thinking of making the switch..

[jaimiepeeters]

I'm thinking of making the switch from digital to full on film.

Currently I own a Fuji X100 and a Konica Hexar (plus Leica Minilux, Mamiya 135 AF, Nikon F4, Nikon N90, Nikon F90x and some other stuff). The thing is with digital I always feel I'm getting a 'dead' result.. I edit it in PS and it looks cool but no where near film that I get from my Konica Hexar with an E6 film.

When contemplating to sell my Fuji X100, I'm wondering if I should sell the Hexar, the Minilux and the Nikon N90 and F90x and buy a Leica M6 with a 35mm lens.

Your thoughts?

 

[Roger Hicks]

You know those cartoons with a demon on your left shoulder and an angel on your right shoulder?

I'm sitting on your left shoulder whispering "Film.... Film...."

But bear in mind (a) that the Devil is the Prince of Lies and (b) that if the biggest liar or fool on Earth tells you that the sky is blue, the sky is still blue.

In other words, whose advice can you trust?

Cheers,

R.

 

[jaimiepeeters]

I rather hear sincere experiences..

maybe it's good to tell that I do make some money shooting models, once in a while a clothing company will ask me for a lookbook etc.. but its a little business on the side. My heart is focussing on making a book and an expo of images with models/people in their purest form.

 

[Nomad Z]

I rather hear sincere experiences..

Sincere experiences of what?

maybe it's good to tell that I do make some money shooting models, once in a while a clothing company will ask me for a lookbook etc.. but its a little business on the side. My heart is focussing on making a book and an expo of images with models/people in their purest form.

Define 'purest form'.

 

[Contarama]

Sincere experience - film is expensive to shoot that will be the first thing you notice right away...

 

[gb hill]

Before you sell the X100 or anything else Spend some time looking through this RFF members photo's with his X100. Just might inspire you & change your mind. Get a fixed lens camera like a Canonet & play with both world's.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php?ppuser=3187&cat=500

 

[Paul Jenkin]

I'm not sure why anyone would choose one over the other when you can have both. I've used film since 1974 (maybe a bit earlier). However, I got on board with digital when I bought a new Canon G5 and I now have a Nikon D700 - but I also have an M6, M4-P, F5, Hassy 500c/m and Wista 5x4.

Like yourself, I find more enjoyment looking at film photos than digital images - but I still like the immediacy and precision of digital for some shots. Why limit yourself?

 

[kgb144]

I took the decision this year and have moved to film. My digital has not been used since Christmas last year.

I can get through a shed load of film before I reach the cost of a new D800!

Kind regards,

ft

ft

 

[Neare]

... what do you think a M6 is going to do for you that any other camera can't?

 

[Redsun]

i sold my D700 and switched to full on film
loving it~!

 

[pvdhaar]

I'm wondering if I should sell the Hexar, the Minilux and the Nikon N90 and F90x..
Your thoughts?

My thoughts? You've lost your marbles.. No kidding, if you've decided to go film only, how on earth can you contemplate ditching a Hexar and F90x? These would rank highest on my list if I were to go completely film..

 

[Speedfreak]

The problem with film is the lack of good, fast scanners and the slow death of infrastructure.

Also, once digital has spoiled you, do you really want to get back to

... fixed, low ISO
... 36 exposures
... wasted film (because something was wrong with you camera but you find out not sooner than the slides are there)
... scratches (because a 16 year old brat processed your film without understanding a bit of photography)
... and so on

I hate to say it but film photography is a pretty sad niche of the craft today.

 

[DrTebi]

Why not do both? I agree with that statement. Each technology has its place. I love film and use it a lot, but there are plenty of situations when you are just better off with a digital camera.

Regarding the Leica M6... personally, I find the latest Zeiss Ikon more interesting, but that's just me:
http://lenses.zeiss.com/photo/en_DE/products/ikon/zeiss_ikon_camera.html

 

[shadowfox]

Also, once digital has spoiled you, do you really want to get back to

... fixed, low ISO
... 36 exposures
... wasted film (because something was wrong with you camera but you find out not sooner than the slides are there)
... scratches (because a 16 year old brat processed your film without understanding a bit of photography)
... and so on

I hate to say it but film photography is a pretty sad niche of the craft today.

