A while ago a reader
questioned that Leica continues to manufacture film cameras. The opinion was that in this world of digital
photography, it would be too costly to continue to make film cameras,
especially ones with the level of quality like Leica.
Of course, the writer is
wrong. Leica does indeed continue to
make film cameras, both the Leica M7, Leica MA and the Leica MP. It is easy to think that high end film
cameras are a thing of the past. Both
Nikon and Canon websites do no longer list any film cameras. Does that mean that film is a thing of the
past?
Definitely not. Film continues to have an avid
following. That is the very reason why
the Leica film cameras are still being made.
Unlike with many other makes of cameras, especially Leica enjoys a
faithful film shooter following.
That made me think of my own
film cameras of which several are sitting on my shelves, waiting to be
used. I have to admit, I haven’t shot a
roll of film for a long time and just about when I am ready to keep it that
way, I come across an article by Ricky Opaterny that makes me think about film
again.
He too hadn’t been shooting
film for several years.
... So last week when I had the chance to shoot a
couple rolls of film with a Leica M7, I wasn’t expecting much, having not shot
any film since 2004.
Leica M7
Photo by Ricky Opaterny
That caught my interest. I have never shot with the M7. My M6 was the last film Leica that I shot
film with before changing to digital. Ricky
continues...
A few years ago in the New Yorker, Anthony Lane described
the sound of a Leica shutter as a seductive kiss. I had never handled a film
Leica M series camera before last week, and I have to say that Lane’s
ostensibly cheesy observation is dead-on. After I loaded my first roll of Kodak
Portra 400VC in the camera and advanced it a couple frames, I thought there was
something wrong with the shutter. “Why isn’t it making more noise?” I asked
myself. Seduction begins with a little mystery, I suppose.
This man sat next to me to
watch the Spain vs. Germany game at the soccer store on Haight
Photo by Ricky Oparterny
That mystery eludes me. Probably because I have owned a Leica since
my dad gave me one for my 5th birthday.
After all those years, I have learned what the Leica can do for me. Shooting with that camera is no longer a
mystery but it has proven to be a thoroughly professional tool.
Handling the camera was great. It just feels
absolutely right when you’re holding it. And I had mounted on it my favorite
lens of all time, Leica’s 50mm f/2.0 Summicron.
One of the great things about the Leica M cameras is
that you can shoot them at very low shutter speeds—even with the 50mm lens, I
can reliably get shots as slow as 1/10 second. It’s like having a faster lens
or better high ISO performance or just, generally, an extra stop! This comes in
quite useful indoors where light is usually low. With the exception of the
first shot, I don’t think any of these were taken at speeds above 1/50 of a
second. Normally, on an SLR with a 50mm lens mounted, that would be the minimum
shutter speed that someone could expect to use—here, it was my maximum shutter
speed.
I have to agree. I have never shied away from using a Leica at
relatively slow speeds. I suppose this
is one of the reasons why I think that the current quest for ever higher ISO
capabilities of digital cameras is a wasted effort to some degree. But to each his own.
Ricky makes special mention
of the Leica viewfinder. He considers it
easily the brightest viewfinder of any camera.
He is right. Another advantage of
the Leica bright line viewfinder is that it always shows more than the area
covered on film. This allows seeing and
observing the scene past the edges of the image area. It allows the photographer to become more
aware of his surroundings, something that no SLR camera ever offered.
I even liked the images that
showed more of the film grain
Photo by Ricky Opaterny
Because I was shooting film—expensive film that would
need to be developed at additional cost—I was patient waiting for shots I was
anticipating. I tried to avoid wasting a single frame. I spent more time
thinking about what I was doing rather than blindly snapping away.
That comment definitely made
me think. I used to take the same, more
deliberate approach, and I must admit that since shooting digital, that has all
but disappeared. The gratification of
instant frame review does allow for more of a machine gun approach without any
cost penalty. The only time I still work
substantially more deliberate is when doing studio shoots, especially with
product photography. There it eliminates
a lot of trial and error shots to get things right.
Shooting, with a Leica, as many others have noted,
makes you slow down. It makes you more careful about composition and exposure.
And shooting with film compounds those effects. In general, I’ve spent the past
few months trying to regain two abilities I feel I’ve lost in the Internet
age—that to be patient—to delay gratification—and that to concentrate on
something for an extended period of time.
Digital photography conditions us to expect instant
gratification, providing us with instant previews of our images. In some cases,
this is useful and helps us get the shot we wanted. However, more often it’s
simply a distraction from doing the thing we should be focused on—taking
photographs. Is there any other activity in which people so immediately
evaluate their performance with such scrutiny as photographers checking the LCD
image previews on their cameras?
