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.

Super 8’s grainy, nostalgic look is having a moment right now, popping up everywhere from music videos to blockbuster TV shows. But even outside of pop culture, the consumer-friendly Super 8 film format is winning the hearts of amateurs and the analog community. If it’s caught your eye, too, here’s everything you need to know about getting started shooting Super 8 film.

Lead image courtesy of Noah Buscher on Unsplash.

What is Super 8 film?

This format might just be the king (or queen) of home movies. Introduced in 1965 by Kodak, it was a step up from the 8mm film that came before it, both in terms of quality—thanks to its larger frame size—and usability. This led it to be positioned as the new movie-making format of the masses.

More cost-effective than 16mm or 35mm, Super 8 film is housed in inexpensive plastic cartridges, so it’s easier to handle and load, too. These cartridges also convey to the camera important bits of information, like the film speed as well as filter information for B&W film. And in 1975, a magnetic strip was added to the cartridges to capture audio.

With its launch, Super 8 put the power of creativity in the hands of regular people. Suddenly, everyone was a movie maker.

Super 8 film today

Today, the medium is still very much alive—and by many indications—both doing well and picking up steam. Aside from the enthusiasts scooping up used cameras to record their summers, some of the biggest names in entertainment are turning to film—and Super 8 specifically—for their creative projects.

Harry Styles’ Watermelon Sugar, Katy Perry’s Daisies, Chopard’s short film with Julia Roberts, Burger King, and more have used Super 8 footage to create a grainy, vintage, old-school effect. Search for the medium on YouTube, and you’ll find there’s no lack of videos showing off the medium.

What Super 8 camera should I buy?

How much should I pay for a Super 8 camera?

Options are plentiful when it comes to used Super 8 cameras. Major brands still circulating include Canon, Nikon, and the king of Super 8, Beaulieu. Other brands like Minolta and Chinon sell for under $100, while Canon and Nikon Super 8 cameras can run as low as $300, depending on the model. But Beaulieu cameras are sure to command a heftier (over $500) price tag.

You can buy Super 8 cameras pretty much anywhere secondhand electronics are sold, including Ebay, Etsy, Facebook Marketplace, and used camera shops (like Pro8mm). But also know that an astute searcher may find luck befalls them at random garage or yard sale. The main thing you want to do when buying a Super 8 camera is make sure the motor works. If it doesn’t, you won’t be able to advance your film.

What to look for when buying any Super 8 camera

Some cameras may have a crank and are completely manual. Others will require batteries. If possible, go for a film-tested camera and always ask to see the footage and any CLA (clean, lube, adjust) certification the seller may have. It’ll be more expensive but save you the agony of wasted money on the back end. Developing Super 8 film isn’t cheap any way you slice it, so better to know you’ve got a working camera beforehand.

Best Super 8 cameras under $100

If you want to get your toes wet, there are Super 8 cameras out there under $100. The Chinon 723 XL is a good option with its autofocusing capabilities, and so is the Minolta XL 400 with its Zoom Rokkor-Macro lens, which has 13 elements. Both will shoot at 18 frames per second (fps).

If you can’t find those exact models, consider also the Bauer C series (A512 in particular), the Minolta Autopak 8 D6, and the Chinon 213 PXL. The Bauer A512 specifically may run you a little over $100.

Best Super 8 cameras under $500

The sought-after brands live here: Canon and Nikon occupy the top end of this range. Particularly, the Canon 310, 514, or 814 series are popular choices and finds. At the time of its release, the Canon 514XL had the world’s fastest lens at f/1.0. While the Auto Zoom 814, which is comprised of an all-metal mechanical design, was the first Super 8 camera to have an 8x zoom range with an f/1.4 lens.

There are also a handful of other Super 8 cameras that fall on the lower side of the spectrum, too, such as the Sankyo Sound SL-60S and Elmo 1012S-XL. The Nikon R8 and R10 would be considered the high end of this range.

