The writing is on the wall for film photography. It is a zero-sum game with only one end result – the extinction of film photography. Perhaps something will happen to change that but I doubt it.
There are three types of film photographers: those that have been in the game before digital was around, those that got into shooting film in a world after digital cameras became ubiquitous, and those that have yet to try it but will in the future. For many young photographers, regardless of experience, they have at least one experience of al older photographer talking in a condescending manner towards them for shooting film. This blows my mind.
My personal experience with an older photographer of the curmudgeon variety was with the man who owned and ran the only film processing place in town who would do one of two things every time I saw him. One, he would tell me that he didn’t understand why I would shoot film – that it made no sense and I should stop. Or, if he wasn’t actively trying to discourage me from shooting film, he was trying to sell me more film than I needed or sell me one of his own cameras. It was the strangest juxtaposition. He didn’t want me to shoot film for selfish reasons but then again, he had a particular vested interest in me to continue shooting film and using their lab to process my film. It got to a point where I made an effort to only visit the shop when the owner wasn’t in.
At the end of the day, this whole dynamic was by and large one of the strangest I’ve ever had with another person. In summation, I needed his shop to be around so I could get my film processed and he needed me to continue being a customer because without me and others like me, he would have been out of business. That said, he despised young film photographers and I found his company grating. There was never a clear winner in our exchanges, only business transactions.
Zero-Sum Game
What is a zero-sum game you ask (or maybe didn’t)? It’s simple. For every team playing a "game," the wins are perfectly balanced with the losses. In its simplest form, there are two teams. Whatever amount team A starts to win by, team B starts to lose by as is how games work. In a zero-sum game, however, what goes up must come down and the wins of team A equate to the losses. Before it’s all said and done, all the wins along with all of the losses sum to zero.
Within the world of film photographers, the way I think about it, is that there are the people who have been shooting film for a while (team A) and then those who have only most recently got into film along with those who have yet to get into but will at some point in the future (team B). Team A includes people who remember when the price of a Contax T2, or Hasselblad 500CM, or Mamiya 7, or any other camera that was just a fraction of their current price just a few years ago compared with today’s market value. And then there’s team B, those who have only known todays price point or will come to know it this way when they start shooting film. The main loss for team A is obviously the stark increase in prices for cameras. It can be frustrating, I know. As you may know from the article on my most recent medium format acquisition, the Fujifilm GA645, the price for that camera just a couple years ago was hundreds of dollars less than the going rate now. I found it particularly difficult to shell out hundreds of dollars more than someone did just two years for the same camera. Except not for the same camera but rather a camera two years closer to breaking.
The primary to benefit to team A is in fact, indirectly, the sudden and substantial jump in camera and film prices – it is a sign of increased interest in film photography as a whole. Prior to this increased interest, in the days of nice cameras being cheaper, one film stock after another were being discontinued. It seems strange to think of Kodak’s TMax 3200P or Ektachrome E100 as anything but new stocks but in reality, they are more or less re-releases of films Kodak made and discontinued years ago. The same thing happened with Fujifilm Neopan Acros. (The list could go on but I’ll cap it here.) Without the uptick in popularity, prices on film cameras would have likely have remained low but more and more film stocks would have likely been discontinued, leaving the market more and more bare.
The Extinction of Film Photography
It is with a heavy heart that I come to terms with the finite nature of film photography. I would not at all be surprised if within my lifetime I see the end of new film production. It doesn’t take much to effort to come to the conclusion that with so few cameras being made today, the overwhelming majority of cameras in use were made decades ago. That fact coupled with fewer and fewer businesses equipped to repair older cameras, clearly spells out what will eventually be an end for vintage cameras being the norm.
In addition, I would argue that much of the reason film photography started gaining traction again was in large part because it was so inexpensive. A Pentax K1000 was easily $50 or less and most Minolta models were under the $50 price point. In fact, my reintroduction to film photography after college was through the purchase of a Nikon F2 (from the guy who owned the film lab I mentioned above) for $100, equipped with a 50mm f/1.4. Today we live in a vastly different world. More and more photographers and people wanting to get into photography are considering getting into film and as such the prices for cameras will continue to grow.
