What to spend some money on?

Status
Not open for further replies.
AshleyC

AshleyC

Suspended / Banned
Messages
2,956
Name
...
Edit My Images
No
Ok so the situation at the moment is ive got rid of all my nikon gear, just left with an xe-2 digital and the rest of my cameras are film. 35mm, 6x7mf and 5x4 large format.

I will have a couple of thousand coming my way in the next few months, trying to decide how to spend it and getting nowhere.

Im torn between a nikon d810, the sony a7rII or getting a really nice scanner that can do medium format and 35mm and scan past 2400dpi. I don't really want to buy a brand new digital camera as the depreciation on the bodies is ridiculous but the a7r is calling my name. The scanner is also desperately needed as that would get me back into 35mm if i could get some really nice scans out of a frame, 2400dpi on 35mm gives me worse files than my xe-2, so i want better. I had a look on that filmscanner website but there is so much info on there i cant decide whats what.

I like and miss the convenience of digital but also know im not getting the best out of my neg's on the epson v750, its fine for large format but just knowing i can get more from a scan is annoying.

I dunno what to do. I either spend it on rebuilding my digital setup or maxing out my film setup. Does anyone have one of those higher end film scanners and can recommend one that does 35 and mf?
 
I echo your thoughts on the digital but I am going to take the plunge on one of the little Fuji X series cameras, only on a serious small budget.

But if I had that kind of spend I would be considering the XT-1 and a few lenses.
 
Last edited:
If a couple of grand came my way right now it would go on a top scanner and a printer that'll do proper b+w
 
AshleyC said:
I dunno what to do. I either spend it on rebuilding my digital setup or maxing out my film setup. Does anyone have one of those higher end film scanners and can recommend one that does 35 and mf?
Click to expand...

If it were me, I'd be using the extra money to pay for good film, development, and scanning, not for investing in more equipment.
 
Or maybe one of these
 
Braun do a scanner that is very similar to one that is much more expensive. It's about £1200 I think. With the euro being on its arse it is good value. It also does MF.

http://www.braun-phototechnik.de/en/products/detail/~id.952/BRAUN-FS120-Midformatscanner.html

Test report of it: http://www.filmscanner.info/en/BraunFS120.html

I was looking at getting one. I'd dearly love an older minolta but they're stupid money now and as mine is already showing its age and making weird noises I'd expect an MF one of similar age to be similar. I've had it since new and it's not done that much. Probably 50 films. Scans are awesome but reliability is also important. I'd also be suspicious of old coolscans for similar reasons. Unless they're repairable with parts available you could pay top dollar and find you have a paper weight in no time.
 
Probably not what you want to hear, but I'd spend the money on 20 rolls of film for the cameras you already have and the rest on flights + hotel somewhere interesting. You'll come home with a shed load of great photographs and memories that will last a lifetime. A lot better than simply owning another camera that will probably not be that interesting after three months of use.

(I don't work for a holiday company BTW!)
 
I agree about the funky printer tho as well

I recently purchased a canon pro-100 and its epic for b and w
 
Heidelberg Tango or an ICG drum scanner
 
FujiLove said:
Probably not what you want to hear, but I'd spend the money on 20 rolls of film for the cameras you already have and the rest on flights + hotel somewhere interesting. You'll come home with a shed load of great photographs and memories that will last a lifetime. A lot better than simply owning another camera that will probably not be that interesting after three months of use.

(I don't work for a holiday company BTW!)
Click to expand...

Best suggestion so far.
 
Could spend your money on the best lenses for film and digital...Contax, Canon L, Zeiss, Leitz, Nikon and so on..........................................................................
 
yes i like the idea of a nice holiday :) although ive got that covered this year. I dont want to buy more film camera gear as, per this thread, im not getting the best out of the gear i already have. And, to be honest, i cant tell the difference between the images taken on my £15 charity shop fuji and 50mm lens to those i took when I had a leica and 50mm summicron.

Ive got the canon 100 printer too and its lovely.

Thanks, I will check out those 2 scanners though, the braun and coolscan and probably scratch my head some more. A drum scanner is out as arent they a bit on the large side? my flat is full of junk as it is :)
 
AshleyC said:
yes i like the idea of a nice holiday :) although ive got that covered this year. I dont want to buy more film camera gear as, per this thread, im not getting the best out of the gear i already have. And, to be honest, i cant tell the difference between the images taken on my £15 charity shop fuji and 50mm lens to those i took when I had a leica and 50mm summicron.

Ive got the canon 100 printer too and its lovely.

Thanks, I will check out those 2 scanners though, the braun and coolscan and probably scratch my head some more. A drum scanner is out as arent they a bit on the large side? my flat is full of junk as it is :)
Click to expand...

The two drum scanners I mentioned have small footprints :P ish...
 
AshleyC said:
yes i like the idea of a nice holiday :) although ive got that covered this year. I dont want to buy more film camera gear as, per this thread, im not getting the best out of the gear i already have. And, to be honest, i cant tell the difference between the images taken on my £15 charity shop fuji and 50mm lens to those i took when I had a leica and 50mm summicron.

