Is it expensive to get into analog photography?

Question

Analog (film) photography has been growing in popularity over the past decade. It looks interesting, but the cost of film and processing looks a bit scary. Isn't digital a lot less expensive?

Answer 1

There are a number a factors to consider in judging whether to get started in film photography. In a poll a few years ago, a number of millennial-aged photographers using film said that the cost of high-quality digital cameras put them out of reach, while top-quality (used) film cameras could be purchased for a few hundred dollars or less. The same savings, or even greater, applied to lenses. $1000-1500 saved on equipment can buy quite a bit of film and processing. And one advantage of film cameras is that you don't have to worry about the software becoming obsolete. An experienced film photographer can help guide you in making camera choices.

An argument can also be made for learning to process film yourself, either color or B&W. Many today develop their film and then scan their negatives for post-processing in an image editor and printing digitally, rather than in a darkroom. Also, keep in mind that film prices (and those of wet darkroom printing papers, if you decide to go that route as well) cover a significant range. You don't need to start with top-quality materials to begin learning.

All that said, it is true that film and printing paper are ongoing costs. At the same time, with a film camera, you're not going to fire off 200 shots in a few minutes. Those who choose film often say that they like slowing down and thinking more about making each image, and they like the involvement in decision-making and manual control. If it's something you really want to try or to develop seriously, there is probably a way to do so.