What Would Turn Things Around
I started this article talking about the zero-sum game because the film photography world needs more photographers to continue to grow and expand. The growing number of photographers, however, equates to higher and higher prices for both film and cameras. With so few manufacturers making new film cameras (and the cameras that are available are either very cheap or horribly expensive), photographers are relying more and more on decades old cameras which, with their finite stock, are getting further out of reach for people getting into film photography.
As such, I would argue that the only thing that could truly turn things around is for more manufacturers to present new options for cameras and among those that currently make them, to offer less expensive options. I don’t know anyone that is willing to pay the money for a Nikon F6 or Leica M-A which cost more than $2,500 and $5,000, respectively. (If you do and/or have, more power to you.) Gone are the days of the newly made Nikon F100 or Canon Elan 7. If any would just make 35mm cameras (or even medium format cameras!) that fit somewhere between the plastic, gimmicky Lomography cameras which don’t even get put into the 35mm category on B&H’s website and the ultra-expensive, “I should have just bought a digital camera” Nikon and Leica options. That said, I don’t think that will ever happen. Though camera sells have been on the decline, investing in the production of a film camera doesn’t even seem to be a remote possibility.
What do you think? Do you see any manufacturers staging the comeback of modern film cameras?
I almost commented (maybe even did, I forget) on a recent article about Pentax - in some ways Pentax would be the ideal brand to take this on: struggling to find room in the digital space, with a strong following in the (albeit very niche) film world. Given the prices that used 6x7s go for (due to limited supply) might there not be a market for a few new ones? I don't imagine this will actually happen, but hey ... Pentax.
Perhaps you did. I don't recall seeing that article.
If Pentax rereleased a few of their flagship cameras like the K100, 645, and 67, it would be a game changer. Unless they charged an absolutely insane amount of money or changed the mount, so many people (myself included) would jump onboard in a heartbeat. Alas, I have my doubts this would ever happen.
I think I never hit the post button.
That's essentially what I thought. Re-releases of their classic models shouldn't be all that expensive to make given that it's now pretty old and basic technology, and could sell at fair prices allowing those interested in a Pentax film camera to get one with all the guarantees of new, and Pentax to carve themselves out a nice little niche.
Pentax, if you're reading this, call me.
I suspect that it would be more expensive than you'd think. I suspect that whatever contracts and plans they had for manufacturing are out of date by now. I would also think that they'd want to take advantage of better metering technology - though, if they fell in line with the old days, the prism could be changed out/updated.
Still though - fingers crossed this happens. That would be huge.
Getting the factories running is probably the largest cost of any production, and the relatively small numbers involved would obviously keep the unit cost high.
I don't really see it happening, but if it were my call I'd be thinking a line of fairly basic but functional film cameras with good build quality. Original 6x7 more than 67ii, for example. If you're using film, you're pretty much by definition not looking for the latest tech ...
In 1997 Nissan did some perfect factory restorations of the original 240z and tried to sell them. I guess they were priced too high and did not sell very many but recently some were auctioned off for more than $100k
Remaking old stuff is not usually profitable, fun as a halo project but old tech is old tech. Better to find a dentist who bought a couple for his collection and never used it.
It's less an argument that people's taste for a film photograph will dissolve and more to say that with a finite supply of film cameras, one day there will be so few left that the market cannot stay afloat. That's what I see as eventually happening - not imminently.
The film industry might eventually die but I will continue. A camera is just a box with a lens on one end and film/sensor on the other. I’ve made several cameras myself from 4x5 up to 16x20. If film eventually becomes obsolete, I know how to make my own emulsion, developer, etc. with chemistry that will is readily available. No worries here.
That's impressive! Are you shooting film and/or wet plate?
Yes, mostly wet plate or regular film if I’m too lazy. I’ve experimented with making emulsions, coating it on paper and using that in the place of film. Mixed results. Most of my homemade emulsions are used in the darkroom to make prints.
That's pretty wild. I have a copy of the Darkroom Cookbook which I'm thumbed through and used a couple times. I wonder if they have recipes for emulsions...