The bruschetta was very good
Photo by Ricky Opaterny
It isn’t just the process that blew me away; the
results were awesome. I waited with anticipation for the local lab to develop
and print my film. What would it look like? What surprises lay in store? I can
say that I felt my patience was rewarded. Even though their content is boring,
the prints I got back from the lab had a contrast and vividness that makes them
look not only unlike digital images, but cinematic in a way that I absolutely
love—rich, textured, almost tactile. Unfortunately, getting to that result
means paying a lab for developing and printing, which is why I don’t think I
can shoot exclusively on film.
I wholeheartedly agree and it
makes me think all the more to get some film, load one of my film cameras and
shoot. Of course that brings up the
question of what film to use. My main
interest is black and white. Therefore I
don’t think I will bother with color film.
My favorite black and white film used to be the Agfapan APX 25. Unfortunately that is no longer
available. Then I switched to Efke KB 25
which later available as the ADOX CHS 25.
Unfortunately, to my knowledge nobody offers an ISO 25 film at the
moment. Of course there are times when
ISO 25 just isn’t enough. For those
times I occasionally used Agfapan APX 100 or later the Efke KB 100 or the ADOX
CHS 100. But my favorite higher speed
film is without question the Ilford XP-2 Super.
It has the advantage of an ISO range from 100 to 800 without the need of
any exposure or development compensation.
However, at the lower speeds it does display noticeably finer
grain. This allows the user to switch
between higher and lower ISO indices on the same roll of film and thus assure
the finest possible grain under varying lighting conditions. XP-2 super is a chromogenic film meaning that
it must be developed in C-41 color chemicals, like all standard color films.
Watermusic
Photo by Heinz Richter
Leica M6, 50mm f/2 Summicron
Agfapan APX 100
Kallie
Photo by Heinz Richter
Laica M6, 50mm f/2 Summicron
Agfapan APX 25
cropped to 20 percent section
of whole negative
Lou Bellami
Penumbra Theater, St. Paul,
MN
Leica M6, 135mm f/2.8 Elmarit
Ilford XP-2 Super at ISO 800
Stage lighting
Don Stolz
Old Log Theater, Excelsior,
MN
Leica M6, 50mm f/2 Summicron
Ilford XP-2 Super at ISO 800
I guess I have convinced
myself to shoot some film. Now I just
have to decide which film and which camera to use. Maybe I will be back here at a later date for
a report.
For the complete article by
Ricky Opaterny go to:
Rediscovering film with the Leica M7
For more information on the
ADOX films go to:
BLACK AND WHITE FILM
PHOTOGRAPHY
For more information on black
and white films and sample images go to:
YOUSUF KARSH REVISITED
Film verses Digital
LEICA M2 No 1048416 - HAPPY
50TH BIRTHDAY
THE 90 ELMAR THAT NOBODY
WANTED
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For high quality camera bags and accessories worthy of Leica equipment, go to
Are you saying that the Ilford XP2 Super is as good as the 25 speed BW films were?
ReplyDeleteNo, that would be small miracle. After all, the XP2 Super has a basic rating of ISO 400. But I wouldn't hesitate to put it against any ISO 100 film currently available if it is rated at the same ISO 100 speed.
DeleteI am amazed at the sharpness and tonality of the photo in the Karsh article is taken with a 35mm camera. Are you sure it wasn't taken with medium format?
ReplyDeleteI have received a lot of similar comments, especially from people who have seen an original enlargement. I can assure you that it was taken with 35mm. It is a prime example of what modern 35mm film is capable of when paired with a high end 35mm camera and lens, like the Leica M6 and the 135mm Elmarit.
DeleteI would like to shoot BW film, but I don't like to do my own developing. Are there any labs that still process BW?
ReplyDeleteThat depends very much on where you live. There are a few professional labs throughout the country that process BW. You might want to google this question.
DeleteI live in Denver.
Deletemikescamera.com
Deletewww.roachphotos.com
englewoodcamera.com
www.reedphoto.com
Reader Tony Carson commented on this article on Facebook:
ReplyDeleteFor me, the problem does not lie with camera availability, but with film and processing labs: if the majority of pictures are now taken with digital devices, then the number of available labs dwindle; if they cannot get enough work to continue to be economically viable, then what is the point of buying an enormously expensive - albeit the best In the world , camera which relies for its use, upon ancillary articles to run it? Film is now a niche market - and, yes, if I could continue to afford it, mostly I too, would prefer it - but there are too few companies who continue to make film, who could fail at any time, to sufficiently satisfy their shareholders and be forced to change to a different product. What then? The ownership of an exquisite piece of machinery that can no longer perform its function? Hardly....
I don't disagree, besides, for me there are other advantages in shooting digital as well. However, there is a loyal number of individuals that still do shoot film. The numbers that do are apparently high enough for Leica to recently introduce a third model in their lien-up of film cameras. As long as they see a viable market, they will continue to make film cameras. As for processing labs, there won't be a problem in the foreseeable future, in larger cities or markets, that is. As for the availability of film in the future, that obviously depends on demand. Recently, a while line of BW films was introduced under the ROLLEI label.
Delete