Film photography is enjoying a resurgence in popularity, but unfortunately, so are used film camera prices. Granted, analog cameras are still bargains compared to new digital cameras, but some of the best-known models are creeping up in value, and as the film photography community discovers more hidden gems, their prices rise as well.

But film camera prices aren’t always based on quality or features; more often than not, it’s the fondly-remembered cameras that demand higher prices. Happily, there are plenty of less-popular cameras—often from the same manufacturer!—that can do the job just as well as their better-known brethren. In this article, we’ll talk about 10 well-known and expensive cameras, explain why they demand the prices that they do, and introduce you to reasonably-priced alternatives that do the job just as well—and some for much less money.

Skip: The Nikon F4 or F5

The Nikon F4 and F5 were the go-to professional film cameras from the late 1980s until the mid-2000s. Built like tanks, they were—and still are—tools designed to get the shot under any circumstances. Today, the F4 and F5 are highly regarded and highly priced—we’re talking $200 to $350 for a body in usable condition, and double that for a mint rig that hasn’t led the hard life so typical of these workhorses.

Instead buy: The Nikon N8008/N8008s

Related: The best used camera to buy right now

Back in the ‘90s, many F4/F5-toting pros kept a Nikon N8008 in their bag as a backup. Introduced concurrently with the F4, the N8008 was Nikons’ top consumer camera, with sophisticated-for-the-time matrix metering and a fast autofocus system. (It was also an incubator for the F5’s DSLR-like interface.) Like its pro-grade brother, the N8008 almost always gets the shot. The N8008 and N8008s (a later model with a spot-metering mode; they’re called F-801/801s outside North America) lives in the shadow of the more-advanced N90, and as a result, it’s largely underappreciated and underpriced: Bodies sell for a mere $20-$50, a ridiculous bargain for such a sophisticated camera.

Skip: A Hasselblad 500-series Medium Format camera

Hasselblad is often labeled as the Rolls-Royce of film photography, and the 500-series Medium Format cameras certainly are impressive machines. Not only are they exceptionally well-engineered and well-crafted, but they are also relatively small and light for their film size. But man-oh-man, are they expensive! A complete 500 C/M rig (body, lens, viewfinder and film back) will set you back at least two grand—likely more—and lenses aren’t cheap either.

Instead buy: A Bronica SQ-series Medium Format camera

Bronica cameras were often referred to as “Japanese Hasselblads”. Like the ‘Blad, the Bronica SQ is a square-format leaf-shutter SLR that is compact and light. The optics are excellent, the bodies are reliable, and you should be able to assemble a complete system for less than $1000, and closer to $500 if you are willing to patiently watch the auction sites. If you prefer a rectangular 6×4.5cm negative format, the Bronica ETRS and Mamiya 645-series are bargains as well.

Skip: The Nikon FM2/FM2n

Nikon’s FM2 is among the most prized of 35mm film SLRs, and with good reason: It’s all-mechanical (which means it can operate without batteries), has a fantastic feature set, and uses Nikon’s outstanding lenses. No surprise, then, that it’s one of the more expensive 35mm SLRs on the used market, with working examples easily fetching between $250 and $500.

Instead buy: The Nikon FM

The irony here is that the FM2’s predecessor, the FM, sells in the $100 to $200 range, sometimes even cheaper. The older FM has a slower top shutter speed (1/1000 sec vs 1/4000 sec) and slower flash sync speed (1/125 sec vs 1/200 sec or 1/250 sec for the 2n), and… that’s about it. Under the skin, the FM has similarly robust all-mechanical construction for which the FM2 is prized, and if you can do without the faster shutter speeds, it’s a great bargain. An even cheaper alternative is the Nikkormat FT2, which is bigger and heavier than the FMs but fully compatible with Nikon’s less-expensive pre-AI lenses.

Skip: The Canon AE-1 Program

The AE-1 Program was Canon’s first consumer-grade camera to have a program mode, one that could set both aperture and shutter speed. It was a strong seller in its day and remains popular with those transitioning from digital to film, as it combines that old-school SLR feel with the ease of fully automatic exposure control. No surprise, then, that the AE-1 Program commands high prices—$150 to $300 in good working order.

Instead buy: The Nikon FG

Introduced in 1982 as a low-cost AE-1 Program competitor, the FG is one of the most controversial Nikon bodies, derided among Nikon purists for its built-to-a-price-point construction. Though it lacks the heft and feel of other Nikons, read online reviews and you’ll see that most modern-day FG owners (your author included) love them. The FG is small and light and provides aperture-priority, shutter-priority, and full-auto program modes with all Nikon AI-S manual focus lenses. Thanks to its poor reputation, it’s easy to snag an FG for $75 or less.

Skip: A Rollei Rolleiflex TLR

Mention twin-lens reflex cameras and many film photographers imagine a Rolleiflex. Designed with German precision, Rollei’s Medium Format TLRs are elegant, reliable, and admirably small and light. And in their day they were prized by both casual snapshooters and professional photographers. Their well-earned regard translates to high prices: Depending on the model, Rolleiflex cameras range from $300 to $2,500 or more, and even Rollei’s lower-end Rolleicord cameras go for $200 and up.

Instead buy: A Yashica TLR

The Japanese-made Yashica twin-lens camera was designed as an affordable alternative to the Rolleiflex. But don’t let its budget status fool you, Yashicas are high-quality cameras. For some reason, though, these fine TLRs continue to lurk in Rollei’s shadow. Happily, this is reflected in their prices: Working Yaschicas sell in the $50 to $300 range. You might also consider the Mamiya C220 and C330, rare among TLRs in that they have interchangeable lenses. They’re larger, heavier, and more expensive than the Yaschicas—figure $250 to $500—but they too are excellent cameras.

Skip: The Pentax K1000

The K1000 is one of the best-known 35mm SLRs in the film world, largely because Pentax kept it in production for an epic twenty-one years, from 1976 to 1997. Cheaply priced when new and virtually indestructible, the Pentax K1000 became the go-to student camera for generations of photographers and is fondly remembered today. That nostalgia keeps prices up: Despite a massive supply, working K1000s routinely sell between $120 and $150, which is rather steep considering the K1000’s limited feature set.

Instead buy: The Pentax KM

What many photographers don’t realize is that Pentax derived the K1000 from their KM of 1975-77. The KM is actually a more feature-rich camera; its self-timer and depth-of-field preview were eliminated from the K1000 in order to get the price down. There’s one other big difference between the KM and the K1000: How much they cost today. Despite having more features, the lesser-known KM routinely sells for under $100. If the K1000’s slightly-higher price tag isn’t a budget-buster, though, consider your author’s favorite Pentax, the KX, which uses the same mechanism with a mirror lock-up and a better light meter.

Skip: A Leica M-series rangefinder

Are Leica’s legendary 35mm rangefinder cameras worth their sky-high prices? That debate will likely never be settled, but with the price of entry starting around $1,500 for less-desirable models and rising well above $5,000 for a nice M6—and that’s before lenses!—it’s a question for which few of us will have the opportunity to give an informed answer.

Instead buy: A Voigtländer Bessa R or R-2

Voigtländer is another German brand, except the Bessa R isn’t exactly German—it’s made by Cosina, a Japanese company that has manufactured cameras and lenses for numerous other well-known brands. Hard-core Leica fans might dismiss the Voigtländer as a plastic knock-off, but those who have used both cameras don’t seem to find the Bessa’s performance lacking. The Bessa R uses the 39mm Leica screw mount while the R2 uses the Leica M-mount. And while the Bessas don’t come cheap—figure $500 to $1,500—they are a great value compared to Leica. (Note that the Bessa T and Bessa L are less expensive, but the T has no viewfinder and the L lacks both viewfinder and rangefinder.)

Skip: The Nikon FE or FE-2

The FE-series was Nikon’s state-of-the-art consumer camera throughout most of the 1980s. A stablemate of the mechanical FM, the FE features an electronic shutter with an aperture-priority automatic exposure mode along with full manual control. Though cheaper than the FM-series cameras, the FEs still command healthy prices in the $100-$300 range.

Instead buy: The Ricoh XR-2 or XR-2s

Back in the 1970s and ‘80s, Ricoh was known for making feature-packed cameras at discount prices. The XR-2 and XR-2s (the latter accepts a power winder) have a similar feature set to the FE, including a match-needle meter display, shutter speed range of 1/1000 sec to 4 sec (the FE goes to 8 sec), and aperture readout in the viewfinder. Ricoh XR cameras are compatible with Pentax K-mount lenses, which are cheaper than Nikkor and of comparable optical quality (though Ricoh’s own Rikenon lenses are fine, too). Their plastic bodies feel a bit cheap, but don’t be fooled—Ricoh was an early adopter of durable polycarbonate, two decades before Canon. You’ll find the XR-2 for $50 or less, and the Sears-branded version, the KS Auto, is even cheaper.

Skip: The Pentax LX

Back in the 1970s and ‘80s, Pentax primarily pursued the consumer market, and the LX is one of their few pro-level film cameras from that era. An impressive camera, it features a weather-sealed body, interchangeable viewfinders, and an unusual hybrid shutter that is mechanically timed at high speeds (1/75 sec to 1/2000 sec) and electronic at slow speeds (4 sec to 1/60 sec). Among die-hard Pentaxians, the LX is considered the brand’s most desirable 35mm body, and prices are high, typically between $200 and $400.