As long as film is manufactured, there will be film cameras. But what kind of camera? An antique camera like a Century 4x5 made out of mahogany, glass, leather, and brass? A mechanical 35mm like a Nikon F? A metered hybrid 35mm like a Nikon F3? A medium format Rollei SL66? A 120 Kodak Autographic with a ball-bearing shutter? An Agfa Super Isolette 6x6 folder? A Kodak Bantam? I've owned them all, used them, and made great pictures with them.
And I'll make new film pictures with my Fujifilm GA645, Fujica GW690, and my Agfa folder. As long as they make film, of course. But I don't want to shoot macros without digital focus stacking. I don't want to do a lot of things I had to do using a film camera.
The real question is whether serious photography, film or digital, will survive given the current price points? Or, will it become like the mechanical watch industry where only the very rich can afford to purchase a working example?
I think digital price points and resolutions will move in desired directions. If people are willing to pay $1000 for a new cellphone with two lenses, there will be digital, and film, cameras for those who want the challenges and pleasures of real photography. Buy a five pack of 120 today and shoot it all before the expiration date!
I've never seen anyone shooting a Kodak Autographic and I had never heard of an Agfa Super Isolette before. How do you like your GW690? I've fallen in love with my GA645 and have considered looking into a GW690 for a travel camera.
I'm not sure what price points you're referring to. I recently picked up a new a7R II to replace my original a7. I love it and appreciated Sony continuing to sell old models that still offer good tech.
James,
Old Kodaks use old film like 127 which, while available, are a pain to find and process. I did run a few rolls of 127 B&W through the Vest Pocket Autographic. I liked the look produced by the old Anastigmat lens, so I mounted it on an M44 (Miranda) body cap along with a helicoid for focusing and a tube for focal length. I like the convenience of using 35mm film and would use that rig a couple of times a year. KVP cameras, as the Kodaks are called, are available on eBay in the $40-$80 range. Just make sure the shutter works or can be used open with your camera's focal plane shutter (best way). Then experiment and have fun.
The Agfa Super Isolette (or Super Speedex) is a pocketable 120 6x6 camera from the mid-50s. If it has not been used for years, you should expect a frozen focusing helicoid and light leaks in the bellows. Jurgen Kreckel (certo6.com) serviced mine after I bought it on eBay in 2002 for about $325. Jurgen has an informative webpage about the Super Isolette as does Ken Rockwell on his website. It is a (large) pocketable camera with a fair amount of heft to it. Those of us who own one, use our cameras often. It makes superb B&W pictures if you slow down enough to get the composition, focus, and exposure right. The 75mm f/3.5 Solinar lens is sharp and nearly devoid of the usual aberrations for objects more than two meters away.
The GW690 is huge and heavy. You can hide behind it. They call it the Texas Leica; it is more like the Alaska Leica. But when you slap a 6x9cm negative down on a light table, it is unbelievable. I shot a roll of transparency film just to see how impressive it can be. I was not disappointed. I think I'll be using it often making pictures of the Arizona red rocks and the open steppes. And it'll build my upper body strength on the side.
I also have a GA645. It is a real sweet camera: light weight, convenient to use, a sharp auto-focus (sometimes) 60mm f/4 Fujinon lens, and even a tiny popup fill flash when you need it. Use it in program mode, aperture priority mode, or manual. Autofocus or manual. It really is a great travel camera. Dante Stella (dantestella.com) and Matt Osborne (mrleica.com) have informative web pages about the GA645.
I really urge others to buy a 35mm or MF film camera. Shoot a lot of film. You will become a better photographer regardless of your chosen subject or genre.
Good piece, thank you. I am one of the former, old git and worked as a pro in the days of film. (Now with digital)
I re-collected MF kit, Mamiya tlr and Universal plus the lenses, etc and obviously pleased to see "new film" being produced.
But, aside from the expense for just a hobby, and the process and scan costs because very few will install a darkroom in their home, the elephant in the room is exactly as the op suggests.
My cameras are serviced but up to 50 years old. Even my F100 must be nearly 30. Most are mechanical and will probably remain serviceable. They are "nr mint" and I am pleased of course to see the prices rising steeply but they are becoming collectors items rather than usable cameras for someone wanting to play with film.