Best Super 8 cameras $500+

If you’re sure Super 8 is your medium, you might find yourself fancying the fanciest of them all: The Beaulieu 4008ZM II. With beautiful design and a reputation for being the best Super 8 camera ever created, there’s a lot to its name. Thanks to its built-in rangefinder, plentiful shooting options (you can adjust the frame rate from 2fps to 50fps), and interchangeable lens design, this French-made camera gives creators plenty of control over their vision. Expect to spend at least $600, with mint kits running up to $5,000.

Also on the market are the Beaulieu S2008 and the 5008S, the latter of which is considered the professional model.

Types of Super 8 film and where to buy it 

Kodak is the main purveyor of Super 8 film, and it’s available from major retailers like Adorama, Amazon, and B&H. The options are Kodak Vision 3 (color-negative 50D, 500T, and 200T); Tri-X reversal 7266; and Ektachrome 100D color reversal.

However, you can also find B&W Fomapan R100 film, and Pro8mm packages their own, which you can buy in a bundle to include processing. Film cartridges run about $40 ($27 if you’re going for Fomapan) and can record 2.5 minutes at 24fps and 3.3 minutes at 18fps. Expect to pay at least $25 to process it.

If shooting Super 8 for the first time, we recommend grabbing the Kodak Vision 3 50D and shooting in daylight. 500T and 200T are balanced for tungsten light, and as a color-reversal film, Ektachrome is quite saturated. These might be better to experiment with once you’re more familiar with the medium.

How to use a light meter for Super 8 video 

Most cameras will often come with an internal meter, but unless you’ve confirmed it works, an external light meter is always a solid investment, whether you shoot stills or video. I personally use a Sekonic L358, but we’ve also got a list of best light meters for you to choose from. If you’re not ready to take the plunge on a real light meter, there are some apps, like Lumu, that have a video mode.

To use the light meter, you’d best take a look at the instructions, as each may differ slightly in how to operate the video mode. But, generally, you’ll want it to be in the f/s mode (frames per second), as opposed to A (aperture) or T (for shutter speed). Know that the frame rate you choose will affect how long you can film—at 24fps, you won’t shoot as much footage vs. 18fps.  

Where to get Super 8 film developed

There are still a good number of film processors that will develop (and scan) Super 8 film. A good bet is to see if there’s a local spot in your area that still processes Super 8. If not, see the list below for where to develop Super 8 film.

Pro8mm

Pro8mm has an incredibly robust lineup of offerings, from selling/renting Super 8 cameras to film development packages. They’ve processed film for Harry Styles, Drake, and Katy Perry, to name a few. Their packages include film, processing, development, and color correction. If you find yourself really bitten by the analog film bug, they’ll also do 16mm, double Super 8mm, and Super 16mm films. 

Film Photography Store

The Film Photography Store has many films on offer, from Super 8 to 35mm and 16mm, which they will also develop and digitize. 

Negativeland Film

Negativeland is a motion-picture lab that will process Super 8 and 16mm films.

Color Lab

Working with clients including National Geographic Channel, NBC, HBO, and the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, Color Lab processes 35mm, 16mm, and Super 8 color negative film and Super 8 B&W film.  

BB Optics

BB Optics specializes in motion picture processing for Super 8, 16mm, Super 16mm, and 35mm, also offering color grading services and post-production supervision. 

How to develop Super 8 film at home 

This is a real commitment and should only be attempted if you have prior experience developing your own film. If you don’t, try 35mm first before taking on the (literally) gargantuan task of processing Super 8.

For those who want to take the plunge, any old developing tank won’t do. You’ll need a special drum that will accommodate the reel, which is typically 50 feet per cartridge. A Jobo Super 8/16mm drum kit (drum, tank, and foot pump) will run you about $880—and that’s before you’ve procured the chemicals.

After you’ve picked up the drum, you’ll want to consult the shop on the chemicals you’ll need to process the film. Then, you’ll need to make sure you have space. Practically, will you be able to hang 50 feet of film somewhere while it dries? This video delves into more specifics to consider.