- fixed "low" ISO is not a problem if your criteria of Image Quality are not limited to "no grain"
- 36 exposures are too many for me unless I'm traveling. I prefer 24.
- wasted film is nothing compared to wasted time on chimping or editing 100 nearly identical shots off the memory card
- learn to develop yourself

"sad niche" ???
Now that's a sad conclusion.

And I'm talking from the perspective of a bored digital user who found film and loving it.

 

[Steve Ash]

Leica M

Leica M

This is one reason why I utilize the Leica M system. It gives me the chance to shoot both digital and film. And I only need to drag around the same lenses for both.

Regards,
Steve

 

[awbphotog]

The problem with film is the lack of good, fast scanners and the slow death of infrastructure.

Also, once digital has spoiled you, do you really want to get back to

... fixed, low ISO
... 36 exposures
... wasted film (because something was wrong with you camera but you find out not sooner than the slides are there)
... scratches (because a 16 year old brat processed your film without understanding a bit of photography)
... and so on

I hate to say it but film photography is a pretty sad niche of the craft today.

I cannot believe you think that film photography is a 'sad niche' of the craft. So many of us still shoot film because digital photography does not feel like photography in the same way film does. I have digital Canon gear and while it's great for very specific applications, my film cameras get infinitely more use because they feel real to me. Digital blurs the lines between shooting and editing too much for me, and that almost therapeutic activity of sleeving negs, scanning/printing them, and having a tangible print will never be replaced by card readers and thumb drives.

 

[Aristophanes]

This is one reason why I utilize the Leica M system. It gives me the chance to shoot both digital and film. And I only need to drag around the same lenses for both.

I shudder to think of Leica lenses being "dragged".

Film adds cost and E6 may not be around much longer. I've been following Fuji industrial recently and they are not manufacturing any more processing equipment. All wet lab supply manufacture is going away, quietly. Fuji will continue to service what is out there, but the days of mini-lab manufacture with processing (the dry print items are still under production) of the necessary equipment appears to be over with only some residual NOS still in the supply chain. The market will be salvage and refurbish only with critical parts soon to be in short supply.

Something to think about.

 

[mdarnton]

I have a fleet of film cameras, but also a digital for commercial work. I don't know why you should feel like you need to go all the way to one side. Also, you didn't mention what lenses you have, and that would decide it for me, if I had a lot. It looks like you're already invested in Nikon, too.

When I went digital, I moved from Leica to Nikon, because of what was available from Nikon compared with Leica, and the relative prices, and then went backwards, and filled in my formerly-Leica film kit with lenses and bodies that were compatible with the Nikon digital, so now I have a huge Nikon-consistent, digital AND film kit where everything except two lenses works on everything else.

I see a lot of people here with a bunch of bodies from five or more incompatible systems, and a lens or two for each, and I don't get that at all. I'd rather have a full kit where everything could move around from camera to camera. Aside from the digital camera, I have somewhere around eight bodies and 18 lenses, and the whole setup cost me less [used] than you're contemplating spending on one 35mm lens. That would be a consideration for me, too.

One additional consideration: though I had been a Leica shooter for years and years, when I got the Nikon stuff I discovered I liked using SLRs a whole lot better, and would not switch back to RF, especially for the studio product photography work I find myself doing a lot of by necessity. That's the kind of thing, since you have both RF and SLR cameras, that I would figure out now, before making any purchases in any direction.

If you put all your money into a Leica and one lens, you're going to be very boxed in. If I were going to go Leica and film, the first thing I'd be thinking is how I could land at least a couple of other lenses as soon as possible.

 

[bulevardi]

... what do you think a M6 is going to do for you that any other camera can't?

Indeed.

Besides, I would do both : digital and film.
And with different cameras, I like to switch sometimes.

 

[peewee]

Some people don't get or care about the visual subtleties of film, they are not emotionally involved visually on that level.
A friend of mine LOVES photographs, she has many badly taken digital framed photos of her family enlarged from point and shoot cameras, she enjoys them and doesn't care about quality one bit.
I enjoy all of it but I'm deeply passionate, obsessive even, about beautiful film prints.
We're all different.