#photography #filmphotography #believeinfilm

Needing some fresh work to show at our next analog photo club meeting, and realizing that I was going to have my granddaughter (1 yo that week) in a controlled environment during a visit to Ohio, I decided on a whim to take along a pair of Nikon F cameras (made ca. 1970) that hadn't been used in 30 years. They worked great (of course; you can't kill these things). It was fun. Data in alt text.

Annie's hat, Nelsonville, Ohio (2023).

@bosak Nice one Jon. Why did you need 'a pair'?
(Especially with their weight!)
@dpawson For news photography. Back in the day, zoom lenses weren't good enough for serious work, and everyone used primes. So news photogs in the 60s through 80s (at least) always carried two bodies, one with a shortish prime and one with a longish prime, and switched back and forth as needed. My usual combo was a 35 or 24 (depending on inside or outside) and an 85. For rangefinder cameras, 35 and 90 was a common combination.
@dpawson Same for different kinds of film (e.g., switching between tungsten and daylight as you run between inside events and outside events). This is why photogs you see in pictures from that era sometimes look as if they're dripping with cameras. (And yes, they were heavy; the Nikon F and Leica M bodies were machined from a solid block of metal, and the lenses were made entirely of chrome-plated brass and big chunks of glass.)
@bosak Can you still find the variety of films? I'm surprised.
Well, no, not the range that used to be available. But a few of the most popular ones remain, and that's plenty for me. (The analog is just for occasional fun.) Most non-studio photogs didn't use many kinds of film anyway; it takes a long time to get to know just one. In 35mm I shot nothing but Tri-X (bought in 100 ft. rolls) from 1966 to 1979 and nothing but Ilford XP1 from 1979 to 1985, when family snapshots took over and I got a job and it was all color negs and prints for 15 years.