How to convert Super 8 film to digital  

Digitizing film reels is usually included or an optional add-on to the development package at labs. However, if you’re going to shoot a decent volume of film and want to save a little money, you can scan it at home—with less hassle than the development process.

Scanners are available from Amazon, B&H, and other retailers, and Wolverine Data seems to be the brand of choice. The Wolverine 8mm and Super 8mm Film Reel Converter retails for $299.95 and will digitize film at a resolution of 720 pixels. For $100 more, the Wolverine Digital Movie Maker Pro scans at 1080 pixels. Simply load up the film and the scanner does the rest, compiling the footage onto an SD card (that you must provide). This video offers a detailed tutorial on how to set yours up.

Further resources for Super 8

Feeling daunted? Don’t be—at the end of the day, you only need three things: A working camera, film, and a place to develop. Should you be searching for additional resources, try the Pro8mm Super 8 Reference Library, which features tips, a film calculator, education, manuals, and more. Super8camera.com is also a wonderful compendium of the medium. Happy movie-making.

The post Everything you need to know to get started with Super 8 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.

Boston, Massachusetts-based CatLABS has a brand-new B&W film stock available in both 35mm and 120 formats. A fine grain, ISO 320 film with wide tonal range, CatLABS X FILM 320 is available right now for $6.99 a roll.

This is great news for analog shooters as film has been in short supply these days, thanks in part to its growing popularity but also due to lingering industry hiccups related to COVID-19. As such, we welcome any new stock to the game with open arms. Here’s what CatLABS X FILM 320 is all about.

About CatLABS X FILM 320

Related: CineStill 400Dynamic is a daylight-balanced ISO 400 color film

First and foremost, this is not a repackaged film stock but a truly new emulsion. CatLABS says its ISO 320 stock offers plenty of exposure latitude and should be especially well-suited to street photography. Grey tones have an “almost metallic” look, which gives this it a truly unique vibe. And it should handle itself well, even in low light.

Speaking of low light, according to CatLABS, you can push and pull it with no problem. They suggest keeping it within ISO 200 and ISO 1600 but we are curious to see what it looks like pushed even higher.

35mm rolls come with 36 exposure, and the stock can be processed in a wide range of B&W developers including D-76 and DDX. You can see a complete list, with development times here. Note, this is not a DX-coded film.

This ISO 320 B&W film should prove versatile for a wide range of shooting conditions.

Price & availability

Grab some CatLABS X FILM 320 from the company directly. Individual rolls of either format are priced at $6.99. Ten packs will set you back a reasonable $65.

The post This new B&W film stock produces unique metallic/silver grey tones appeared first on Popular Photography.

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

You pick out a roll of film and load it into your camera. You advance by a few frames. You line up your shot and…*CLICK.* The shutter opens for just an instant, light hits the film, and the moment is captured. All that’s left is to advance to the next frame…Or not?

Shooting double exposures is a classic technique that involves exposing the same section of film twice to overlay two scenes within a single frame. This can be repeated any number of times to create multiple exposures of any amount, but in the interest of keeping this article a bit simpler, I’ll be sticking to just double exposures.

Related: Best 35mm film

Why try double exposure photography

Everyone goes through periods of feeling uninspired, and shooting a roll of double exposures is a great way to get the creative juices flowing again. Personally, I shoot a lot of film and I often revisit familiar locations. There’s certainly no lack of pictures to be taken, but it can be hard to get excited about shooting somewhere you’ve been to countless times before. For me, shooting double exposures is a way to breathe new life into a place; it gets me excited to go out and shoot again.

Another great thing about shooting double exposures is that they’re super simple to try out, but very challenging to master. Double exposures can be done with any film camera and often lead to cool results even without any real planning.

Related: Everything you need to know to get started with Super 8 film

If you do decide to plan though, there are many factors that go into creating that “perfect” image. The type of film, how scenes are metered, and the framing of shots are all essential when trying to create more intentional double exposures. Experimenting is key, and even though there can be a lot of disappointments, it’s worth it when one comes out exactly as you’d hoped.

