>>3266555[2/?] pic rel from my Rebel XT and too many hours in RawTherapee
>Brainlets think its cheaper...Film cameras and lenses are generally cheap. Especially when moving into MF and large format. Films, like the Color Plus 200, can be bought in bulk for cheap $25-30 for 10-12. Dev kits are maybe $25-30ish and can usually squeeze out a dozen or two rolls. Decent scanners can be had for under $300, probably half, or even a third, of that. I don't know why anyone would frequent a dev/scanning service. It can all be done at home for way less. Developing is brainlet-tier easy and scanning only takes time. It only get expensive when you outsource dev/scanning, use meme films, and buy a high-dpi scanner. Most people aren't even printing anymore, so these consumer grade scanners are usually good enough. (I'm still saving for a hasselblad x5 though...)
Digital cameras are affordable, usually to lure you into buying expensive lenses. Most of the digital camera arena is geared toward collecting. These companies are spending lots of cash to convince consumers that their current camera and/or lens is inferior, and that they need to "upgrade". Then "reviewers" (bloggers) come along, and shill, giving a "people's perspective" on how great the new product is. Flamewars ensue online, and the consumer ends up with more shit they didn't need. The whole digital thing is a sham. Sure people shill for film, but most of the film gear has already been vetted, so you can easily separate the bs from the truth. A lot of the film gear is decades old, and has years of first-hand reviews, so there's no need to beta test Sony's newest camera, or wait for canon to release a camera with a competitive DR. Hit up Wikipedia, find the top of the line film camera from your favorite manufacturer, find the lenses you want, and start shooting, knowing you are using the best of the best. (it's also hard to blame the gear for your shitty shots when you do this)