Ive got the canon 100 printer too and its lovely.

Thanks, I will check out those 2 scanners though, the braun and coolscan and probably scratch my head some more. A drum scanner is out as arent they a bit on the large side? my flat is full of junk as it is :)
Click to expand...

.....but 35mm colour neg for film is for dinosaurs like me and paupers, why waste your money on a super duper scanner for 35mm when a VG digi with a top lens would walk over a 35mm film camera with a top lens (at least for colour negs)...the V750 is very good for MF so why buy another one just for 35mm :rolleyes: IMO the way to go for you is:- use a digi for general shooting and MF for fun, pleasure or for special shots...of course 35mm B\W or slides can be be fun but I'm only posting my view if you just use colour neg film.
 
If you really want to get great scans then it might be (a somewhat unorthodox) option to get an old drum scanner like a Scanmate or ICG. They're going for anywhere between 50-400 on eBay and will still work fine with an old Mac G4 or PC. This is what I want to do at some point and although there's a learning curve with drum scanners the results are (I've heard) sublime. Personally, if I already had quite a few cameras in different mediums then I would just save the money for film, developing, printing, web hosting and like others have suggested, taking trips to subjects that could help further your photography. I'm currently at the end of my 5 month trip around South America and the States and I can confirm that I've taken thousands upon thousands of photographs and really improved since I left home.
 
excalibur2 said:
.....but 35mm colour neg for film is for dinosaurs like me and paupers, why waste your money on a super duper scanner for 35mm when a VG digi with a top lens would walk over a 35mm film camera with a top lens (at least for colour negs)...the V750 is very good for MF so why buy another one just for 35mm :rolleyes: IMO the way to go for you is:- use a digi for general shooting and MF for fun, pleasure or for special shots...of course 35mm B\W or slides can be be fun but I'm only posting my view if you just use colour neg film.
Click to expand...

But Brian, we have had this conversation before, some people just like shooting film and we know that the best digital cameras are stunning but that isn't the point. It's just like someone who likes to ride old motorbikes rather than shiny new ones. ;)
 
excalibur2 said:
.....but 35mm colour neg for film is for dinosaurs like me and paupers, why waste your money on a super duper scanner for 35mm when a VG digi with a top lens would walk over a 35mm film camera with a top lens (at least for colour negs).
Click to expand...

Walk over in what way?

There's more to photography than simply sharpness/resolution, which, unfortunately, seems to be the only way people on the internet want to evaluate the worth of any photographs/cameras/scanners/etc.
 
Why be in a hurry to spend.?
It is a bit cart before the horse.
Wait till you need something, Then you will have the cash in hand,
And a better bargaining position.
 
Well guys here are using MF for a reason, anyway the OP mentioned a A7R and I just can't match the shots with my 35mm camera using colour neg film esp for detail when cropped and the only way I would get near would be using a top 35mm scanner, but why when I can use MF and a V750 and even then I'm not sure I can match it?
Other reasons against 35mm would be magnification of spots or whatever esp in the darkroom and did give up 35mm for about 25 years and only have started back on 35mm because all the great 35mm cameras I missed in that time and now have bought for peanuts and it's great fun playing with them and.also it's so cheap with expired 35mm film esp with a combo of Asda.
If you want a plus for 35mm then there are lots of good lenses going cheap to play with and to enjoy, but if anyone wanted to spend 2 grand on gear and not worried about costs and wanted to use film and digi..then a VG digi camera and MF film gear is a great combo..my two pennies worth.
 
excalibur2 said:
Well guys here are using MF for a reason, anyway the OP mentioned a A7R and I just can't match the shots with my 35mm camera using colour neg film esp for detail when cropped and the only way I would get near would be using a top 35mm scanner, but why when I can use MF and a V750 and even then I'm not sure I can match it?
Other reasons against 35mm would be magnification of spots or whatever esp in the darkroom and did give up 35mm for about 25 years and only have started back on 35mm because all the great 35mm cameras I missed in that time and now have bought for peanuts and it's great fun playing with them and.also it's so cheap with expired 35mm film esp with a combo of Asda.
If you want a plus for 35mm then there are lots of good lenses going cheap to play with and to enjoy, but if anyone wanted to spend 2 grand on gear and not worried about costs and wanted to use film and digi..then a VG digi camera and MF film gear is a great combo..my two pennies worth.
Click to expand...