Instead buy: The Pentax K2

A predecessor to the LX, the K2 was actually Pentax’s first (albeit half-hearted) attempt at a “pro” camera, and while it lacks many of the LX’s pro-specific features, it offers similar functionality and uses the same K-series lenses. Its electronically-timed shutter offers speeds of 1/1000 sec down to 8 sec, and it’s the only camera in the K-series to offer an automatic exposure mode. The K2 DMD version was compatible with a motor drive and a data back and tends to sell for a bit more than the regular K2. You’ll find K2s in the $100-to-$150 range, sometimes even cheaper.

Skip: The Minolta Maxxum 9

The Minolta Maxxum 9 (known as the Dynax 9 in Europe and the α-9 in Japan) was Minolta’s last professional 35mm body. With weatherproof construction, a highly advanced autofocus system, and a 1/12000 sec top shutter speed, the 9 was a formidable competitor for the Nikon F5. The 9 was ignored for many years, but appreciation for this camera is growing rapidly, as are prices—they’re trading in the $250-plus range and prices are on the rise.

Instead buy: The Minolta Maxxum 5

If the Maxxum 9 is a sleeper among pro bodies then its mid-level brother is a sleeper among Minolta SLRs. One of Minolta’s last advanced-amateur film bodies, the 5, encompasses many of the features of the Maxxum 7 (which some argue was a more advanced camera than the 9). It’s not weatherproof and its shutter tops out at a mere 1/4000 sec, but it has sophisticated autofocus and autoexposure systems and a plethora of programmable options. Because they appeared towards the end of the film era, many used examples have seen little use. Best yet, the Maxxum 5 is laughably cheap, with plenty on the auction sites for $30 or less. Your author bought his, in like-new condition and with a lens, for a mere $17.

The post Affordable analog: 10 alternatives to high-priced film cameras appeared first on Popular Photography.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

In this section of our three-part series about traveling with film, we’ll talk about the mode of travel most fraught with peril for film photographers: Flying. Back in the pre-digital days, flying with film was a no-brainer; you could pack your camera gear and buy all the film you needed at your destination (and perhaps get it developed there as well). Today, film is harder to find and airport security is tighter (and potentially more harmful to film), so airborne analog photographers have to do a bit more planning.

(Note that the information in this article is specific to air travel in the United States. Other countries may—and likely will—have different regulations and procedures.)

The primary problem facing film fans who fly

Related: How to travel with film by land and sea

Here’s the big problem for airborne film photographers: The scanners and X-ray machines used for luggage inspection produce light energy to which film is sensitive. These machines can potentially “fog” your film, causing dark spots or waves on the negatives (or light spots on slides) as if the film had been exposed to light. So the challenge when flying is to minimize or avoid situations that could potentially damage your film.

Note that only undeveloped film is subject to damage. Developed negatives, slides, and prints are no longer light sensitive and cannot be damaged by airport security equipment. 

Can you avoid X-rays altogether?

Depending on your destination, it may be possible to avoid bringing film through the airport altogether. If you’re traveling to a big city, you might be able to buy your film locally. If you’re staying at a high-end hotel with a concierge, they may even be able to buy film for you (but beware of hefty prices and fees). You may also be able to mail-order film and have it sent directly to your lodgings; check with the property first to see if they can receive packages (and bring a couple of rolls in case your shipment is lost or delayed). Likewise, if you use mail-order film processing, consider sending the film off for development from your destination before you leave for home.

Never put film in a ‘checked’ bag

Do not put unexposed or undeveloped film in checked baggage, ever. The scanners used for checked baggage are more powerful than those used in carry-on luggage and will very likely fog your film. Film and loaded cameras should always be taken in carry-on luggage.

Related: Going back to film? Here’s what’s changed

A related side note: When booking your airline tickets, beware of “Basic Economy” tickets, which do not always allow carry-on baggage beyond a small personal item. Buyers of these tickets often board last, when carry-on storage is full, and will sometimes be forced to check their baggage (for a hefty fee), where it could be subject to harmful scanning at stopovers. If you are traveling with film, make sure your air ticket allows you to bring carry-on luggage, and pack your film (and cameras) in a bag small enough to join you in the cabin.

Film in carry-on baggage: Ask for a ‘hand inspection’

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) says that the X-ray machines it uses for carry-on baggage are safe for photographic film up to ISO 800*. We’ve had slower film scanned with no ill effects, but we also understand that the effects are cumulative and that multiple scans may cause fogging. (We asked TSA if we could run some test scans at our local airport; they politely denied our request, citing security concerns.)

Fortunately, there is one good way to ensure your film will not be damaged: Ask for your film to be “hand inspected,” regardless of its speed.

*Note that at some airports, TSA is introducing more powerful CT scanners for carry-on luggage, which can damage even slower-speed film.

The PopPhoto guide to hand inspections

First: We recommend being patient and polite with TSA agents. Remember that their first responsibility is security, not customer service—and also that they’re subject to a lot of vented frustrations from harried passengers. There’s no need to show fealty; simple politeness and civility will get you a long way.

Film photography is popular enough that most TSA agents should be familiar with hand-scanning requests, but it does slow their workflow. When traveling with film, we always allow an extra ten to fifteen minutes to get through security (a margin we rarely need).

We recommend carrying your film in a clear plastic zip-lock-style bag, with which TSA is familiar. Leave your rolls in their plastic canisters and/or sealed packaging whenever possible. We try to keep our cameras unloaded so they can pass through the X-ray machine, but loaded cameras can also be hand-scanned. Anything you’d like hand-inspected should be kept where it’s easily accessible; a backpack is preferable to a suitcase that must be unzipped.

Before we put our luggage on the belt, we remove our film and loaded cameras, catch the eye of the nearest TSA agent, and say, “I have some film (and cameras) I’d like to have hand-inspected, please.” If asked if the film is under ISO 800 we either say no or (to avoid fibbing) tell them it’s going to be pushed and shot at a higher speed. (They may not know what this means but will generally accept it.) 

After walking through the scanners we try to stand somewhere conspicuous without blocking the flow of passengers. Film is usually checked by the same agents inspecting bags that have been pulled for secondary inspection, so there may be a wait. The inspection usually consists of swabbing the individual rolls, then putting the swab in a machine that checks for explosive residue. We’ve occasionally had requests to open boxes and always say yes (so long as they don’t pull your film out of the canister or unspool your 120 rolls, it’ll be fine). Once the machine gives the agent the green light, you’ll likely be sent on your way. 

Going home: Have all film hand inspected

Once your film has been shot, it’s still sensitive to light and can still be damaged by scanners, so be sure to have all of your film, shot or not, inspected by hand. We must reiterate: Do not put undeveloped film in checked bags. 

If you’ve had your film developed while on vacation, there’s nothing to worry about—as we mentioned earlier, developed film, negatives, prints and slides are not light-sensitive. You can safely put them through the scanners or in your checked baggage.

What about lead-lined film bags?

Several manufacturers offer lead-lined film bags that claim to protect the film from X-rays. (We do not know if these bags protect against CT scanners.) We haven’t tried one in recent years, but if the bags do block X-rays, they will likely show up as a large dark blob on the security scan, which is likely to trigger a secondary inspection. We find it easier to simply request a hand inspection and avoid the inconvenience of having TSA unpack our bags.

Advice for other countries

While we’ve never had a request for hand-scanning denied in the US, we have been refused in Europe, and we don’t know if this was down to security procedures or a language barrier. For this reason, if you do travel with analog cameras overseas, consider bringing a slower-speed film, which is most likely to survive scanning with no ill effects. That said, we understand that some European countries are also introducing CT scanners for hand luggage, which is much more likely to fog film. 

Ultimately, it’s best to check the official website for the security agency of the country to which you are traveling. If they don’t have a clear-cut policy covering film, you might want to consider traveling with a digital camera or making provisions to mail your film home before you leave.

The post How to fly with film appeared first on Popular Photography.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

One of my many, many pet peeves is folks who discourage would-be analog photographers by telling them film is too expensive. They cite $25 rolls of slide film, $20 E-6 developing, and $40-per-shot drum scans, and declare film as a financial quagmire compared to “free” digital photos.

The fact is that while film can be expensive, it doesn’t need to be. My 35mm B&W photography costs me less than a quarter per frame—not just for film, mind you, but for film, processing, and scanning. And here’s the punch line: I’m actually spending more than I have to. If I did things differently, I could be shooting B&W film for less than 14 cents per photo. And while color film is more expensive, it need not cost much more than what I currently spend on B&W.

Stick with me through this article and a bit of math, and I’ll explain how I do it.

Step one: Save on film by rolling your own

Related – Affordable analog: 10 alternatives to high-priced film cameras

Many popular B&W emulsions are sold in 100-foot bulk rolls, which the photographer winds onto reusable 35mm cassettes. 100 feet yields approximately eighteen 36-exposure rolls. A bulk roll of my favorite film, Ilford HP5 Plus, sells for $89.99, which works out to $5 per 36-exposure roll (about $3 cheaper than pre-rolled HP5+) or 13.9 cents per photo. 

My beloved HP5+ is hardly the least-expensive film on the market. I also like Ilford’s Kentmere 100. At ~$70.00 for a 100-foot roll, it costs just 11 cents per shot. Freestyle’s Arista EDU film costs $51.99 per 100-foot roll—just 8 cents per exposure.

