Quoted By:
I've been about this myself lately. I want to get a really nice film camera before they become completely unattainable, but I can't figure out whether to go 6x6 with Hasselblad or 135 with Leica.
The Leica is obviously going to be a lot cheaper in the long run, and it's only going to be more noticeable as the price of film goes up. But it's also a camera made for run-and-gun situations, a recipe for using up tons of film with very little to show for. For that I might as well just shoot digital.
The Hasselblad on the other hand is much farther removed from the typical digital workflow, as far as you can get before getting into large format. So when I do spring for a roll of film, I'm getting much more of the film experience. Also, I actually prefer square to 3:2, so with the Leica I'd be cucking myself out of 1/3 of the film a lot of the time, which closes the cost gap between 135 and 120 somewhat.
The rational part of me keeps saying just forget about film. It's a pointless time and money drain and you can just use the grain slider in post and it will look close enough. But maybe it's not about being cost effective. Maybe it's more about the journey than the destination. I just can't compete with full time photographers, so LARPing with obsolete processes might actually be the best way to derive the most pleasure out of photography. I spend the whole work week on the computer, it actually feels nice not having to use it in my free time as well, so much that I'm thinking of setting up a darkroom and doing my own prints.