The science behind double exposures

The way this works is pretty straightforward but requires a basic understanding of how film functions. Film consists of a strip of celluloid coated with chemicals that react to light when exposed (i.e., they are photosensitive). This reaction permanently alters the film such that the specific pattern of light (the photo) can be seen once the film is developed. 

With that in mind, there’s no reason why the same strip of film can’t be exposed to light a second time to re-trigger this reaction, thereby layering two photos into a single frame. Now, this is an extremely simplified explanation, but hopefully it helps give a bit of background to what’s going on when you take double exposures.

A final thing to remember is that the shadows of the first photo will show in the second photo more prominently, and vice versa. This is because the shadows of a photo haven’t been exposed to as much light as the highlights, so they still have the ability to retain an image. For example, consider the following photo:

In this double exposure, the shadows of the first image (the road) show the statue most clearly. Simultaneously, the shadows of the second image (the statue and its base) show the cars and the power lines best.

To plan or not to plan?

Related: Film photography is driving increased silver demand

There are three approaches I like to take when creating double exposures. These are just meant to give you some ideas of where to start and to hopefully get your creativity flowing. The approaches are: Shooting completely random/unrelated images for each photo, shooting with a very loose overall goal (e.g. contrasting city and nature), and precisely planning out frames to achieve a specific vision.

Before showing you some examples, I’d like to mention that it can be easy to overexpose the film unless you have a good idea of what you’re doing. For that reason, I’d recommend starting out by underexposing each individual shot by one stop, then experimenting a bit once you see how that turns out. One easy way to do this is by setting your camera’s ISO to double the film’s ISO. That way you can just meter as you normally would without needing to remember to underexpose when shooting.

With that out of the way, here are a few examples:

Leave it to chance

This double exposure was taken with no plan in mind. I enjoy the unexpected composition here, with the right of the frame being extremely crowded and the left being fairly empty. It’s not something I would have thought to do intentionally.

Keeping in theme

For this double exposure, I shot through the entire roll at separate times with the goal of photographing city scenes on the first pass and nature scenes on the second pass.

Planning the shot

For this frame, I had a specific plan in mind. I wanted to create some ‘artificial street art’ by first taking a photo of a brick wall, then a photo of a sunflower. For metering here, I underexposed both scenes by about a stop, but ensured the sunflower was against a mostly dark background.

How to photograph a double exposure on film

Method 1: Shoot the same roll twice 

If you saw my guide on redscaling film, you’ll be happy to learn that creating double exposures is even easier. Depending on your camera, there are a few ways to achieve this effect.

The first way to take double exposures is to shoot through a roll fully, rewind it, then shoot through the whole thing again. The upside to this approach is that you can do it with any camera, but there are a number of downsides that make it a bit less desirable than the other methods. However, there are workarounds.

With this method, it can be a bit challenging to line up the frames perfectly on top of one another. Doing so involves taking a lot of notes and is very prone to error. You’re also locked into shooting a full roll of double exposures, whereas you can just shoot one here and there when using the other techniques.

 If you are taking this route, the simplest way to align the frames is by marking the film before your first pass, then moving the marking to the same position before the second pass.

Additionally, try to avoid rewinding the leader all the way into the canister after shooting through your roll the first time. Rewind slowly, and wait for a “click” that happens when the film fully separates from the take-up spool. Then you can safely open the camera and prepare for the next set of exposures. If you accidentally do wind it all the way in, there are ways to get the leader back out, but it can be a bit frustrating unless you have a special tool.

Method 2: Shoot the same frame twice

The second method is to manually prevent the film from advancing, while still pushing the advance lever to reset the shutter. This approach is definitely preferable to the first, since it allows you to just do a few double exposures, and ensures that the frames stay lined up. Unfortunately, it is only possible on certain film cameras. To know if your specific camera can do this, you’ll want to start by checking the manual for info related to double exposures (most can be found online here). If there’s nothing in the manual, you may need to search around or try it yourself to see if it’s possible.