Bulk rolling has advantages beyond costs savings. Chief among them, you’re not stuck with 24 or 36 exposures. When I buy a used camera, I don’t need to burn a whole roll of film to test it out; instead, I’ll whip up a 5-exposure test roll. For general use, I load around 25 exposures per roll, though this does increase my development costs slightly, as you’ll see in the next section.

What about equipment? You’ll need film cassettes, which sell for around $1.25 each. They last for years, making their per-shot costs basically negligible. Some photographers use a bulk loader to wind film onto the cassettes. A loader costs around $50, and if you only keep it ten years—chances are it’ll last five times that long—it’ll add about a third of a cent per frame to your film costs. Me, I don’t use a bulk loader; I simply spool up my film in my dark bag.

My film cost (Ilford HP5 Plus): 13.9 cents per picture.

Buying color film

Color film for still photography is difficult to find in 100-foot rolls; however, you can still save money by buying in quantity. A five-pack can save a couple of bucks per roll, and if you can find a dealer who will sell you a “brick” of film, you can drop your costs much closer to bulk-roll levels.

Step two: Save on film development by doing it yourself

Related: How to change the light seals in an old film camera

I develop all of my own B&W film, and not just because it saves money. I genuinely enjoy the process. If you’ve never done it, don’t be intimidated—B&W development is dead-easy and hard to screw up. Also, it’s a huge cost savings over lab development. 

For those unfamiliar, there are four (or so) types of chemicals needed (developer, stop bath, fixer, and a washing agent) and some basic hardware. Let’s look at the costs of each.

Developer

There are several choices of B&W developer; I’m very fond of Kodak D-76. It’s sold as a $9.99 package of powder, which mixes with a gallon or so of distilled water (about 99 cents). For most of my developing, I dilute this stock solution 1:1 (so, ad another 99-cent gallon of distilled water). If I use my single-roll developing tank, that’s enough for about 23 rolls of film, which comes out to 52 cents per roll. That’s 1.4 cents per frame for 36 exposures, but since I shoot 25-exposure rolls, my cost is 2.1 cents per frame.

Granted, I don’t always spend that much. I have a two-roll tank that uses about 25% less developer per roll than if I develop two rolls individually in a single tank. Besides D-76, I also use Kodak HC-110, a liquid-concentrate developer that costs about 35 cents per roll. And there are cheaper alternatives to Kodak developers: LegacyPro’s L-76, for example, is identical to D-76 and sells for $6.99. (As a former resident of Rochester, New York, I use Kodak developers out of loyalty—or perhaps guilt for shooting Ilford film.)

Other Chemicals

I use Kodak Indicator Stop Bath and Ilford Rapid Fixer, both sold as concentrates that are mixed with water. Stop costs 0.9 cents per roll; fixer, 11.2 cents. I use Kodak Photo-Flo 200 as a rinsing aid, which adds another 3.8 cents per roll. That breaks down to 0.4 cents per frame for 36 exposures or just under 0.7 cents for 25-exposures.

Again, there are more cost savings to be had. Some people use water instead of stop bath (but for less than a penny a roll, I think it’s worth splurging on). I change my stop and fixer every 25 rolls, but they could probably go longer—there’s an easy test for fixer (drop in a scrap of unexposed film and time how long it takes to clear), and Kodak stop bath changes color when it’s done (hence “Indicator” in its name). As with developers, there are cheaper alternatives from brands like LegacyPro and Arista.edu.

Equipment

I was lucky to have my developing tanks, reels, and thermometer given to me. This meant I only had to buy a dark bag/film changing bag (a light-proof bag with arm-holes, used to transfer the film from the cassette to the developing tank), measuring beakers, and bottles for mixed chemicals. (I buy brown bottles of hydrogen peroxide and empty them out.) In all, I spent less than $40, but if you’re starting from scratch, you might spend closer to $150. Most of this equipment will last forever, but if you only get ten years out of it, and like me, shoot about 35 rolls per year, that’ll average out to about 2 cents per frame. (For me, the costs are half-a-penny per photo.)

My developing costs (D-76, single-roll tank, 25 exposures): 3.3 cents per photo.

DIY developing for color film

Color film development used to be so cheap and widely available that doing it yourself wasn’t considered cost-effective. Today you can buy C-41 (color negative) developing kits that contain all the needed chemicals in a single box. Color is a bit more fiddly to develop than B&W—temperature control is paramount—but not much more difficult. Equipment is the same as for B&W, plus something to keep the chemicals warm. Many DIYers use a sous vide immersion cooker, which costs around $75.

CineStill sells a one-liter C-41 kit that costs $39.99 and processes 8 rolls—$3.50 per roll (way cheaper than commercial developing!) or 9.7 cents per frame. Arista EDU makes a one-gallon kit that develops 32 rolls; at $79.99 it breaks down to $2.50 per roll or about 7 cents per frame. (Color processing chemicals, once opened, have a short shelf life, something to keep in mind when choosing quantities.)

Shooting slides? There are development kits for E-6 processing, too. An eight-roll kit from Arista EDU costs around $5.50 per roll, while a 32-roll kit brings the costs down to $3.59 per roll.

Step three: Save On Scanning With Your Own Scanner 

I use a Epson V550 film scanner for all my own film (which has since been replaced by the Epson V600). Some photographers buy third-party scanning programs, but I’ve been happy with Epson’s own software, which I find works well for B&W, color negatives, and color slides. Obviously, the Epson can’t compare to a drum scanner, but I am very happy with the results I get—I think they’re fine for editing and sharing photos online.

I paid $195 for my V550. If I only get five years out of it—I’m hoping for more!—and if I shoot 35 rolls per year, my scanning costs are about $1.11 per roll. At 25 exposures per, that’s 4.4 cents per scan. Of course, if I keep the Epson longer, or if I shoot more film, that lowers my per-shot costs even further.

My scanning costs: 4.6 cents per photo.

Adding Up My Costs—and How I Could Save More

If I shoot a 25-exposure bulk-loaded roll of Ilford HP5 Plus (13.9 cents per frame), develop with D-76 (3.3 cents), and scan with my Epson (4.4 cents), I’m at 21.6 cents per frame. I buy my supplies locally, so I have to add 9.5% for sales tax. Grand total: 23.7 cents per frame, or $5.93 to shoot, develop and scan a 25-exposure roll of B&W film.

Still, I could be spending far less. If I shot Kentmere 100, loaded each cassette with 36 exposures, developed with LegacyPro L-76 in my two-roll tank, and kept my scanner for ten years, my costs would drop to $4.91 per roll—just 13.6 cents per photo. To put that in perspective, for the price of a new Nikon Z7 kit, I could shoot, develop and scan one roll of film per week for twelve years—and still have some cash left over to buy a decent 35mm camera.

Color is more expensive, but not overly so. With bulk purchasing and home developing and scanning, it’s easy to get color negative film down to $10 per roll (27.8 cents per shot) or less. Even the cost of pricey slide film can be greatly reduced.

So the next time you hear someone disparaging film as prohibitively expensive, please help me out by setting them straight. In fact, you might want to ask how often they replace their digital rigs and how much that costs—and then explain how much money they could save by shooting film.

The post How to shoot film on a budget appeared first on Popular Photography.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Back in the pre-digital days, most Photo 101 classes had students start out shooting B&W film and learning how to develop it. For many who have returned to film photography, do-it-yourself film processing is one of analog photography’s big attractions—it’s easy, it’s good fun, and it’s very rewarding.

If you haven’t considered developing your own film at home, here are 5 reasons you should consider giving it a try.

1. Developing your own film is easier than you think

Related: Everything you need to develop your own film at home

Film processing might seem daunting if you’ve never done it, but it’s really quite easy—remember that back in the day, film developing was a skill easily mastered by school students. Getting the film on the developing reels requires a bit of practice, but the processing itself is dead simple—it’s a matter of mixing up the chemicals, pouring them in, setting a timer, moving the tank around at pre-set intervals, and pouring them out again.

Contrary to what many believe, you don’t need a darkroom to develop film—darkness is only required for transferring the film into the development tank, for which a simple dark bag or dark tent will suffice. After that, everything can be done at your sink with the lights on, and with the chemicals right around room temperature. Color developing is a tad trickier because it requires more precise (and higher) temperatures; still, it’s not brain surgery. If you can follow a simple recipe in a cookbook, you can develop your own film.

2. DIY developing saves money

Related: You should buy a sous vide machine and develop your own color film

Lab developing is often one of the priciest elements of film photography, and doing it yourself can save you a lot of money—in fact, it’s a key element in my strategy for shooting film on a budget. How cheap is it? That depends on what developer you use (and there are a lot of choices), but generally, the costs for chemicals will be between 50 cents and $1 per roll for 35mm, with 120-size film costing just a few cents more. Yes, you read that right—it generally costs less than a buck a roll to do your own B&W developing.

You will need some equipment—developing tanks and reels, a thermometer, a dark bag, and some measurement beakers, which you can buy separately or in a kit—but before you do that, talk to photographer friends to see if they have equipment from their film days that they’d be willing to give you. If you have to buy new, figure on spending between $100 and $150—a one-time investment that will quickly pay for itself in savings over lab developing.