I have said in the past there is little point continuing to produce film unless you have viable cameras to put them in. I have recently been able to fit my Mamiya Universal with a working "polaroid back" which is remarkable for every reason, two parts that mate together from two different countries and the efforts over years of a small number of investors to remanufactured polaroid film...even to buying the name!
My point is if the will is there and the ingenuity, maybe there's the market size to support a small company to manufacture camera bodies, perhaps a tie up with existing independent lens manufacturers such as Tokina or Sigma, to create a modern film capable product?
It would be a sad loss to see the demise of film photography simply because the kit wasn't available to put it in....?
I didn't even think about availability of labs... Right now I'm fortunate to have a good lab that can process C-41 but my only options for E-6 are to mail it out which turns into such a hassle that I very rarely do it. In two places I used to live, there was a shop who would process C-41 until their machine broke down and they decided not to fix it.
I've been chomping at the bit to get some version of instant film in a MF camera. I've not used a Mamiya Universal but if it can shoot Polaroid film, I may just have to!
I guess I'm lucky, grumpy lab guy is only grumpy because nobody shots film anymore. He's also grumpy because I don't shoot more film. "Two rolls *grumbling* been out with that toy camera, haven't you?" 'toy' is referring to a digital camera.
Perhaps that's why. haha
Grumpy lab guys were grumpy long before digital...
I find this a very capitalist and unrelatable point of view. I have never experienced any of these so called unhappy older photographers and or unhappy people who run film developing businesses. All the people I have encountered in film do it because they enjoy it.
I have been doing film photography since I was a child and have also dipped my toes in digital but never found it satisfying. The beauty of making photography for me is a combo of total mystery and the organic way you can manipulate film to capture real life. Idgaf about the newest camera or whether they even make a new camera. As long as there is film out there I will shoot it and develop it and print it. I havent heard any news of all film companies stopping making film and I also shoot expired so 🤷
I also find it very boring that most these comments are from (assumedly) cis doods.
I don't think that the guy who ran in the lab in Charleston, SC still shoots film. He used to shoot film and owned a printing and framing shop which still had a functioning C-41 processing machine. He was definitely a bit of a curmudgeon.
Economics dictate that if there's demand, prices go up, which in turn creates opportunity for companies to manufacture new products. The reason they stopped was falling prices and lack of demand 20+ years ago, which now is coming back. Digital cameras are going down sharply, so in a way, it could save some company in the long term.
I'd say we're max 4 years out from a new 'affordable' camera coming out, prob less for some old model being re-released. Nikon prob are the best positioned to do so, given they have the mount that's still compatible with new glass, but all manufacturers could start a small batch made in China factory of one of their old models.
It's not just when demand goes up - it's when demand increases but supply is static or decreasing which leads to sharp increases in prices.
Man, I would be so happy if Nikon rereleased the F100. It is hands down the camera I use most in my life and they're getting more and more difficult to find and more and more expensive when they're around.
I just read your article. I have to disagree. Film photography is on the upswing. My lab has lots of film orders. The Film photography project is very successful. You mention sales of film cameras is on the decline. Again I disagree. People are buying a nd selling on ebay. I am sure KEH is still doing a hell of a business. You mentioned or didnt mention lomography. Probably the most successful kickstarter ever. They usually meet their goal and then some just about every time. Everything film related is going to be expensive when there is hardly any competition anymore. And they said photography was going to kill painting. Not to my knowledge.
And more and more people are embracing d.i.y. Even if all the film and paper companies went out of business (and at this stage, I find that unlikely in the extreme), silver gelatin photography (film, dry plate, and paper) will be firmly entrenched in the alternative/historical community. For information on learning to make your own materials, you might like www.thelightfarm.com .
I don't recall ever mentioning that film camera sells are on the decline. Conversely, I remember stating that digital camera sells have been declining for some time now. I'm well aware of the increase in film sales and have written more than one article about it.
This particular article is to say that with the increase in film's popularity and the finite supply of affordable cameras, the day will come that it will be in serious trouble unless manufacturers begin releasing affordable, solid film cameras.
You're correct that film is seeing n upswing. I think one of the major problems that isn't being addressed surrounds the cameras used. Because most of us are shooting on older used cameras there will be an increased need for repairs. Camera repair shops are increasingly harder to find (that know what they're doing) so without that industry support or new cameras released that are aimed at 35mm and 120 users, we will eventually hit a wall. Working cameras will increase in value as they become more rare.
