Suggestions / advice for new camera

After reading your original post and skimming through the responses, I can feel compelled to add only a few comments.

First, stick with your gut as to what you like and/or suits you. If you like the Pentax K3, then go for it.

Second, personally after growing up with film photography and transitioning to digital, I would never go back to darkroom printing. It has its "charm" I suppose, but it is time consuming and laborious. And, unless you build a darkroom, you'll tie up a bathroom for hours at a time. So, if you opt with a film camera, send the film out for processing and invest in a film scanner. It's still time consuming, but you'll avoid the chemicals - and the other annoyances.

Third, consider your girlfriend’s advice carefully if she gives it - especially if you ask for it.
 
Digitizing, not "digitalizing" ... pedantic for sure, but using the correct names for things promotes better understanding. 😉

The disadvantages of scanning transparencies are specifically the disadvantages of slide film in general:

- limited exposure latitude
- contrasty, limited dynamic range which is difficult to encompass with scanner technology
- generally lower acutance (because transparency film generally has more emulsion layers than negative film)

The only real advantage to scanning transparencies is that you have the positive transparency image as a reference check to compare against the scan in order to evaluate how good or how bad the scan is.

The only big disadvantage to scanning negatives, either B&W or color, is that you have to learn how to invert them (and remove the color mask in the case of color negs) and obtain the full gray and color scale that they contain. Otherwise, they have more detail resolution, in general, and are lower contrast allowing scanners to accommodate them more easily, as well as far more exposure latitude.

G
In general, this is contrary to my experience. My Plustek film scanner software can be set for color reversal, B&W, or slide film scanning.

I've found scanning slide film to be almost as clean as scanning B&W film. If the slide/negative is over or under exposed, then it is harder to get a clean scan. I've found color print film to be the hardest to get clean/sharp scans from; specifically, without allot of tweaking they tend to scan slightly out of focus.
Furtcamp IT8 copy.jpg
Kodachrome 64 - scanned with Plustek 8200 AI

Laura (14)c copy.jpg
Tri-X - scanned with Plustek 8200 AI
 
I would blame out of focus scans on your scanner. My negative scans are *always* sharper than slide scans, because negatives are by their nature thinner, simpler emulsions that carry more detail.

I have many many scanned photos uploaded to Flickr.com, but this one will do to illustrate sharpness:

54208896527_b192e60958_h.jpg

Tree Leaves - Santa Clara 2023
Voigtländer Vito II
Fujifilm ACROS 100

G
 
My negative scans are *always* sharper than slide scans, because negatives are by their nature thinner, simpler emulsions that carry more detail.
...it's been a long time since I shot either regularly, but I always found I got a lot more detail out of Provia than I did any C41 stock, regardless of format. For what it's worth.
 
Even before digital existed, I mostly shot B&W film. I have thousands of slides and color negs, however, as that was "the thing to do" for a good time (late 1970s-middle 1980s). Color neg ... I seem to recall using a lot of Kodacolor 100 and maybe a bit of 200. I haven't shot any color film in decades now, since about 1995.

In slides, I never used Provia ... I mostly used Kodachrome 25 and Agfachrome, an occasional Kodachrome 64 and Ektachrome 200 as well. Kodachrome 25 was always the highest acutance slide film I used, by a long shot ... so I can't say anything about Provia. But Panatomic-X (ASA 32) and even Plus-X in Acufine (ASA 320) always produced more detail than even K25. Kodacolor 100 is very sharp too ... I wonder if I have any negs to scan and compare against..? Certainly, but I'm going away for a week and will see if I remember when I return. 😉

G
 
Hi again, thanks for your new suggestions!