3. There’s a lot of support for home film developers

We fear we’ve made at-home film developing sound more complicated than it is, mentioning all the choices in chemistry and the hardware you’ll need. Don’t worry—the process really is very straightforward, and the Internet means you don’t need to take a photography course to learn (though if you have that option, it’s a great way to go).

Today, there are scores of articles and online videos on YouTube that will walk you through the basic process. Film manufacturers provide data sheets that give specific developing times for different types of developers, while timing for the rest of the processes—stop, fix and wash—are effectively constant. You’ll notice that different photographers may have slightly different methodologies; there’s a little flexibility in the process of processing, which is one of the things that makes it so easy.

Once you start developing, you can experiment with different developers and techniques to find what works best for you. You’ll find lots of help on various film-related forums, and before too long, you may well be one of the experienced film developers sharing your knowledge with other newbies.

4. Developing your own film expands your options

One of the joys of film photography is that you are working directly with light-sensitive media (as opposed to digital, where there’s always a layer of electronic data wizardry between you and your images). That work need not end when you fire the shutter: DIY developing presents all kinds of options to fine-tune your analog photography. How can developing extend your options? Lots of ways. 

With B&W photography, the choice of developer makes a difference as to how your photos will look. Many avid DIYers keep several types of developer on hand. Even changing the dilution of your chosen developer can alter the way your photos come out. There’s lots of documentation and knowledge online, so it’s easy to customize your developing regimen to get the result you want. Developing your own film also makes it easy to push- or pull-process (intentionally under- or over-exposing your film, then compensating by altering the development time). When you do your own developing, you have real control over how your negatives look—control that would otherwise be turned over to your photo lab.

5. Developing your own film feels like magic

Asked anyone who has ever developed their own film: There is no feeling like opening the tank after that final wash, unrolling a bit of film, and seeing an image—a physical image that you physically put there by exposing and developing the film. It’s a sensation of which we at PopPhoto never tire, and that no digital camera or computational process can emulate.

One of the aspects of film photography we love most is that it removes all barriers between the photographer and their image. When you take a film photograph, you are literally working directly with the very stuff of which your photo is made, including selecting how much light the silver halide crystals are exposed to.

Developing your own film lets you complete that process as you literally convert a latent image to a visible image by hand—not 0s and 1s and invisible data, but real silver and dyes you can see with your own eyes. Technically, it’s not magic—it’s science and chemistry—but if film developing doesn’t feel like magic, well, we don’t know what does.

The post 5 reasons you should develop your own film appeared first on Popular Photography.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

For reasons I can’t quite explain—my contrarian nature, perhaps, or the inferiority complex that comes with being a Pentax shooter—it pains me to heap praise on Nikon. It’s impossible to deny that most Nikon gear, be it film or digital, is pretty darn good. Still, any time I hear or read someone extolling the superiority of all things Nikon, I can’t help but imagine what they’d look like with a Nikkor AF-D 70-210mm zoom shoved firmly up their left nostril.

There is, however, one Nikon film camera I genuinely adore—and it just so happens to be the one that Nikonians love to hate. Fellow film friends, meet my favorite Nikon SLR: The quirky little Nikon FG 35mm camera.

Nikon FG pros:

• Small size, lightweight
• Great control layout
• Works equally well in automatic and manual modes
• Bargain price for a Nikon SLR

Nikon FG cons:

• Unrefined feel compared to other Nikon cameras
• No depth-of-field preview
• Nikon fans might think you have a lousy camera and no taste

The Nikon that irked everyone

To appreciate both the FG’s eccentricities and the derision it attracts, it’s helpful to know a little about its history. The FG was the second attempt to market an entry-level camera under the Nikon brand; previously, such cameras were marketed as Nikkormats. The FG’s predecessor is the equally-detested EM, a lightweight, automatic-only SLR introduced in 1979 as a response to compact automatics like Pentax’s ME of 1976.

Related: Affordable analog – 10 alternatives to high-priced film cameras

The EM’s (relatively) cheap price and limited feature set jibed with Nikon’s pro-level snob appeal. Worse yet, Nikon ads touted the EM as a lightweight, low-cost, foolproof camera that delivered the same high-quality results as pro-level Nikons—something that likely did not sit well with those who had invested serious cabbage in their F2 and FE kits. One can only imagine how they felt about the snapshooting masses suddenly joining the ranks of the Nikonisti.

Enter the surprisingly sophisticated Nikon FG

Sensitive, perhaps, to the fan base’s criticisms of the EM, Nikon replaced it in 1982 with the FG, a name that implied closer kinship to other F-series SLRs. And the FG is a surprisingly sophisticated camera: Similar in size to the svelte EM, the FG adds full manual mode (along with the EM’s aperture priority auto mode) and an exposure compensation dial in addition to the EM’s backlight, +2EV button. Like the EM, the FG lacks a depth-of-field preview, but it does have a mirror lock-up tied to the self-timer. 

Nikon FG key specs:

• Type: 35mm manual-focus, manual-wind SLR
• Years produced: 1982-1984
• Built-in light meter: Yes
• Exposure modes: Metered manual, aperture priority auto, program auto
• Focusing aids: Horizontal split prism, microprism
• ISO range: 25 to 3200
• ISO setting: Manual
• Shutter type: Metal leaf, vertical travel, electronically timed
• Shutter speed range: 1/1000 to 1 sec (stepless in auto modes) + Bulb
• Flash sync speed: 1/90 sec
• Hot shoe: Yes
• Self-timer: Yes
• DOF preview: No
• Mirror lock-up: Yes, with self-timer
• Exposure compensation: Yes
• Batteries: 2 x LR44 or S76
• Dimensions: 5.35 x 3.46 x 2.13 inches

But it was the innovations over and above other Nikon cameras that really set the FG apart. The FG was the first Nikon camera to offer a fully-automatic “program” mode, which set both shutter speed and aperture in stepless increments. It also offers off-the-film (OTF) flash metering, a feature borrowed from the pro-level F3. (It’s worth noting that when the FG-20 replaced the FG in 1985, the Program and OTF flash features were gone, transplanted to the high-end Nikon FA.)

The 1982 price for the FG was $322, but major retailers advertised it for as low as $185 (about $560 in 2022 dollars). For comparison, retailers were getting $99 for an EM, $205 for an FE, and $435 for an F3. Competing cameras included the Canon AE-1 Program, which sold retail for $170, and the Minolta X-700 at $195.

Ingenious workaround enables new tech on old lenses

One innovative feature that Popular Photography covered in our July 1983 Nikon FG Lab Report (in which we tore the camera down to its bare frame) is the camera’s last-second metering check. When the shutter is fired in program mode, just after the lens is stopped down—and before the mirror pops up—the FG takes a meter reading to set the final shutter speed. Why? The throw of the diaphragm actuating lever is so short that the FG can’t set the aperture with perfect precision, so this final check allows the shutter speed to be fine-tuned for proper exposure. It’s a work-around, to be sure, but one that allows the FG’s program mode to work with existing AI-series lenses, many introduced half a decade before the FG showed up.

PopPhoto’s response to this nifty new Nikon was favorable. In our First Look at the camera, published in the November 1982 issue, we said:

“The camera was extremely responsive and has an accurate, nicely center-weighted metering system that gave beautifully exposed negatives and slides. In spite of its plastic exterior, the FG felt solid and reliable, with none of the ‘tinniness’ that is sometimes characteristic of cameras this small… All in all, the FG is an extremely flexible picture-making machine that is at once quite sophisticated and easy to use.”

Not good enough for the Nikonians

Unfortunately, the Nikon FG proved to be no more popular than the EM among Nikon fanatics. Pick one up and it’s easy to see why: Smaller and lighter than the FE and FM, it feels substantially less substantial, and not just because of its plastic body. The FG doesn’t have the same mirror-damping mechanism as pricier Nikons, and, like the EM before it, it employs the same Seiko MFC-E shutter used by Pentax, Minolta, and others, rather than the Nikon-designed Copal shutter. Inertia has a field day with the FG: Fire the shutter and it shudders in a way most Nikon SLRs don’t. 

The film advance is just plain weird: It has a two-piece hinged lever and a ratcheting design which allows the film to be advanced in several short strokes rather than one big one. Winding it feels like manipulating a broken finger, and when the film is fully advanced, the clutchamathingie that makes the ratcheting action work stops the lever’s travel with a most un-Nikon-like clack. Compared to the refined feel of other Nikons, the FG is more Holga than Hasselblad. It just doesn’t feel like a proper Nikon, and I’m sure that’s a big part of why it alienated the fan base.

Why I love the Nikon FG

That’s unfortunate because those unable to get past the FG’s un-Nikon-like feel are missing out on a magnificent camera. I like my SLRs small and light, and the FG is a significant three ounces lighter than the Nikon FE. While not quite as light as the Pentax M-series cameras—my favorite walk-about bodies—the FG has a better control layout: The edge of the shutter speed dial sits proud of the camera’s front edge, so you can turn it with your shutter-button finger. The exposure compensation dial can also be easily adjusted while looking through the lens.

The meter display is one of my favorites. The FG’s viewfinder has a vertical row of numbers corresponding to shutter speeds. In manual mode, red LEDs light up solid next to your selected shutter speed and flash next to the meter’s recommendation, with arrows at the top and bottom warning of over- or under-exposure. A single solid LED means you and the meter agree. In automatic mode, the LED shows the camera’s selected shutter speed, with a beeper (which can be disabled) warning of shake-prone speeds of 1/30 or less. Unlike a mechanical needle, the LED display is visible even in very low light. Even if it’s too dark to read the numbers, I find I can figure out the approximate shutter speed by the position of the LEDs.

