This morning Mom dug out her old 35mm camera, a Minolta Maxxum 3xi, a budget SLR unit which was bought with a stock lens for $630 in 1994. It hasn't been used since Mom went fully digital about 10 years ago, and she figured I might be interested to try it out. And she was right.   I popped in a new battery, a new roll of Fujifilm ISO 400 film, read the 50 page manual, and had a lot of fun with it.

I shot about half the roll today. It's the first time I've really been interested in film photography. Before I got my first digital camera I did own a film camera, but it was a cheap featureless thing, and I never used it. To use this camera for the first time was a very pleasant surprise, as it has features like manual shutter speed and aperture size, which I use all the time in my photography, and it even tells you if a particular shutter speed/aperture combination will result in an underexposed or overexposed picture. I didn't know film cameras could have any of these features!   It was also a cool experience because I've known this camera all my life - it took some of the earliest pictures of me. Now 20 years later, I'm using it myself.  

I spent the remainder of the day reading all about the various Minolta Maxxum SLR cameras, which were produced from 1985 to 2001, and are very highly regarded by film photography enthusiasts today. Something interesting is that when Sony bought out Minolta in 2006, they adopted the Maxxum lens system, so any Sony Alpha-series DSLR camera (even ones currently in production) will work with an old Minolta lens, and vice versa!

So while I have no plans to ditch my Canon PowerShot SX130, I do have a feeling that I'm going to be using this camera for artistic and experimental shots here and there. I hope I don't do it too often, because I know my wallet would be hurting getting the crap developed.   Speaking of which, the film I'm currently using expired in 2011, which slightly worried me, but it turns out that expired film is not only perfectly usable, but if it has actually deteriorated, it can cause some pretty cool looking color and grain effects in the final pictures.

And yes, I'll take a few lighting pictures and upload them here when they get developed.  

Does anyone here do any film photography? What kind of camera do you use?

I once was into film photography. I was a member of the photography club in high school in the 1990's. While I did colour work, I took a lot of black and white pictures. My favorite film is the Ilford FP-4 with an ASA of 125. You can still find it in some photo stores but you need to process it yourself. I did buy some photo developping equipment to process the negatives but I am too busy at the moment to work at it. I don't have an enlarger to make prints so I take my developed negatives to a photo finisher and simply order reprints.

The hardest part of processing a roll of film is to spool it in the complete darkness. You roll it onto a special spool that allows liquid to come in contact with all the surfaces and load it into a light proof developing tank. Then you can pour the required solutions in and out of the tank without opening it all while having the regular room lighting on.

Film photography is fun, only it takes more time. I have a Pentax SLR as well as a Bronica medium format (6-45). The Bronica is completely manual and you have to calculate your aperature and shutter speed yourself.  I also have a vintage Zeiss that my grandfather brought from Europe after the war. That one is a 6x9 and takes very good pictures. The Bronica and the Zeiss take medium format roll film called 120 (because the film is 120mm wide instead of the more common 35mm). Professionnal photographers use that kind and it is also still available. The pentax takes standard 35mm film.

I can't say I'm "into it", but I'm certainly in the mood to experiment at the current moment.  The only lens we have for it is the stock 35-70mm autofocus lens that came with it. If I had more cash to blow I would get a 28-135mm, but they fetch as much as $300 on eBay! Nope, I have no plans or wish to ever try developing myself. I'm not sure there's a developing lab anywhere around here any more, but I certainly have no problem mailing the film out. I'm wondering if there's anywhere who could give me a digital copy of the photos, without getting prints. I couldn't care less if I ever got prints, and it would save a few bucks.

I completed my first roll of film and sent it in to be developed a few days ago. The local Shoppers Drug Mart still accepts film and sends it to a Fuji lab for development. I'll get the photos in a week or so. They don't give you the option of getting the digital scans without getting prints, so I think I'll do some research and contact a few film developers and see if I can mail film for development, and for how much.