Assuming that your camera can do this, all you’ll likely need to do is press down the “rewind button” located on the bottom of the camera before advancing the film. (Depending on your camera, you may need to fully hold the button down while advancing).

Method 3: Use your camera’s double exposure feature 

The final, most convenient method is to use a camera’s built-in “multiple exposure” mode. This essentially works the same way as method two, pressing/holding the button advances the frame count but keeps the actual frame in place. Not many older cameras have this functionality, but plenty of cameras from the 1980s and beyond offer it. If yours does, you’ll want to check the manual for info on how to use it.

Ready to try your hand? 

Shooting double exposures is probably one of the all-time classic film experiments and for good reason! It can be done by just about anyone with a camera, and really makes you see the world differently. Whether you randomly shoot through a roll twice or create extremely calculated images, the results can be spectacular! It’s truly a technique with endless possibilities.

Hopefully, this overview of double exposure on film has inspired you to try it out for yourself.

Be sure to use the hashtag #popphotofilm if you do, so we can see your results. If you’re interested in learning about other experimental film techniques, check out more of my work on Instagram and TikTok.

The post How to create double exposures on film appeared first on Popular Photography.

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

Some people love expensive cars. Some people love expensive cameras. Some seriously lucky few love (and can afford) both. Now, Italian hypercar maker Pagani—whose founder was formerly a Lamborghini engineer—has teamed up with camera designer Gibellini to release a super-limited edition 8×10 large-format camera priced at $75,000.

Related: Ethan Moses built a massive 20×24 camera

For the Pagani x Gibellini camera, it’s all in the details

The Pagani x Gibellini camera, dubbed the GP810HP, features details borrowed from the classic Pagani Huayra supercar, complete with spokes, bolts, aluminum, and leather-covered carbon fiber. It also comes in a custom case, made from the same leather used in Paganis. Car owners even have the option of matching their vehicle’s trim to that of their camera.

Only 75 will be manufactured, according to luxury news site Robb Report, and 30 of those units are reserved for current and future Pagani owners. 

Related: Hasselblad’s X2D 100C offers a 100-megapixel sensor with built-in stabilization

As with his fantastic automobiles, founder Horacio Pagani conceived the GP810HP as something more than just a standard 8×10 analog camera. But, let’s face it, these aren’t exactly the fastest or easiest cameras to shoot with. Which begs the question, why did the designer of something so speed-oriented create something so unwieldy to handle? According to Pagani, it’s all about the experience of using it:

“One day, a friend of mine gave me a Gibellini analog camera. As I looked at it, I thought of the hundreds of cell phone snaps we take unthinkingly without enjoying the pleasure of taking a real photograph,” Pagani says. “I thought of the magic, the strength, and the time it takes to capture an image on a camera like this, after having reflected and meditated long and hard while waiting for the right light. You’re not just taking a photo, you’re experiencing an emotion.” 

The Pagani Gibellini camera: exclusive assembly required

Like other large-format cameras, the Pagani Gibellini camera allows photographers precise control with eight movements: four on the lens plane and four on the film plane. Cool, if you know what you’re doing. But actually procuring a model to shoot with is another story.

It’s so exclusive, that the camera isn’t even listed on either brand’s website (though it has its own site). There’s only a note saying that it is available through Pagani dealers or through the official sales channels. And, as with most nice things, if you have to ask about the details, you probably can’t afford it. We’ll dream about it, though. 

The post Renowned Italian supercar maker Pagani announces a $75,000 large-format camera appeared first on Popular Photography.

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

The demand for silver increased 19 percent last year, according to the World Silver Survey 2022. Part of this increase is due to a 3 percent uptick in demand for silver from the broader photography industry. While a big driver is medical X-rays, the popularity of amateur film photography also played a small role. 

Photography in flux

Falling sales, declining demand, and general photographic doom and gloom get a lot of coverage in the photography press. The industry has, for some time, been going through a smartphone-driven decline along with a seismic shift to mirrorless cameras.