The beauty of the FG is that it works equally well in manual, semi-automatic, and fully-automatic modes, which is more than I can say for my beloved Pentax ME Super (which I find to be great as an automatic camera but lousy as a manual one). Personally, I like the FG even better than my Nikon FE, which is supposed to be the superior SLR. The FG isn’t as refined, but I find it a lot easier and faster to use. 

And, of course, the photos that come out of the FG are just as good as what an FE or FM –or even an F2 or F3—can make, because they’re all shot through those lovely Nikkor lenses. And while I don’t own any, I’m told that the lower-cost plastic-body E-series lenses, which with the EM and FG were often bundled, also do an excellent job.

And yet it’s still the Nikon that Nikonians dislike

The odd thing about the FG is that even now, forty years after its introduction, it is still reviled by some of Nikon’s fan base. The FG has a reputation for fragility, though this seems to be propagated by folks who don’t trust cameras with electronic shutters (which is a little like keeping your money in a mattress because you don’t trust banks). I’ve seen little evidence that reliability is any more of a problem for the FG than any other electronic Nikons. In fact, having read through hectares of online reviews and forum commentary, it strikes me that most of the people who bag on the FG haven’t actually used one. Actual FG owners, what few of us there are, mostly love the li’l critter.

Still, this unfair tarnishing of the FG’s image has created a great situation for would-be Nikon shooters who are put off by price: The FG remains a bargain among manual-focus Nikon SLRs. While working FEs frequently sell in the $100 to $200 range, and FM-series cameras for even more, it’s still possible—easy, actually—to find an FG in good condition for well under a Benjamin. The same goes for the FG’s replacement, the FG-20. Though it lacks all of the FG’s features, it’s still a great (and greatly underappreciated) Nikon SLR. Of course, one still has to contend with the high price of Nikkor lenses, but the savings the FG offers over the FE should cover the cost of a light-weight Series E 50mm f/1.8, or get you most of the way to the lovely Nikkor 50mm f/1.4.

Will the FG ever get the love it deserves? 

I imagine that the Nikon FG will never be fully embraced by Nikon fans, and much as I would like to dismiss those who turn their nose as snobs, the truth is that I cannot blame them. There is a level of polish and sophistication that one expects from a Nikon camera, and the FG doesn’t meet that standard. Shoot with a Nikon FE or FM and you can understand why they command such high prices. Shoot with an FG and you can understand why it doesn’t.

But that doesn’t change my opinion that the Nikon FG is a brilliant camera. I’ve been shooting with the FG for far longer than I’ve been writing for PopPhoto, and what my forbears at this publication said about the FG four decades ago still holds true today: It’s a flexible picture-making machine that is at once sophisticated and easy to use. Nikon fanatics may not hold the FG in high esteem, but I sure do.

Nikon FG sample images

Below you’ll find a selection of sample images from the Nikon FG. Note: All shots were hand-processed and scanned.

The post Classic film camera review: Nikon FG, the SLR that irked everyone (but me) appeared first on Popular Photography.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

We’ve seen lots of great new films come on the market in the last few years, but there are also a lot of classic films we love—survivors from the pre-digital days that have changed little or not at all since film’s heyday. Here are eight classic films we think every analog photographer ought to try.

Kodak Tri-X 400

SEE IT

Say “classic film” and many experienced film photographers will instantly think of Kodak’s B&W Tri-X. Introduced in roll-film form in 1954, Tri-X’s 400-ASA speed made it the film of choice for both photojournalists and amateur photographers, and it remains popular well into the digital photography age. Tri-X is the film that documented the second half of the 20^th century in America, and its grainy, contrasty look has become synonymous with monochrome photos of that era.

Tri-X’s popularity came from its flexibility: It was (and still is) well suited to a variety of lighting conditions, and performs nicely when pushed to 800 or 1600 for low-light conditions. Tri-X has been reformulated and refined repeatedly over its 80-plus-year-life, and the latest version, called 400TX, still delivers that same distinctive, stark look. Tri-X has its quirks and it’s not a film that every analog photographer will love, but we think everyone should at least give Tri-X a try.

Available formats: 35mm, 120, sheet, disposable camera

Ilford HP5 Plus

SEE IT

Back in the film-only era, Ilford’s Hypersensitive Panchromatic film was—to American photographers, at least—unfairly characterized as a lesser-known alternative to Tri-X. Like Tri-X, it’s an extraordinarily flexible 400 ASA traditional-grain film that is exceptionally easy to work with. It actually predates Tri-X, having been first developed in the 1930s. But while Kodak continued refining Tri-X well into the 21^st century, the current version of HP—HP5 Plus—has been unchanged since 1989, making it a true film-era veteran.

HP5 Plus contrasts (heh) sharply with Tri-X in its tonality: While Tri-X delivers harder blacks and whites, HP5 renders the world in more subtle shades of gray, and yet its visible grain gives it an unmistakably classic look. Pushed two stops, it delivers excellent low-light performance with grit and contrast. HP5 Plus is a classic, to be sure, but it’s also a great modern-day tool, as close to a do-everything B&W film as you’re going to find.

Available formats: 35mm, 120, sheet, disposable camera

Ilford FP4 Plus

SEE IT

HP5’s low-speed companion is Ilford’s Fine Grain Panchromatic film, and with the demise of Kodak Plus-X it’s now the premiere traditional-grain B&W medium-speed (125 ASA) film on the market. Until tabular-grain film was developed, FP’s image quality was as good as it got: Sharp contrasts, vivid tonality, with a traditional look that celebrates grain rather than trying to hide it.

Like HP, FP has a long history: It was first developed in the 1930s and refined to its current version, FP4 Plus, in 1990. Some photographers regard it as the best B&W film ever made, not just for its look but for its latitude and flexibility: Shot at box speed and developed per the chart, it gives great results, but it also has extraordinary latitude, and you can push it, pull it, and alter development to fine-tune its characteristics. Be warned: Once you shoot FP4 Plus, you might not want to use anything else.

Available formats: 35mm, 120, sheet

Kodak ColorPlus 200

SEE IT

ColorPlus has already made our list of affordable films we love, so what’s it doing here? Well, this beloved cheapie film is also a classic: It was originally introduced in 1982 as Kodacolor VR, a color print film employing Kodak’s new “T-Grain” emulsion. In the late 1980s, Kodak brought out Gold and Ektar, both offering greatly improved color rendition. Rather than discontinue Kodacolor VR, Kodak rebranded it as budget-friendly ColorPlus and has been making it, virtually unchanged, ever since.

It’s that never-changed nature that makes ColorPlus a classic: As Kodacolor VR it helped to create the classic “film look”, and 40-plus years later it’s still delivering it—warm, slightly faded colors that make photos feel like fond memories. Beautiful grain, sharp detail rendition, and excellent latitude—not to mention a (relatively) cheap price—round out this oft-overlooked classic.

Available formats: 35mm

Kodak T-Max

SEE IT

Kodak initially developed its “T-Grain” emulsion as a way to increase the speed and image quality of color films. In 1988 the company launched tabular-grain T-Max 100 and 400, the sharpest B&W films ever made with grain so fine it was practically invisible. Kodak followed on with T-Max 3200, a hyper-speed film that returned usable results as high as 12,500 ASA—heady stuff in the pre-digital era. 

T-Max was a controversial film then as it is now: Some complained it was too flat, while others had trouble printing shadow and highlight detail, especially with T-Max 400. Many dismissed it as inferior to good ol’ Tri-X. In truth, T-Max was (and is) less forgiving than traditional-grain films, and exploiting its ability to capture highlight detail requires more precision in shooting and development. And isn’t the need for precision one of the enjoyable challenges of film? Like Tri-X, T-Max isn’t for everyone, but it’s a film we think everyone should try—if for no other reason than to experience T-Max 100’s incredible resolution. 

Available formats: 35mm, 120, sheet

Fujichrome Velvia 50

SEE IT

First introduced in 1990, Velvia is the slide film that toppled Kodakchrome 25 from its lofty perch as the standard by which color films were judged. Velvia was and is incredible stuff: Its fine grain is nearly invisible, even when projected at large sizes, and it produces bright, saturated colors that seem to explode off the screen.  Unlike Kodakchrome, Velvia doesn’t require specialized processing, and it quickly replaced Kodachrome as the choice of professional photographers.

Velvia was reformulated in 2007, and the latest version still captures the detail and the colors of the original, plus it remains among the highest-resolution films available, rivaling digital for its resolution and color saturation. Slide film has become very expensive and is tricky to shoot—your exposure must be perfect—but a roll of Velvia is a special treat, if for no other reason than to see just how well film can perform.

Available formats: 35mm, 120

Ilford XP2 Super

SEE IT

Introduced in 1980, the original Ilford XP was a novelty: A B&W film that was developed and printed using the C-41 color process. This was huge: In the 1970s, B&W film was largely the realm of students, artists, hobbyists, and pros. By making a B&W film that could be developed at the corner drug store, Ilford XP brought monochrome photography back to the masses. Forty-plus years later, XP2 Super is still doin’ its thing.