I finally managed to get the Pentax S1a mirror working! I added a little sewing oil on a small gear somewhere at the bottom of the camera, I'm aware this is advised against because of wrong viscosity. But at least it seems to work fine again. So I have to find out if I have to replace the foam sealings as I see some remnants in the top front corner of the mirror box, it's almost gone. I can't find any info about the mirror damper foam for the Pentax S1a - only for different models. Not sure, if I have to replace it? (the current damping foam is almost completely gone)
 
Last edited:
Hi again! I finally got a Minolta Dynax 500si from a friend, as the Pentax was still having problems with the stuck mirror. I got 2 rolls of Agfa precisa CT 100 film from my girlfriend and shot 2 of them during my holiday trip. I still have to (let them) develop, but it was a nice refreshing experience to shoot analog: I abolutely didn't miss the digital screen, it was more a positive thing than a negative to me. After the shot the mind is quiet again as there is nothing to see. That was the biggest difference to me compared to shooting with a digital screen camera.

I think I would equally enjoy the Leica 11M-d and Pixii camera's, but they are way more expensive initially. And although I still have to send the film rolls to a photo lab (or learn to do it myself if possible) - as long as I can just hand the film rolls in, I skip the digital RAW development as well, a process I don't enjoy as it's also behind a computer screen.
 
Thanks again for your reactions!

I found this video:



and I managed to open the front of the camera and then the lens was easy to unmount. So I saved at least the lens. But the mirror was still locked and the viewfinder was blocked / black. So I opened the bottom plate and when pressing the correct part, I managed to open the mirror so I can finally see through the viewfinder!

I discovered that with slower shutter speeds the mirror / mechanism locks, but with faster shutter speeds it seems to work fine (greater than 1/60s works fine). I have no knowledge about camera repair, so I have to read into it better, but I guess if I'm lucky it could be dried out lubrication. I think the sealing from the back cap has to be replaced as well as it looks bad. I found another video where the sealing is replaced:



Not sure if I can fix the camera, I will try it at least before replacing it.

(I drafted the following several days ago, but vacillated about posting it. It's quite wordy, and I've had a bit of flak in the past about the length of certain posts. That said, the information is based on learned experience and much study, it is accurate, and, if any members are genuinely interested in a better understanding of how their camera works and the real causes of it malfunctioning, well, the detail may assist. If you're disinterested in these things please feel free to skim past the following.)

Apropos your sticking mirror.

A "modern" (it's a relative term) mechanical single lens reflex that features an instant return mirror, should automatically drop the mirror at the end of the exposure, after the closing curtain has completed its run.

It's essential that the components which return your mirror to its viewing position must never begin to drop the mirror before the (second) curtain has closed off the film gate. Otherwise, portions of the image formed through the lens would not be properly recorded on the film.

The typical (and most expedient) way to ensure that the mirror of one's camera is only ever lowered after the second curtain has finished—is to use the second curtain itself, to trip the mirror release. Many manufacturers will do this by fitting an idler gear driven by, and meshed to, the take up shaft of the second curtain. Spring power from the curtain take up roller drives the gear and provides the impetus needed to throw off the mirror release lever. The idler gear is meshed to the curtain roller gear such that the peg or pin on the idler can only ever trip the mirror release, after the curtain has closed off the film gate.

A correctly tensioned and lubricated second curtain has sufficient surplus energy not utilised by driving the curtain across the gate, that some of it can be used to hit the mirror release lever and trip it. By timing the point of mirror release appropriately, an additional, and welcome, consequence of this design, is that using some of the curtain spring energy to trip the mirror release also discourages the second curtain from bouncing back and partially re-opening the gate. It's an elegantly simple solution to the challenges of letting the mirror down at the correct point in the curtain cycle, and only at that point, and, preventing curtain bounce.

Given these points, it will be appreciated that (whilst there can be various reasons why a reflex mirror may not descend, including simple explanations such as sticky damper foam residue clinging to it), in many instances, the root cause may be that, the second curtain is no longer travelling with sufficient velocity, and the residual spring energy needed to successfully throw out the mirror release is not available.

The usual suspects tend to be to blame for this behaviour. It may be old, dried out/evaporated lubricants, or: dust or other contaminants; wear of parts; curtain fabric that's stiffened; possibly, all of the above. Generally, cleaning the mechanism, lubricating it correctly, perhaps some minor correction to curtain tensions, (and, if the curtains are no longer serviceable, replacing these) should usually then see the reflex mirror begin to function properly, without any direct intervention to its pivot or its direct actuating components.