If I remember right I took two lighting pictures, equivalent to this and this. I took a chance and decided to trust the camera's light metering. I'm crossing my fingers that they won't be underexposed. I'll upload them on the gallery when I get them.

I also finished a second roll of film yesterday, a roll of off-brand ISO 200. It was in a compact camera I got years ago and forgot I had. I had already shot a few photos on it, hence finishing the roll so fast. I wanted to transport the film to the Minolta, so I tried to rewind the film and remove it from the other camera by hand in the dark to try and preserve the photos I had already taken on it, but I couldn't get it out of the camera, so I ended up turning the light on to do it.   Then I facepalmed when I saw that the camera had a manual rewind button on it.   Oh well. It was only 4 or 5 photos of unimportant stuff.

Now I have a second roll of Fujicolor Superia X-Tra 400 ready to go. I'm gonna shoot a few more lighting pics on it. After that's gone, I'm gonna buy my own film online. I'll probably try some Kodacolor 100, or something close to that.

I shoot both film and digital photos. My film camera is a Canon EOS Rebel G which was Canon's entry level SLR from 1996 to 1999 and started me into SLR photography earlier this year. In late May I purchased a Canon EOS Rebel T5 (not T5i) digital SLR kit from QVC. QVC added a Canon EF 75-300mm Lens and the kit included an EF-S 18-55mm lens.

I have plenty of film to shoot. I have 12 exposures left on a roll of consumer color film (rewound mid way) and 30 exposures of chromogenic black and white film (in camera). This is in addition to another roll of consumer film, another roll of chromogenic black and white (different company) and some Kodak Ektar 100.

For those that don't know Chromogenic black and white film is a special type of black and white film that contains a black dye that allows it to be processed as color film. These films are Kodak BW400CN available in 35mm 36 exposure only and Ilford XP2 Super which is available in 24 and 36 exposure 35mm, 27 exposure single use flash camera, and 120 format.

I have four lenses of which three can be used for the film camera. I have an EF 35-80mm III lens which came with the EOS Rebel G, a EF-50mm II Lens which is my high speed prime lens F:1.8. Also the two included with my DSLR mentioned above (EF-S will not work with film/full frame cameras and EF-M will not work with any Canon SLR).

I've built up a good bit of kit this year. You can see some of my DSLR work in my gallery with the colored lamps, the 200 watt lamp, and the work light.

My pictures finally came in a couple of days ago. Cost $14.11!  So I'll be looking into other places to get it done in the future. The digital scans are very small, only 1.5 MP, but at least they were done straight from the negatives, so I won't get any better quality by scanning the prints myself.

Most of the pictures I took came out fantastic; I'm really pleased with them. I've already uploaded one of the two lighting-related ones, which you can see here. I'll attach a couple of my favorite non-lighting-related ones here.

$14.11 seems reasonable as I was paying about $10 back in 2006 when I had the last roll processed. Regarding scanning, the best way is with negatives and if the lab offers it that is the most convenient. Scanning negatives requires a scanner with the negative feature. A standard flat bed scanner won't work (I've tried).

Mom says she used to get rolls done at the same store for only $8, and at that time you got the same package, 4x6 prints and digital scans. I guess lack of demand has driven the cost up.

I am! I use film extensively and pretty much exclusively for my photography. Most of the time I'm shooting with my 1956 Rolleiflex, but I use my 1970's Topcon Super D for macro shots, etc.

I usually use Kodak Portra 160 in the Rolleiflex, and  Fujifilm 200 from Wal-Mart in the Topcon. I don't develop or scan myself (i wish I could, but my current living situation doesn't permit it  )

In fact, made all my LG  (and GOL) photos on film (no I'm not kidding).

I love using older mechanical cameras. They have a heft and precision feel that I don't think a digital camera can ever match. I'm glad to see I'm not the only one here...

All your photos? Cool, I'll have to take a second look at them! I know Prismatic has taken some lighting photos on black and white film, as well.