Today’s XP2 isn’t merely convenient: it’s also an excellent film with advantages that go far beyond ease of processing. Like other C-41 films, it has outstanding flexibility and latitude. While nominally rated at 400 ASA, XP2 can be shot anywhere between 50 and 800 with no alteration in development (though lower speeds may require post-production contrast adjustment). It produces excellent detail with contrast that is strong but not excessive. And because it’s a color film, it is compatible with Digital ICE software-based dust removal. XP2 Super is a film we recommend not for nostalgia, but for pure practicality.

Available formats: 35mm, 120, disposable camera

Fujifulm Neopan 100 Acros II

SEE IT

Fujifilm is best known for its color films, but their Neopan Acros was a traditional B&W film with a strong cult following. While well regarded for its sharpness and range, Acros was best known for its resistance to reciprocity failure. Most films go a bit wonky when exposed for more than a second, requiring some form of compensation in exposure, but Neopan Acros could handle significantly slower shutter speeds without deviating from the metered exposure.

Fujifilm discontinued Acros in 2018, then did an about-face in 2019, announcing a new reformulated version of this beloved film called Neopan 100 Acros II. The resistance to reciprocity failure remains: According to the data sheet, Acros II can be exposed for up to 120 seconds with no exposure correction and up to 1,000 seconds (16.5 minutes!) with only an extra half-stop. Whoa! Given the reformulation, it might not be entirely accurate to call Acros II a classic film—but it’s doing the same job as the original, and that seems classically righteous to us. 

Available formats: 35mm, 120

The post 8 classic films every analog photographer should try appeared first on Popular Photography.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Welcome to part three of our series on traveling with film and analog cameras. In previous installments, we covered general guidelines for traveling with film as well as air travel with film. In this article, we’ll talk about travel by car and train, both of which are particularly film-friendly; and traveling by water, which requires a bit more care.

Traveling with film by car

Car travel is great for film photography, as you’ve got plenty of space to bring all of the gear you want, and unlike air travel, you don’t need to worry about sending your precious film through airport scanners that could potentially damage it.

Your film and film cameras will be fine just about anywhere in your car; however, film prefers cool and dark conditions, and if you can maximize those, all the better. Avoid packing film or film cameras where they will be in direct sunlight, such as near windows or under hatchback tailgates. If possible, cover your gear with a towel or blanket to protect it from the sun.

Some cars have “hot spots” in their trunks: Hybrids and electric cars may have batteries or motors that warm the trunk floor, while mid- and rear-engine cars may have front-mounted radiators that bake the contents of their frunk (front trunk). Before traveling, take your car for a lengthy drive, then feel around your trunk to check for hot spots. 

Related: 5 reasons you should develop your own film

If in doubt, keep your film and cameras inside the cabin; if it’s comfortable for you, it’s probably comfortable for your film. If it’s cold out, avoid putting film on the floor, as this is where the heater ducts blow hot air, as well as door pockets, which may be significantly colder than the rest of the car. As with digital, it’s a good idea to keep a loaded camera in the center console so it’s easy to reach. Avoid putting larger cameras in door pockets or near the edge of the trunk where they might fall out when the doors or tailgate are opened. (Yes, we’ve made that mistake before. Several times.)

When you reach a destination it’s a good idea to bring your analog gear along with you rather than leaving it in a locked car, where it could be at risk of theft and/or temperature extremes. If you do need to store equipment/film in your vehicle, be sure to keep it out of sight—a locking trunk or glove box is your best bet.

Traveling with film by train

Like car travel, train travel is fairly benign for film. In the US, Amtrak’s security procedures are primarily focused on verifying the ID of travelers. TSA has performed some luggage inspections in the past, but aside from sharp objects (i.e. scissors to cut film leaders), there is little film equipment that should cause a problem.

Amtrak does have some restrictions on photography; they don’t want you taking pictures of other passengers or railroad personnel. Railroad staff may be overly cautious about photography on station platforms, as many train buffs have wandered into the path of an oncoming train while trying to get that perfect shot. If you’re using your camera on the platform, be hyper-aware of your surroundings and avoid platform edges. Don’t ever go near railroad tracks to get a photo! Trains are significantly wider than the tracks they run on, and many modern trains are electric or pushed by locomotives at the rear, which means you may not hear them coming.

If you are checking bags with cameras, bear in mind that some Amtrak train routes are run by buses, which means your luggage will be crammed and stacked into the underfloor bays. On the trains themselves, carry-on luggage that does not fit on overhead racks may have to be stored in common areas that are out in immediate sight and accessible to all. We recommend keeping cameras in small carry-on bags that will fit near your seat. Amtrak’s long-distance coaches have lots of legroom and their sleeping cars offer plenty of personal space, so there should be no shortage of room for your gear.

Travel with film by sea

Cameras and film have two enemies on the water: The water itself and the salt air (if you’re on the ocean). You need to protect your gear from both. 

Small, fast boats can generate a lot of spray and give your camera a good soaking. A weatherproof camera like the Pentax IQ Zoom WR should be fine, as will a fully waterproof camera like a Nikonos or a Canon Sure Shot A-1. Obviously, sea spray should be avoided at all costs for non-waterproof cameras, as the salt water can find its way into crevices and cause fatal corrosion. Consider bringing a waterproof disposable like the Kodak Water & Sport or Fujifilm Quicksnap Waterproof—and definitely bring one if you’re planning to swim.

Dropping your camera into the water is a bigger hazard than you might imagine. Your author’s grandfather, an experienced sailor, put wrist straps on every tool he had on his boat. His rule was “Tie it to your if you don’t want it to go into the drink.” Whether you’re on a small boat or a big liner, every camera should have a wrist or neck strap. Neck straps can be used the traditional way or securely wrapped around your wrist. Remember, all it takes is one good jostle to knock your camera out of your hand and into the water.

If you’re traveling on saltwater, opening the camera exposes its innards to salt air. A little bit won’t do much harm, but it’s best to minimize exposure just to be safe. Film changes are best done indoors or below decks. Same for lens changes, but if you must change lenses on an open deck, take your time and be deliberate. Remember, a dropped lens will roll—likely somewhere inaccessible, including straight to Davy Jones’ Locker. Always assume you are in imminent danger of dropping your gear into the water (because you are). 

As with all forms of travel, consider leaving your best gear home and traveling with cameras that can be repaired or replaced if something bad happens. Happy travels!

The post How to travel with film by land and sea appeared first on Popular Photography.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Low budget and stylish		Blue Woven Vintage Camera Strap		SEE IT	Retro style for carrying film cameras.
Instant fun		Polaroid Originals Now Viewfinder i-Type Instant Camera		SEE IT	A new version of the classic instant camera.
At home development		Ars-Imago LAB-Box Developing Tank 2-Module Kit		SEE IT	An easier solution for developing film at home.

Gift-giving season is upon us—so what should you get for the film photographer in your life? We’ve put together a list of 18 gifts for film photography lovers should find both fun and useful, from inexpensive stocking-stuffers to high-end gifts that will last a lifetime. Here they are, arranged from least to most expensive.

A throwback camera strap

SEE IT

Every film camera should have a shoulder strap to keep the camera close to hand and prevent drops and damage. Modern-day digital-camera straps tend to be boring and bland, but the resurgence of film photography has brought a resurgence of film-era strap designs—classic multi-color and woven camera straps that go perfectly with classic film cameras from the 1970s, ‘80s, and ‘90s. Fun and functional, a colorful camera strap makes a great film photography gift.

A handy tool for an annoying problem

SEE IT

A film leader retriever is one of those handy little gizmos that film photographers don’t realize they need until they really need it. Their function is to retrieve film that has been wound back into the cassette, and they have several uses, including mid-roll film changes with auto-rewind cameras and easy unloading for home development. Give one of these to your favorite film photographer and ensure that they have one when the need arises.

Some awesome limited-edition film

SEE IT

CineStill is known for limited runs of novelty films, and their latest is Redrum, a color film that puts an eerie emphasis on reds, oranges and yellows. It’s basically 120 film spooled with the film base facing the lens, so that light doesn’t go through the anti-halation layer. It’s a good fun film that won’t be around forever, so why not treat your favorite film photographer to a roll? (Note that Redrum is 120-size film, which means it fits medium-format cameras, not more-common 35mm cameras.)

Protection for their camera

SEE IT

Here’s a handy bit of modern kit that works well with classic film cameras: Soft neoprene cases that protect cameras against nicks, bumps and drops. Sizing these modern-day cases for film cameras can be a little tricky, but a case for a compact mirrorless digital camera like the Fujifilm XT-series should work for most manual-wind cameras, while a DSLR case will likely accommodate larger auto-focus rigs with zoom lenses. Best to include a gift receipt in case the case isn’t a perfect fit.

A new carry-all

SEE IT

Film photographers tend to haul a lot of stuff—lenses, filters, backup bodies, and film, film film. A camera bag on a shoulder strap is convenient, but it’s also an open advertisement to would-be thieves. A purpose-built camera backpack, with padded compartments to protect components, offers a more discrete way to haul gear—and it’s also a lot more comfortable to lug around.

