They quit making Kodachrome a few years ago. Now it looks like there may not be any film cameras or films before long.
Ektachrome was faster and less red-biased than Kodachrome. I think it outlasted Kodachrome for a few years, and then the digital axe fell.
The Walgreen near me is selling 35 mm film for $.50 a roll
Sad in a way
“Now it looks like there may not be any film cameras or films before long.”
I’ve got a couple of cameras and a few rolls of film in my closet that I haven’t looked at in years. They’ll be on the future version of “Antiques Roadshow” I hope.
RE: Film vs Digital - You can still buy film and get it processed through many of the big mail order webstores (B&H, Adarama, etc). For that matter, I can travel 10 or so miles from my house and take a $700 course in wet plate photography. I can also re-create the look of virtually any film or process in Photoshop, no muss, no fuss. With film you had the choice of shooting fine-grained but slow ( ISO 25) or fast & grainy (ISO 400)). Cost per image over a dollar each by the time all is said and done. Back in the 50’s I'm told that an 8x10 dye transfer print could be more than a few hundred dollars with a high degree of uncertainty of success in processing.
Today you can shoot a few hundred images in an afternoon and get a passable image at ISO 800 and even ISO 1600 and get gallery quality 16x20 prints at Sam's Club for under $7.00 each. IMHO we live in a golden age of photography with wonders yet to come (computational imaging for one)!