Yes, all of them. Although my GF owns a digital camera, I'm too stubborn to purchase one for myself. This might help explain why I don't post photos more often. I usually wait until I've accumulated several rolls of film before I send them away to be processed/scanned.

Cool! I've looked at quite a few of them, and I like what I see!

I forgot, I've since uploaded a video of the camera, and you can see all the pictures I took at the end of the video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pt0I6R0G64

A couple of weeks ago Mom said she would sell the camera to me for $20 if I wanted it. I said no since I didn't plan on using it much. Then a couple of days ago she gave it to me and told me I could have it.  I bought six rolls of Kodak Kodacolor VR Plus 100, which expired in the year 2000, for $16 on eBay.  Should be interesting to try that stuff.

I discovered shortly after moving to where I live while going to school that the local Walmart here not only processes film, but they do it for a third of the price of Shoppers Drug Mart back home. You have the option of getting only digital scans, so developing and scanning a roll is only $5. And it's done in an hour, compared to two weeks with Shoppers. The quality seems to be just as good. The scans are a little smaller, 1.4 MP compared to 1.55, but that's all right for the price. Unfortunately, they're shutting the service down in February due to lack of demand.

The first roll I did there, the second I've shot since starting all this, a roll of off-brand ISO-200, turns out to have severely rotted. All the colors have shifted blue, and the grain has become more pronounced. It looks awesome. I don't know how old that roll is; all I know is I originally put it in a point-and-shoot camera I bought some 6 or 8 years ago, then never used it. I've attached two pictures from that roll.

Since that roll confirmed that Walmart did at least a half-decent job, I sent four more rolls in at once. They did them, and charged me only $10 for all four rolls, because they were apparently able to put two rolls to a CD. I discovered, though, that they actually only scanned two rolls; each CD containing one. They developed everything, but evidently forgot to scan two of the rolls. So I spoke to them, and they're gonna re-scan all the negatives for me, free of charge. I've gone and cleaned all the negatives with a microfiber cloth, as whoever originally handled them left fingerprints all over them (I guess that's what you get for a cheap service like this). I'm gonna see if they'll let me handle the negatives when they go to scan them.

I've uploaded a new lighting photo that was shot on film. See here.

Still shoot film   Just can't beat photos shot on film
In the age of digital you can take 1000's of photos and just delete the ones you don't like which is why I still shoot film from time to time. It's refreshing to go back to the basics of photography. With only 24 or 36 (12 in 120 format!) shots per roll, you have to get everything right the first time! You have to get your composition, focus and exposure bang on, you can't just take a picture, look at the screen and then reshoot! The limited capacity makes you think if it's interesting enough to taken a picture in the first place and makes you really think about how to compose the photo to look the best. I'll still shoot film as long as they sell it tbh.

Had quite a few cameras over the years but started off with point & shoot thing when I was very young and soon moved up to a Ricoh KR SLR and settled on a Pentax ME which was the workhorse for a long time. Still have it somewhere.

Curently got a Canon EOS 1n HS which can use any Canon EF lens ever made past or present but I mostly just use a 50mm f/1.4. Love fast fifties me.
The EF 24-104mm f/4 L lens works a treat on it also when I need the extra reach.

Also got a 1976 Hasselblad 500 EL/M medium format camera with a Carl Zeiss 80mm f/2.8 Planar and a metered prism finder. What a camera and lens combo!
Probably the best camera I've ever used but it's very heavy and bulky! I've had quite a few strange looks when using it for street photography!


As for film, I'll use anything but I prefer either Kodak Ektar or  Portra. I used to develop and scan my own film but these days I just send them into a professional lab which can provide me with contact sheets.

My fridge door is chock full of film! 😄

I used to take b/w photos and develop my work, but this was a lot of years ago (12-14), recentely i tried to develop some digital photos with b/w paper (putting photographic paper on monitor) with discrete sucesses (with 10-14 year material!!!).

p.s. i used an philips special red lamp, but due broken filament, i used an 1W E14 red led lamp with very good success.