The ultimate photographer swag

SEE IT

Dorky but very handy (and perhaps a little retro-cool?), photo vests are festooned with gear-sized pockets, and were popular among pros (and wannabes) back in the film days. Today, when most digital photographers can get by with a single camera and a versatile zoom lens, the photo vest is a bit out-of-date. But they’re still useful when shooting film in a fast-changing environment. Among other things, a photo vest gives the wearer a quasi-official look, which can be helpful for slipping into places that an amateur photographer might not otherwise be welcome.

A way to keep the light out

SEE IT

These light-proof changing bags, also known as dark bags, have elastic-banded arm openings and provide a dark workspace when a full-on darkroom isn’t available. They are primarily used for loading film onto reels for developing, but can also come in handy if a camera gets stuck or jammed—the dark bag provides a safe way to open the camera and either fix or unload it without damaging the film or the images on it. It’s a great tool for any film photographer.

The original toy camera

SEE IT

The Holga was originally designed as a Chinese “people’s camera”, and was soon taken up by art photographers as a great way to put a new twist on their pictures. Holgas have distortion-prone plastic lenses and light-leaky body that introduce a random element to film photography—and thanks to rampant manufacturing inconsistencies, no two Holgas take pictures that are exactly alike. The humble Holga has been used for award-winning photos and allegedly inspired Instagram, and it’s good fun for film photographers looking to try something different.

New film stocks

SEE IT

Speaking of funky photography, we must recommend something from Lomography, a company that makes funky film emulsions that reflect an alternate reality. The Try Them All pack includes four of Lomo’s most popular emulsions, including two black-and-white films (muted Kino Berlin and super-sharp Kino Potsdam) and two-color films (faded-color Lomochrome Metropolis and color-shifting Lomochrome Purple). Lomography films aren’t for everyone, and the Try Them All Mix is a great way to find out if your favorite film fanatic is also a lomographer at heart.

An easier way to wind

SEE IT

One way to save money on film photography is to buy 35mm film in bulk 100-foot rolls, which can be spooled (in whatever quantity the photographer pleases) onto re-usable cassettes. The easiest way to use bulk film is with a device called a bulk film loader, which makes the spooling process easy and even allows it to be done in broad daylight. Most bulk-roll film is black-and-white, so this is the best film photography gift for avid monochrome film photographers.

Some stability

SEE IT

Compared to today’s high-ISO digital cameras, film is s-l-o-o-o-w—and that means that as the light gets low, film photographers often need to brace the camera to avoid blurry photos from camera shake. JOBY’s flexible GorillaPod tripod is small and easy to carry, and just the ticket for bracing cameras on uneven surfaces. The 1K model holds 2.2 lbs (1 kg) and is perfect for most 35mm SLRs; medium-format photographers will want the heavier-duty 3K model. 

A little analog variety

SEE IT

Every type of film has its own characteristics, and one of the joys for film photographers is trying out new emulsions and discovering which films we like and which we don’t. The folks at the Film Photography Project offer several sampler boxes, each containing several varieties of film. They’re good fun and can may even lead to your favorite film photographer finding a new favorite film.

A way to DIY it

SEE IT

For many film photographers, home film developing is one of the most satisfying and enjoyable aspects of the hobby, and it’s also a big money saver—do-it-yourself processing is much cheaper than lab development. This kit from Patterson contains nearly all of the equipment one needs for home developing, including a tank, reels, thermometer, measuring beakers, and film-drying hangers. It’s a complete set of equipment that will last for decades, making it a great film photography gift. Plus it comes with a sampler set of Ilford chemicals to develop the first two rolls.

Some instant fun

SEE IT

The brand-new Polaroid Now+ is an instant camera that allows an unprecedented level of creative control. Using a smartphone app that communicates with the camera, the Now+ offers aperture-priority and full manual exposure control, time exposures, and other features that for ages were all but unheard of in the world of instant photography. The standalone Now+ camera costs $149, but for gift-giving, we recommend the Now+ Starter Set, which includes three packs of i-Type film, two-color, and one black-and-white.

Another way to DIY it

SEE IT

One of the more daunting aspects of film developing with the Patterson kit listed above is loading the exposed film onto developing reels, which must be done in complete darkness. The innovative LAB-BOX offers an alternative method of developing, thanks to an innovative mechanism that pulls film out of the canister or reel without the need for a darkroom. The LAB-BOX is a great gift for film photographers who have expressed an interest in home developing but are intimidated by the process.

A fancy way to measure light

SEE IT

A hand-held (or external) light meter is more precise and less error-prone than the light meters built into most cameras, allowing film photographers to get better precision in their exposure settings, which in turn makes for better prints and scans. It’s also useful for older and larger cameras that don’t have light meters. The Sekonic L-308-XU is a reasonably-priced hand-held meter that is packed with features, including the ability to meter for flash and strobe photography. It’s a great film photography gift for film photographers looking to improve their technical skills.

A better way to digitize

SEE IT

Today, many (if not most) film photographers have their photos scanned rather than printed, but the cost of having a development lab scan photos can really eat into one’s budget. A home scanner like the Plustek 8200i produces high-quality scans of 35mm negatives and slides, and produces results as good as—if not better than—all but the highest-cost lab scans. For avid modern-day film photographers, a scanner is a must-have and a big money-saver.

The ultimate film camera

SEE IT

For many film photographers, a Hasselblad is the dream camera. The 500 is a medium-format SLR that offers easy handling, lovely (and long-lived) mechanical construction, and fantastic optics. Hasselblad no longer makes the 500, but there are plenty of well-cared-for used examples available. ‘Blads are system cameras, so make sure you get the complete kit; we recommend a 500C or 500CM setup with body, viewfinder, 120 film back, and a lens (80mm is a good place to start). A Hasselblad is an expensive investment, but the best gift for film photography to make your favorite film photographer’s dream come true.

The post Best gifts for film photography devotees appeared first on Popular Photography.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

There was a time when traveling with film cameras was a no-brainer: Nearly all cameras used film, and you’d find all the support you needed almost anywhere you went. Today, the rise of digital photography and changes in transportation security make traveling with film gear more of a challenge.

In this three-part series, we’ll cover the specifics of traveling with film by air as well as traveling with film by land and sea. For this first part, we’ll discuss some general guidelines, including cautions about traveling with film and what you should bring on your trip.

The Perils of Traveling with Film

We love film and hate to speak ill of it, but the truth is that shooting travel photography on analog is not a sure thing. Unseen camera faults and mistakes in technique and/or handling can cause problems with your photographs, and unlike digital, you may not realize your photos didn’t come out until you get home. There’s also the potential for damage or mistakes in processing.

Does this mean you should avoid film photography for travel? Absolutely not! Film gives its own special look to travel photos and we wouldn’t miss that for the world. However, there’s nothing wrong with doing what our film-only forbears couldn’t, which is to use modern technology as a backup. If you’re facing that once-in-a-lifetime photo opportunity, there’s nothing wrong with snapping an extra shot on your phone or a digital camera, just in case.

Traveling with film: What film to bring

Back in the day, no matter where you were headed, you could almost always find film—and often good-quality processing—at your destination. Not so today, so modern film photographers will most likely be carrying both new and exposed-but-unprocessed rolls. This is particularly tricky with regards to air travel, which we’ll cover in Part 2 of this series.

If you’re traveling with film, you’ll want to take plenty with you; running out of film on a trip is never fun. What kind of film should you bring? We prefer to stick to film stocks we know and like. We’ve experimented with unfamiliar emulsions while traveling, only to get home and find that new-to-us film didn’t give us the look we were looking for. Our recommendation is to experiment at home and travel with film you know.

Related: Going back to film? Here’s what’s changed

It’s a good idea to check the weather conditions at your destination to help determine what speed film you’ll need. If it’s bright and sunny, we’ll pack mostly ISO 100 film with a couple of rolls of ISO 400 in case the clouds roll in. If we’re expecting inclement weather, we up the proportion of faster film. For indoor photography, many filmies pack some ultra-high-speed film (such as Delta 3200 or T-Max 3200) or a flash. Another option is to shoot ISO 400 or 800 film at 1600 and push-process it. (Be sure to note which rolls need pushing!)

It’s worth noting, though, higher-speed films are more susceptible to the negative effects of airport X-rays. And if you’re bringing along film faster than ISO 400, we recommend carrying it on board (this goes for all film, actually) and requesting a “hand inspection” at security. We’ll cover this more in part 2.

Alternatives to bringing your own film

If you’re traveling to a large city, you may be able to buy film locally. Do a little Googling and be sure to call or email ahead to make sure local stores have adequate stock of your film(s) of choice. If you regularly mail-order film, you may be able to get your mail-order house to ship film to your lodgings; be sure to call ahead to your hotel to make sure they can receive packages for guests. Alternatively, you can mail film ahead to your digs. This method isn’t foolproof—packages do get lost or delayed—so it’s best to bring a couple of rolls with you, just in case.

If you use a mail-order lab for processing, consider mailing your exposed film to the lab directly from your trip. That’ll save some bulk in your luggage (and an X-ray inspection if you are flying).

The case for bringing more than one camera

Digital cameras offer variable ISO settings and can switch seamlessly between color and B&W, but film cameras can’t do that, and mid-roll film changes are time-consuming (and difficult or impossible on some auto-wind cameras). That’s the reason why, back in the film days, avid photographers frequently traveled with a second camera (or third). One camera might be loaded with color film, the other with B&W, or one with slow film and one with higher-speed film. If you travel with a second camera, we recommend keeping that extra camera unloaded until you know what you need it for, to provide you with extra flexibility.

