a bunch a while back, and it now lives in my XA2 and/or Stylus. (I really need to see if my beat up XA can be saved). I'm now down to $0.15 per click on those cameras including processing.
Oh GeneV, I followed your tip and wound up with a small boatload of Gold 100*. And I've never shot the stuff before. And I'm trying to pretend I'm on a budget right now. D'oh!

Thanks for the tip.

*I needed to buy a small boatload to justify the shipping price.
07-24-2010, 09:03 AM   #36
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Montco, PA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 135
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by GeneV Quote
Adorama still has a screaming deal on it at $2.25/$2.49 for 100/200 135 36exp. I bought a bunch a while back, and it now lives in my XA2 and/or Stylus. (I really need to see if my beat up XA can be saved). I'm now down to $0.15 per click on those cameras including processing.
FWIW, I just picked up a 3-pack of Gold 200 (24 exp.) for $5.99 at Target, and no shipping involved. I also grabbed a 3-pack of UltraMax 400 (also 24 exp.) for $7.99, just for comparison purposes.
07-24-2010, 10:24 AM   #37
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Oklahoma USA
Posts: 1,476
QuoteOriginally posted by wedge Quote
Also, as kind of a side tangent, what do you all see as the future of film? By that, I mean do you see film production decreasing to the point that it will become prohibitively expensive? Or, like the end of VHS, might all of the manufacturers just call it quits? I know it's not a direct comparison since the quality of VHS compared to other mediums was horrifically bad and film cameras can produce products of the same quality as digital. I'm just curious what you guys/gals think.
-Chad
I think film and VHS tape are different in that the basic functionality of VHS tape, for the typical consumer, has - amazingly - never been replaced. Lots of people can still record a tv program on VHS tape using a device that used to cost about $50-$100, with no recurring fees. Relatively few people I know are capable of recording a tv program today, and certainly not without recurring fees. Yes, you can hack together recording solutions using PCs and tuner cards and hard drives, but there is no trivial solution. As for the quality issue, the difference between the best available broadcast or cable or fiber signal is still indistinguishable from VHS tape output on all of the devices most people I know have access to. Obviously hdtv signals and devices are superior, but most people I know don't have access to them.

I don't understand why the marketplace never produced a VHS replacement - it's a mystery, and probably always will be.

Film is indistinguishable from digital for the typical consumer, and digital offers numerous cost and convenience advantages. But unlike with VHS, some enthusiasts appreciate the "feel" of film, and digital will probably never quite duplicate it.

Paul
07-24-2010, 05:54 PM   #38
Inactive Account




Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Nanaimo, BC
Posts: 261
QuoteOriginally posted by tibbitts Quote
I think film and VHS tape are different in that the basic functionality of VHS tape, for the typical consumer, has - amazingly - never been replaced. Lots of people can still record a tv program on VHS tape using a device that used to cost about $50-$100, with no recurring fees. Relatively few people I know are capable of recording a tv program today, and certainly not without recurring fees. Yes, you can hack together recording solutions using PCs and tuner cards and hard drives, but there is no trivial solution. As for the quality issue, the difference between the best available broadcast or cable or fiber signal is still indistinguishable from VHS tape output on all of the devices most people I know have access to. Obviously hdtv signals and devices are superior, but most people I know don't have access to them.

I don't understand why the marketplace never produced a VHS replacement - it's a mystery, and probably always will be.

Film is indistinguishable from digital for the typical consumer, and digital offers numerous cost and convenience advantages. But unlike with VHS, some enthusiasts appreciate the "feel" of film, and digital will probably never quite duplicate it.

Paul
They have, but the power that be have been more and more successful at delaying the products' appearance on the market, or worse, limiting it's functionality due to copyright concerns.

VHS was replaced with two different cassette formats, SVHS and DVHS. SVHS was a fantastic upgrade for those with standard VHS, because it actually allowed you to record a resolution beyond 240 horizontal lines. Problem was the machines and cassettes were too expensive to justify the upgrade, and you couldn't record SVHS quality material on regular old VHS cassettes. Try and find an SVHS cassette now. DVHS was Digital VHS, and it was JVC's replacement for VHS. This was an amazing idea; the cassettes recorded and played back HD content, and better still, stored it in raw digital video, as opposed to being compressed. Not only did this yield artifact-free HD playback, but it was virtually impossible to pirate: raw HD digital video weighs in at 3-4Gb of information per minute, which for your average 2 hour movie works out to 480Gb, a fantastic sum even by today's standards. And this was back in 1998! You could record incoming HD content just as you would standard definition on a VHS player, something that is difficult if nigh impossible today without being strapped down by an HD PVR, a monthly fee, and the inability to move the content off the hardware. Unfortunately, for all it's merits, it was atrociously priced at first (think $3500 for a deck), and the media and hype convinced everyone that the ability to have special features and a smaller physical medium far outweighed the potential advantages of recording and playing back high definition content, something that twelve years later, everyone now wants to do.

There have also been lots of hard drive and DVD based recording devices that were meant to replace the functionality of the VHS player, but none of them that I've seen ever replaced that "stick it in and record" simplicity of yore. And I think that's enough history for one post.

07-26-2010, 04:33 PM   #39
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,765
QuoteOriginally posted by wedge Quote
FWIW, I just picked up a 3-pack of Gold 200 (24 exp.) for $5.99 at Target, and no shipping involved. I also grabbed a 3-pack of UltraMax 400 (also 24 exp.) for $7.99, just for comparison purposes.
That's a good price. Walgreens sells that three-pack for a lot more.
07-27-2010, 06:33 AM   #40
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 6,930
Update. I went back to the photography store. I looked at the list again and sure enough Gold 200 XXXX is on the discontinued list. The good news is that the replacement is Gold 200 BXXXX. Apparently, a new formula?
07-27-2010, 05:54 PM   #41
Site Supporter
ChrisPlatt's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Queens NYC
Posts: 4,441
I suspect some tricks Kodak learned creating Ektar will be incorporated as improvements in some/all of their color negative films.

Chris
07-28-2010, 01:23 PM   #42
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,233
QuoteOriginally posted by wedge Quote
FWIW, I just picked up a 3-pack of Gold 200 (24 exp.) for $5.99 at Target, and no shipping involved. I also grabbed a 3-pack of UltraMax 400 (also 24 exp.) for $7.99, just for comparison purposes.
Thanks for the heads up! My Target is now OUT of Kodak Gold 200 and my fridge is plush with the stuff.

Steve
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
brand, days, film, quality, vhs
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Looking for recommendations for a film camera RichyX Pentax Film SLR Discussion 21 10-07-2009 09:23 AM
Film scanner recommendations, anyone? heatherslightbox Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom 51 04-10-2009 05:07 AM
Film recommendations ryno Pentax Film SLR Discussion 8 08-06-2008 11:46 AM
Film Recommendations jbrowning Pentax Film SLR Discussion 8 12-11-2007 12:50 PM
Film Scanner Recommendations DAP Pentax Film SLR Discussion 16 08-27-2007 07:09 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:43 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top