Related: 5 reasons digital photographers should try film

Despite the flux, photography, as a medium, continues to explode in popularity. And not just smartphone photography but film photography, too. So, it’s fascinating to see the latter have a meaningful, if small, impact on the international silver market.

Medical X-rays are probably the real story

According to the report, photographic demand for silver “nudged upwards” 3 percent last year “bucking the long-term trend of decline.” This isn’t entirely down to the return of traditional film photography (which relies on silver-halides to work), unfortunately, as medical X-rays are also included in the same set of figures. 

The report stresses that “rather than representing a meaningful gain” the rise is more to do with the “depth of the COVID-related slump in 2020” and the resulting backlog of delayed X-rays that the medical community had to work through.

Despite this, sales of instant films have apparently almost fully rebounded from the “pandemic-related hiccup.”

Things are a little less rosey with regular film. According to the report, the “total demand for consumer and professional film and paper fell again last year, as travel still proved extremely difficult.” A big part of this was likely the motion picture industry which “posted another year of decline”. (A single Hollywood production presumably gets through a lot more 35mm frames than any number of amateurs.)

Still, with travel resuming and the 35mm devotees in Hollywood “staunchly committed” to the medium, the report predicts there will continue to be a “strong core of demand” for film photography. As such, it only predicts a 1 percent dip in demand for 2022. 

Silver linings (sorry)

In an article for Silver News, Don Franz, the editor of Photo Imaging News, paints the above figures in the best light possible.

Franz argues that “although the cost for processing film is increasing,” it does not seem to be deterring photographers as “additional labs are starting and restarting film processing lines.” Similarly, young consumers shooting instant film, the growing demand for single-use cameras, and the rising market for premium silver-halide paper for things like photobooks are all (small) signs of film photography’s comeback. 

Is Franz overstating the role of amateur photography in the silver market? Absolutely. It’s only when we looked at the report we saw that the demand for film had declined last year. But is it fun to acknowledge that it drives enough of the international silver market that it gets discussed in industry publications and mentioned in reports? Absolutely. 

The post Film photography’s popularity is driving a noticeable uptick in silver demand 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.

Ever since Fujifilm discontinued its FP-100C film for the classic Polaroid Land Camera line six years ago, packs have been hard to come by—and increasingly expensive, too. One photographer reported paying up to $130 for a single cartridge. But, that may be about to change: French-based company Newland Camera is running a Kickstarter campaign to launch an adapter for Land Cameras that would make them compatible with new (and, at around $20, much, much cheaper) Polaroid film. 

Related: Meet the new Alfie half-frame film camera

About the Newland Camera Polaroid adapter

The adapter is compatible with a bevy of Land Cameras spanning the 100-400 lines, plus the M60/80 and Countdown 70/90. The kit comes with a resin, 3D-printed adapter that connects to the back of the camera—plus the tools needed to make the switch. Their demo video shows that one simply needs to remove the pin attaching the old film back, swap for the adapter, and screw everything back together. Newland Camera is sourcing the parts, which include a glass lens, steel tool, and screws, from around Europe.

If the Land Camera is automatic, the adapter makes it work with SX-70 film with the speed setting is at 75; for 600 film, the speed setting should be 300. Otherwise, a neutral-density filter should be used. i-Type film does not require a battery, but the photographer must wind a manual crank to eject shots. 

How to back the Newland Camera adapter 

Backing crowdfunding campaigns can be risky, so make sure to do your research before diving in. The company claims that they have been developing the adapter since 2017, and have tested it via their Pioneer Program, with participants coming from many places including the United States and Australia. 

The project is currently active on Kickstarter, and its campaign will  end on August 31. A pledge of about $300 will land the buyer an adapter plus accessories (steel tool to change the doors, glass lens for focal correction, small square viewfinder), excluding shipping. The estimated delivery date is May 2023.

The post This Kickstarter wants you to dust off your old Polaroid Land Camera appeared first on Popular Photography.

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