So the only advantage to 135 you can come up with is that the lenses are cheap? If you can't see its other benefits, I'm confused why you're even bothering to shoot it. :thinking:
 
skysh4rk said:
So the only advantage to 135 you can come up with is that the lenses are cheap? If you can't see its other benefits, I'm confused why you're even bothering to shoot it. :thinking:
Click to expand...

cos I'm a cheap skate and I'm not going to spend all that dosh for a A7R .:D......Also it's a great hobby playing with many lenses and trying to get the best out of them and also adds knowledge that could help a newbie who want's to try film on the cheap, but my true "love" is MF.
I could use my son's Canon 400d parked here but I'll only get into the bad habit of machine gunning :eek:..anyway the true filmies here are the ones that dev and also print in the darkroom...but I gave that up about 10 years ago and turn a blind eye that when scanning it's sorta digitizing the result...so if you think it does, then it ruins the argument about 35mm colour neg film when a digi camera is superior (at 35mm).
 
Last edited:
excalibur2 said:
cos I'm a cheap skate and I'm not going to spend all that dosh for a A7R .:D......Also it's a great hobby playing with many lenses and trying to get the best out of them and also adds knowledge that could help a newbie who want's to try film on the cheap, but my true "love" is MF.
I could use my son's Canon 400d parked here but I'll only get into the bad habit of machine gunning :eek:..anyway the true filmies here are the ones that dev and also print in the darkroom...but I gave that up about 10 years ago and turn a blind eye that when scanning it's sorta digitizing the result...so if you think it does, then it ruins the argument about 35mm colour neg film when a digi camera is superia (at 35mm).
Click to expand...

Just because an image from an A7R is sharper—in relative terms—and allows more cropping than an image from your 35mm camera, doesn't mean that the digital sensor is superior to 35m film overall. I mean, can anyone even name a single photograph that was considered amazing solely because it was sharp?

Almost all of the cameras and lenses that folks on this forum are using produce images that are plenty sharp, it's the other aspects of the image that we all need to start worrying about to really improve our photography.

I don't even shoot 35mm film, but I think it has more to offer than cheap lenses. For one, I far prefer the colours from films like Ektar and Portra to anything I've ever seen from any digital camera.
 
Last edited:
I'm quite happy with the results get from medium format with an Epson v700; getting a good scan from 35mm is a lot harder, but with medium format gear being very affordable now I don't personally feel a great need to use 35mm.

Perhaps if you can't decide how to spend £2k then there's nothing you really need ?
 
Well my basic view in this thread is about people who have plenty of money and would just use colour neg (since Kodachrome has finished I don't know how good 35mm pos film is)....if a newbie wanting to try film would be advising the same as we all do i.e. 35mm camera, Vista and Asda.
Also I'm sure I didn't mention sharpness but only "detail" but we can agree on one thing and that is:- a MF film camera is superior to a 35mm film camera for quality and if there was a challenge from that lot over the other side to show your film shot plus a massive crop the filmies would be using their MF or LF cameras ;)
 
For me, film is mainly fun when it's cheap.

If I had 2K to spend on camera gear in your situation I'd get an Epson R-D1 backup to my current, or indeed even a used Leica M9. That way, you can get some nice M glass and build up a parallel film/digi rig sharing the lenses eventually.
 
excalibur2 said:
but we can agree on one thing and that is:- a MF film camera is superior to a 35mm film camera for quality and if there was a challenge from that lot over the other side to show your film shot plus a massive crop the filmies would be using their MF or LF cameras ;)
Click to expand...

Sorry, I'm not even going to agree on that one. Although a medium format film camera might be capable of 'higher quality' images in theory, there are instances where 35mm will actually get you more 'detailed' results in practice. For instance, if you shoot a fast-moving athlete on a Bronica, which tops at at only 1/500s, or a Nikon F100, which camera will be capable of sharper or more 'detailed' results, all other things being equal?

This should start to highlight why theoretical sharpness or 'detail', whatever you even mean by that, is an insufficient measure of the value or worthiness of any camera or format.
 
Last edited:
If I had 2k spare I would buy some top lenses to see what I'm missing ;)..and they are a good investment as well if you don't like them as the digi guys want them.
 
ok well thanks for all your views :) its nice to get various opinions.
 
skysh4rk said:
Sorry, I'm not even going to agree on that one. Although a medium format film camera might be capable of 'higher quality' images in theory, there are instances where 35mm will actually get you more 'detailed' results in practice. For instance, if you shoot a fast-moving athlete on a Bronica, which tops at at only 1/500s, or a Nikon F100, which camera will be capable of sharper or more 'detailed' results, all other things being equal? It's not the medium format camera.

This should start to highlight why theoretical sharpness or 'detail', whatever you even mean by that, is an insufficient measure of the value or worthiness of any camera or format.
Click to expand...

H'mm so are you saying you can get all you want from a 35mm film camera and no need to use MF and the results you get are equal to any VG 35mm digital camera (if you drum scan)..and using the colour neg film of your choice and of course using the same top lens on the same subject.?
 
excalibur2 said:
H'mm so are you saying you can get all you want from a 35mm film camera and no need to use MF and the results you get are equal to any VG 35mm digital camera (if you drum scan)..and using the colour neg film of your choice and of course using the same top lens on the same subject.?
Click to expand...

No, that is not at all what I am saying. :banghead:
 
closed at OP's request :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top