You could say that a sticking reflex mirror is often just a symptom of what ails an SLR. Less frequently will it actually be the root cause. So, get those curtains running to spec, and: bingo. The mirror works again.

This is usually how things play out. Other problems are still possible though, these are not new cameras now. If your mirror release lever is sticking or damaged, or the idler gear that drives it has been tampered with and reinstalled with the incorrect gear mesh, the mirror might not descend at all, or it might descend at an incorrect point in the cycle—even if the shutter itself is in prime condition. (The latter doesn't appear to be an issue with your particular camera, it's just general information, but, I did encounter it some years ago with an immaculate Zeiss Ikon Icarex SLR. It drove me half mad trying to adjust a mirror which resolutely lowered before the shutter had fully cycled—because, after all—nobody would remove the mirror gear, refit it wrongly timed to the curtain gear, and then, put the camera back together and leave it this way? Would they? Apparently, yes—some people would).

Setting aside these, or other, left field glitches which might also yield a stuck mirror, percentages favour a shutter that needs some TLC—it's typical. Sort the shutter and your mirror "spontaneously" works.

The behaviour of your Pentax also offers an additional clue. At the faster speeds the mirror is still cycling fully. It's only sticking at slower speeds. The escapement speeds. This is germane.

At longer exposure durations, when a gear train (escapement) is needed to delay the release of the second curtain (whether by inertia, or mechanical retardation at the longest times) more focal plane shutter mechanisms than not (the classic Exakta is an exception) will use the energy provided by the second shutter curtain take up roller spring to drive the escapement. The curtain is initially unlatched in the same way it would be released at, Eg 1/1000, however with the escapement engaged at medium or slow speeds, it is blocked by the gear train and must run this down, before it is then free to travel across the film gate and shut it.

A consequence of this is that—whilst it is often all but imperceptible to the naked eye—whenever an escapement speed is set, your second curtain is going to be running across the gate at a marginally slower velocity than at the shorter exposure settings. Some of that energy from its tensioned take up roller spring has already been used to drive the escapement. When it has cycled the escapement and is finally unblocked, it will begin moving from a point fractionally closer to the opening edge of the film gate.

At speeds of 1/30 or 1/15 the effect of the escapement on the running speed of the curtain is negligible. The gear train is only operating in inertia mode. So the entire mechanism may still work to spec. When the escapement pallet is engaged (most commonly, at speeds from 1/10 or 1/8 down to a second), however, more energy is needed to drive the gear train that is being friction braked by the pallet. The curtain must first rotate the escapement gears, and while it does this, it will begin to move a millimetre or so, initially (approximately) before it is completely free to run across the gate.

Although the reduction in driving force overall is rather slight—if a mechanism is already in need of servicing and its curtains are dragging a little, then, that additional energy used to cycle the escapement, can make the difference between the curtain spring having sufficient force available to trip the mirror release, or not. Happens more than you might expect. Minolta SRTs (which are an all round excellent quality 35mm SLR) are, if found in original as-manufactured condition, beginning to manifest this behaviour more frequently in recent years. But Pentaxes and plenty of other SLRs will do it, too.

For sake of completeness, note that it's entirely feasible a particular camera might have shutter spindles and timing mechanism in excellent condition, but the escapement itself is sticking and in need of cleaning and possibly lubrication. This may cause similar problems to curtains that have begun to drag a bit. Note, however that in this scenario the second curtain may be more likely to just not want to close at all—as distinct from closing off the gate successfully but not firing the mirror release. Nevertheless, it's conceivable a sticking escapement might discourage proper mirror release with some mechanisms. In either scenario—the solution is obvious. Service the mechanism (including the escapement). Not only will your mirror work correctly, but your shutter accuracy will improve.