I'm sure eventually, younger shooters will take up camera repair to keep film cameras alive but even that only does so much.
film aint going anywhere...i would be more concerned that digital camera manufactures staying in business as sales continue to slow.
Thanks for the thought-provoking article. While I agree with you on the problem of availability of film cameras in the future, I think the problem is with getting good film, though. The cost in time and money to develop and scan film is just too high for the greatest number of photographers. Getting the "film look" is not going to be worth the costs in the long run.
I've been using a mamiya 645 and a minolta x700 for two years and developing and scanning my own film. I'm happy with a few of my shots and will keep working at it, but I don't foresee buying any new gear or buying as much film.
I've given up on having labs do my scans. I only do my own now but yes, it can be a very time consuming process. I too have a Mamiya 645 and love it. So much so that I haven't even considered replacing it until it breaks or unless a great, compact 67 comes along.
I shoot a lot of film. Film is really expensive to buy and process so I do a lot of THINKING before I press the shutter release. THAT'S the part that really appeals to me.
I completely agree. It was the discipline that was required with film that helped enhanced the creative process. It seemed that almost any event could be covered with a roll or two of film, now hundreds and even thousands of shots are not unheard of. Discipline and insight has been replaced by high volume and the hope that somewhere in all those shots there will be a couple of good ones. I don't shoot film anymore (after four decades of film), but try maintain a thoughtful and reasonable number of exposures.
Film does train its user - when I occasionally shoot digital, I always feel that I am making unnecessary amount of exposures...but when I check, tere is only 3 or 4 of one scene, with film I would have done 1 or 2 though.
It's definitely a nice change of pace in a world of digital photography!
I know everyone covets old, classic film cameras. But let's not forget the ones made right before the switch to digital. Like the Canon EOS 1N. It's a fantastic body, uses current EF lenses, and costs under $100. And while they are full of electronics that will eventually fail with no repair possible, they were extremely well-made and will be around for a couple of decades more. If all you want to do is shoot film, they're just about the best thing out there for 35mm (they are very loud, though). But, I realize many film shooters also want the "experience" of using a classic camera, and not something that looks and feels just like a DSLR. Although, in the medium format world, maybe DO like the most modern ones like the Mamiya 645 (as mentioned by others).
My go-to film camera is my F100, made shortly before most manufacturers discontinued film. It's always at the top of my list for suggestions too given the ease to use it, build quality, and "modern" technology. I hope it stays around for decades to come but I don't think I've owned anything with a PCB last that long.
I shoot with a Canon EOS 1N RS, Leica M4-P, and Mamiya 6. I can use the Canon lenses on my A7Rii and A7R(m) as well and they are very good so are pulling double duty.
I use my Nikon glass I bought for my F2 on my Sony a7Rii as well as my Mamiya 645 glass. I love the ability to use old, manual glass on the Sonys.
I do as well. The Nikon glass is superb and incredibly affordable. Check out the lesser known 25-50mm f4 zoom. This is an outstanding lens.
There are people who still paint with water colour and oils. It may be a niche thing now, but it will never go totally extinct.
Sure. But companies still manufacture paint, brushes, and canvas. There is next to no one making new film cameras.
"a Nikon F6 or Leica M-A which cost more than $2,500 and $5,000, respectively."
These examples are biased. You can buy a wonderful Nikon FM2 for 300-400€. If you don't have that money, you can go for the FE or FG for less than 100€. F601, 801 and 801s for those who want something with autofocus are also under 100€. You want to shot medium format? There are many solutions : Yashica Mat 124G around 250€, Mamiya C330 400-500€. Dora Goodman is making 3D printed medium format cameras really cheap. You can also have the files for free and print it on your own. In short, there are many solutions.
I would add that there's also new film brands like Japan Camera Hunter, Kosmos...
@james madison go to see Dora Goodman 3D camera (working with Mamiya RZ back and Mamiya 23 Press lenses) on her instagram. She also posts some people's work shot with the camera she designed. You'll see that there's no "less like your 500C/M and more like my grandmothers old Brownieless like your 500C/M and more like my grandmothers old Brownie"
Those aren't biased examples. In the context of newly manufactured cameras, it does not make sense to list a lot cameras which were discontinued decades ago.