Traveling With 35mm point-and-shoot cameras

If you’re a compact point-and-shoot photographer, you’re in great shape—after all, P&S compacts were designed with travel photography in mind. A compact camera with a zoom lens will give you the most flexibility, but the 35mm lens fitted to many fixed-focal-length cameras works nicely for travel snapshots.

Most point-and-shoot cameras are made to withstand a little foul weather, but if you are concerned about getting seriously rained on (some vacation!), consider a “weather-resistant” camera like the Pentax IQ Zoom 90 WR. There are other fully-waterproof compacts like the Canon Sure Shot A-1, but if underwater film photography is on your agenda, consider a one-time disposable camera like the Kodak Water & Sport or Fujifilm’s Quicksnap Waterproof—that way you don’t have to worry about your hard-to-replace camera getting damaged.

Traveling With 35mm SLRs

SLRs give you more creative control over your photos, but they do add bulk, which can slow you down while traveling. SLRs come in all shapes and sizes, and we recommend smaller ones for smoother travel. Older manual-wind cameras (particularly the Olympus OM-series and Pentax M-series) and later-model plastic-bodied SLRs (like those from Minolta and Canon) are among the lightest and easiest to travel with. Pro-level cameras like the Nikon F4 are bulky and heavy.

But isn’t pro-level gear best for travel? Not necessarily: A once-in-a-lifetime trip might seem to warrant your best film equipment, but there’s an argument to be made for leaving your nicer cameras home. Remember, with film—and unlike digital—it’s not the camera that determines image quality, but rather the lenses and the film stock. For travel, consider taking older bodies that you don’t mind getting knocked around a bit, and which will be easier (and cheaper) to replace if they get lost or stolen.

If you’re bringing a second camera body, it should be one that is lens-compatible with your primary body so there’s no need to bring a second set of lenses. Your backup camera need not be anything fancy or expensive. A $20 Nikon N65 makes a great backup for your Nikon F5 or N90s and takes up little extra space in your camera bag.

What lenses should you bring? If you’re using an autofocus SLR, a pair of zoom lenses in the 24-70mm and 70-200mm range should meet most of your needs. For manual-focus SLRs, the standard wide/normal/tele “prime trifecta”—28mm, 50mm, and 135mm —will suit you well. Again, consider the value of your equipment and the difficulty of replacing it in the event of breakage or theft. We’d much rather risk a $25 Vivitar lens than a $250 Nikon lens. Consider fitting a UV filter to all of your lenses to protect them from damage.

Traveling With Other Types of Film Cameras

35mm rangefinder cameras give you the portability of a compact, and most offer the creative control of an SLR, so they’re great travel companions. The only thing that gives us pause is their value: Some of us find it hard to relax and enjoy our trip while worried about damaging or losing our $5,000 Leica.

Point-and-shooters might want to consider a bridge camera, which offers the creative control of an SLR in a more compact package. Their wide-range zoom lenses make them great for travel, and they offer a variety of automatic, semi-automatic, and manual modes.

Instant cameras are great for snapshots, but not so great for landscape or architecture photos—and with the high cost of film, instant travel photography can get very expensive very quickly.

What about medium- and large-format gear? A small TLR like the Yashicamat or Mamiya 645 takes up only a little more space than a bulky 35mm rig, but bigger cameras like the Mamiya RB67 and Pentax 67 can really weigh you down, as can large-format cameras, which generally require a tripod. We tend to reserve the bigger gear for trips by car. If you do take large and expensive gear via commercial travel, be sure to keep it with you and avoid checking it at all costs.

What Else Should You Bring With You?

If you have extra space in your film kit, here are a few items you should consider bringing, in order of importance:

• Extra batteries. Manual-wind cameras use button batteries that last for years; one extra set should suffice. For auto-wind cameras with a higher power appetite, it’s best to know before you go how many rolls a set of batteries will get through, and bring lots of extras.
• Extra lens-cleaning cloths. Travel is filthy business!
• Filters. It’s a good idea to have a good-quality UV filter on all your film-camera lenses to protect from damage. A circular polarizer can be very handy for reflective surfaces (cars, windows, water). If you’re shooting B&W film, consider a yellow or red filter to bring more contrast and texture to the skies. 
• Film Changing Bag. If you have the space, a dark bag is a handy thing to carry. We’ve had old cameras jam while traveling, and a dark bag provides a safe place to open the camera and retrieve your film.

One Last Tip: Don’t Forget To Vacation!

We love traveling with film gear because it presents so many opportunities to take great photos, but we try to avoid seeing our entire vacation through a camera lens. Always be on the lookout for good photo opportunities, but make sure you take time to enjoy and experience the sights with your own senses.

The post How to travel with a film camera appeared first on Popular Photography.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

A vast number of today’s film photographers are not analog newbies, but rather experienced film users who are returning to the medium after years of shooting digital. With all the advances in digital and computational photography, it’s no surprise that many photographers want to get back to a form of photography where skill matters more than the size of your CPU. If you’re thinking of dusting off your old film cameras, here are five key things that have changed.

Lead image by Bernt Sønvisen.

1. A few of your favorite films are gone—but there are new ones

Related: 5 affordable films we love—and why we love them

When you shop for film, you’ll notice that some old favorites like Kodak Plus-X and Fujichrome have been discontinued—but you’ll also see a plethora of new stocks from manufacturers like Cinestill, which modifies motion-picture film for still-camera use, and Lomography, which specializes in funky films. You’ll also find B&W film from Foma (also sold under the Arista brand), a Czech company with a hundred-year history that now sells film in the United States. 

If you’re looking to start with something familiar, you’ll find plenty of familiar emulsions from Kodak, Ilford, and Fujifilm, some of which have been reformulated for easier scanning, like Fujifilm Neopan Acros 100 II. Many of these companies are renewing their commitment to film, bringing back discontinued emulsions, and creating new ones. The bottom line is that today’s film photographers have plenty of choices.

2. Expensive cameras are now cheap… and some cheap cameras are expensive

Related: 10 alternatives to high-priced film cameras

Used-camera prices have been on the rise since bottoming out about 15 years ago, but there are still plenty of bargains to be had—and on some surprisingly good cameras. Ironically, simple and common cameras like the Pentax K1000 and Canon AE-1 often command premium prices, due largely to nostalgia—those were the cameras we used when we were starving students. But the cameras we lusted after and couldn’t afford—high-end rigs like the Nikon N8008s and Minolta Maxxum 9000—now mostly sell for bargain-basement prices.

Even pro-level cameras like the Nikon F4 and Canon EOS-1 are relatively affordable compared to professional digital cameras. Leicas and Hasselblads are still among the most expensive—good to know some things never change—but for the most part, today’s returning film photographers are finding that the cameras that were once unaffordable are now within easy (financial) reach. The one major exception to this is the premium compact camera market, which has completely blown up with inflated prices.

3. The home-developing scene is more robust than ever

Related: Everything you need to develop your own film at home

Most photographers who took a Photo 101 course learned to develop and print their own B&W film. Today, there is a wealth of resources available to do-it-yourself developers, from a plethora of chemistry (including old favorites and new choices) to handy-dandy devices that eliminate the need for a darkroom (for developing, anyway). Even color film development is more accessible, thanks to all-in-one kits that provide all the chemicals you need in a single package—you just need to provide temperature control, which is easy enough to do with an inexpensive sous vide heater— here’s how. 

Printing images still takes space and a more elaborate setup, but many photographers now choose to scan their negatives for easier viewing and sharing. There are several affordable scanners on the market, and many film photographers get great results by scanning their film with a digital camera and macro lens. Should you want to go full-on old-school and print your own but don’t think you have the space, you’re covered: Ilford makes a portable pop-up darkroom.

4. Your old film camera is probably still working

Related: How to change the light seals in an old film camera

Unlike the throw-away electronics we’ve become used to over the past couple of decades, film cameras have proven to be surprisingly durable and reliable—and not just older mechanical models, either; many electronic cameras have held up surprisingly well. Pop in a set of batteries and a roll of film, and you might be surprised to find your old camera works just as well as it did the last time you used it all those years ago.

If your camera isn’t 100%, there are many remedies available. Some cameras need a simple clean-up of their battery contacts to work, and older mechanical cameras may have some gummed-up lubricants that need to be worked loose. Light-seal foam often deteriorates, though not always to the point that it affects photos, and there are DIY replacement kits. And believe it or not, there are still plenty of repair shops that work on film cameras. A simple CLA—cleaning, lube, and adjustment—will often get your camera in working order, usually for $75 to $150.

5. The support community is better than ever.

5 reasons digital photographers should try film

It used to be that if you had a question about film photography, you had to consult a book, your local camera shop, or a college photo professor. Today, we have the Internet—and it has embraced the thriving film community.

Most film and chemical manufacturers now publish their datasheets online, but what if you want information they won’t provide—like how to best develop Ilford Pan F, pulled two stops to ASA 12—The Massive Dev Chart, a community-sourced film development resource, will tell you. There are great film photography podcasts and a thriving online community of analog-related forums, where we’ve been amazed at some of the obscure questions we’ve seen asked—and answered—by online film fans. And, of course, there’s PopPhoto, where we’ll continue to support the film photography community.

The post Going back to film? Here’s what’s changed appeared first on Popular Photography.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.