It's worth noting that some configurations of camera may let you observe the behaviour of your second curtain when the escapement is in use. It's a matter of removing your lens, if it comes off, and looking into the mount at the front of your film gate. I can't provide a list of types, but if you examine a Leica III series, for example, set to 1 second, and watch the inside wind side of the gate carefully, after you press the release—if all is well, you will see the second curtain creeping its way towards the edge of the gate opening at a snail's pace, for the duration of the one second delay, until the curtain spring has finished cycling the escapement, at which point, the curtain can properly fire. (Obviously, the Leica is a rangefinder and has no reflex mirror to release, however its second curtain powers the gear train, and otherwise operates in a similar way. If an "as found" example will cycle its curtains at the shorter time settings, but the second curtain tends to be recalcitrant as the times lengthen into the escapement settings—the above can be germane, particularly if curtains are still in prime condition).
 
Last edited:
(I drafted the following several days ago, but vacillated about posting it. It's quite wordy, and I've had a bit of flak in the past about the length of certain posts. That said, the information is based on learned experience and much study, it is accurate, and, if any members are genuinely interested in a better understanding of how their camera works and the real causes of it malfunctioning, well, the detail may assist. If you're disinterested in these things please feel free to skim past the following.)

Apropos your sticking mirror.

A "modern" (it's a relative term) mechanical single lens reflex that features an instant return mirror, should automatically drop the mirror at the end of the exposure, after the closing curtain has completed its run.

It's essential that the components which return your mirror to its viewing position must never begin to drop the mirror before the (second) curtain has closed off the film gate. Otherwise, portions of the image formed through the lens would not be properly recorded on the film.

The typical (and most expedient) way to ensure that the mirror of one's camera is only ever lowered after the second curtain has finished—is to use the second curtain itself, to trip the mirror release. Many manufacturers will do this by fitting an idler gear driven by, and meshed to, the take up shaft of the second curtain. Spring power from the curtain take up roller drives the gear and provides the impetus needed to throw off the mirror release lever. The idler gear is meshed to the curtain roller gear such that the peg or pin on the idler can only ever trip the mirror release, after the curtain has closed off the film gate.

A correctly tensioned and lubricated second curtain has sufficient surplus energy not utilised by driving the curtain across the gate, that some of it can be used to hit the mirror release lever and trip it. By timing the point of mirror release appropriately, an additional, and welcome, consequence of this design, is that using some of the curtain spring energy to trip the mirror release also discourages the second curtain from bouncing back and partially re-opening the gate. It's an elegantly simple solution to the challenges of letting the mirror down at the correct point in the curtain cycle, and only at that point, and, preventing curtain bounce.

Given these points, it will be appreciated that (whilst there can be various reasons why a reflex mirror may not descend, including simple explanations such as sticky damper foam residue clinging to it), in many instances, the root cause may be that, the second curtain is no longer travelling with sufficient velocity, and the residual spring energy needed to successfully throw out the mirror release is not available.

The usual suspects tend to be to blame for this behaviour. It may be old, dried out/evaporated lubricants, or: dust or other contaminants; wear of parts; curtain fabric that's stiffened; possibly, all of the above. Generally, cleaning the mechanism, lubricating it correctly, perhaps some minor correction to curtain tensions, (and, if the curtains are no longer serviceable, replacing these) should usually then see the reflex mirror begin to function properly, without any direct intervention to its pivot or its direct actuating components.

You could say that a sticking reflex mirror is often just a symptom of what ails an SLR, Less frequently will it actually be the root cause of what ails a mechanism. So, get those curtains running to spec, and: bingo. The mirror works again.

This is usually how things play out. Other problems are still possible though, these are not new cameras now. If your mirror release lever is sticking or damaged, or the idler gear that drives it has been tampered with and reinstalled with the incorrect gear mesh, the mirror might not descend at all, or it might descend at an incorrect point in the cycle—even if the shutter itself is in prime condition. (The latter doesn't appear to be an issue with your particular camera, it's just general information, but, I did encounter it some years ago with an immaculate Zeiss Ikon Icarex SLR. It drove me half mad trying to adjust a mirror which resolutely lowered before the shutter had fully cycled—because, after all—nobody would remove the mirror gear, refit it wrongly timed to the curtain gear, and then, put the camera back together and leave it this way? Would they? Apparently, yes—some people would).