I have never heard of the Dora Goodman cameras but those are awesome! Thank you for sharing!
Click bait is unfair, but without some data based summary of film users, anecdotes are merely assertions. The result is an article with 85 comments essentially saying the same thing back-and-forth on a topic that recurs frequently with no real movement or progress in the discussion. Film photography is pronounced dead on arrival as frequently as the novel and jazz, and both of those are forms continue to innovate despite such pronouncements.
I am in camp A and no, I don’t agree that film will go extinct. Printmaking (woodcut, intaglio, silkscreen, etc.) has been around a very long time and many artists continue to work in the medium. As others have said, painting is alive and well. Film and silver prints are just another medium in the visual arts space. There has been a resurgence of interest in film, and manufacturers did not take lightly the decision to reintroduce films they discontinued only a few years ago.(I’m still mad as hell at Fuji for discontinuing peel apart FP-100, though.) True that *quality* small and medium format cameras are not in production, but view cameras are alive and well.
I personally think that decent quality 35mm and 120 film cameras can be produced to a niche market, just as view cameras are. The Arax factory in the Ukraine repairs and upgrades Kiev medium format cameras. Call me crazy but I have a Zorki 4K which I absolutely love for its old school feel and beautiful glass. I think it would be worthwhile to re-engineer this model of camera to fix some of its quirks. Thinking about doing a kickstarter campaign for this because there’s enough of a fan base for these cameras to warrant it.
"film is dead", been hearing it for 20 years (yawn) also, i believe nikon still produces the FM10 for around $250, a damn fine little camera
Gotta disagree with you about the FM10 being "a damn fine little camera". That thing is a disgrace to the "FM" name... It also seems to be discontinued. I guess Cosina stopped making them.
As long as you don't need the light meter, I bet you can get 30 more years out of the average Praktica. They only have like seven moving parts. And they go for around $15.
Sorry James but what a pile of bullshit. Film photography cannot go extinct, even if all the old film cameras broke down in the world, there will always be fine artists making their own film or plates and build their own camera.
There are plenty of large format camera manufacturers. Mint is pushing the boundaries for instax cameras. Some company is making a SLR compatible with M42 lenses and instax. Don't get me started on the various 3D printed cameras.
Now those above are niche stuff you might say. You might say, "Oh, there aren't many large format photographers" and sneer at instax film. What if I told you Reflex is making A NEW 35MM CAMERA?
Has the possibility escaped you that with the growing demand in film might lead to new or old manufacturers consider start making SLR film cameras again? Film has grown to the point that Ilford researched into a new RC paper, Adox are researching into other papers, Lomography made a completely brand new C41 film from ground up, Kodak is investing in expanding and researched into making a new version of Ektachrome. Why wouldn't a high quality 35mm or MF camera come along later down the line?
This is clickbait and you know it.
As a car guy who reads a lot of automobile media & social postings and I see a lot of parallels in the film vs digital debate and manual transmission vs automatics.
Like film photography, the number of vehicles produced & equipped manual transmissions have been trending down for 20+ years now. A newer, superior technology that demands less of the user vs an older, more clunky but arguably engaging technology. As the demise of the manual gearbox continues there has been a small but vocal market segment that pushes back; no longer able to make the performance argument they've shifted to nostalgia & increased engagement points to justify their opinions. On a macro level the 'vocal minority' has disrupted the trend and certain manufacturers have preserved or even brought back manual gearbox options. They typically only sell a small percentage of MT cars vs the automatics but the old tech has a place.
You can already see similarities in photography world occurring. As the user base for film has decreased it's become more ardent, more vocal, attacking the new technology for what it can't do. If the volume is loud enough and demand is strong enough they will respond. New film cameras produced in tiny volumes may happen, we're already in the middle of film resurgence on the back of cheap available used film cameras, and processing labs are changing to meet the new "old" market.
Film won't die because like the manual gearbox, some people love it and there are enough of them, with strong enough opinions, and loud enough voices they will be heard and catered to.