Setting aside these, or other, left field glitches which might also yield a stuck mirror, percentages favour a shutter that needs some TLC—it's typical. Sort the shutter and your mirror "spontaneously" works.

The behaviour of your Pentax also offers an additional clue. At the faster speeds the mirror is still cycling fully. It's only sticking at slower speeds. The escapement speeds. This is germane.

At longer exposure durations, when a gear train (escapement) is needed to delay the release of the second curtain (whether by inertia, or mechanical retardation at the longest times) more focal plane shutter mechanisms than not (the classic Exakta is an exception) will use the energy provided by the second shutter curtain take up roller spring to drive the escapement. The curtain is initially unlatched in the same way it would be released at, Eg 1/1000, however with the escapement engaged at medium or slow speeds, it is blocked by the gear train and must run this down, before it is then free to travel across the film gate and shut it.

A consequence of this is that—whilst it is often all but imperceptible to the naked eye—whenever an escapement speed is set, your second curtain is going to be running across the gate at a marginally slower velocity than at the shorter exposure settings. Some of that energy from its tensioned take up roller spring has already been used to drive the escapement. When it has cycled the escapement and is finally unblocked, it will begin moving from a point fractionally closer to the opening edge of the film gate.

At speeds of 1/30 or 1/15 the effect of the escapement on the running speed of the curtain is negligible. The gear train is only operating in inertia mode. So the entire mechanism may still work to spec. When the escapement pallet is engaged (most commonly, at speeds from 1/10 or 1/8 down to a second), however, more energy is needed to drive the gear train that is being friction braked by the pallet. The curtain must first rotate the escapement gears, and while it does this, it will begin to move a millimetre or so, initially (approximately) before it is completely free to run across the gate

Although the reduction in driving force overall is rather slight—if a mechanism is already in need of servicing and its curtains are dragging a little, then, that additional energy used to cycle the escapement, can make the difference between the curtain spring having sufficient force available to trip the mirror release, or not. Happens more than you might expect. Minolta SRTs (which are an all round excellent quality 35mm SLR) are, if found in original as-manufactured condition, beginning to manifest this behaviour more frequently in recent years. But Pentaxes and plenty of other SLRs will do it, too.

For sake of completeness, note that it's entirely feasible a particular camera might have shutter spindles and timing mechanism in excellent condition, but the escapement itself is sticking and in need of cleaning and possibly lubrication. This may cause similar problems to curtains that have begun to drag a bit. Note, however that in this scenario the second curtain may be more likely to just not want to close at all—as distinct from closing off the gate successfully but not firing the mirror release. Nevertheless, it's conceivable a sticking escapement might discourage proper mirror release with some mechanisms. In either scenario—the solution is obvious. Service the mechanism (including the escapement). Not only will your mirror work correctly, but your shutter accuracy will improve.

It's worth noting that some configurations of camera may let you observe the behaviour of your second curtain when the escapement is in use. It's a matter of removing your lens, if it comes off, and looking into the mount at the front of your film gate. I can't provide a list of types, but if you examine a Leica III series, for example, set to 1 second, and watch the inside wind side of the gate carefully, after you press the release—if all is well, you will see the second curtain creeping its way towards the edge of the gate opening at a snail's pace, for the duration of the one second delay, until the curtain spring has finished cycling the escapement, at which point, the curtain can properly fire. (Obviously, the Leica is a rangefinder and has no reflex mirror to release, however its second curtain powers the gear train, and otherwise operates in a similar way. If an "as found" example will cycle its curtains at the shorter time settings, but the second curtain tends to be recalcitrant as the times lengthen into the escapement settings—the above can be germane, particularly if curtains are still in prime condition).
Thanks for the detailed explanation--I learned a few things.
 
thanks for all your responses!

@Coldkennels: sounds like a good idea, I will consider it!

@JeffS7444: fair point. My girlfriend advices against analog, because of higher costs and way more work. But the amount of work can be an advantage I guess, if I enjoy it. I will do some research about developing and printing b&w film, just to get an idea. She also has doubts about digital b&w printing, as her experience is not always positive, compared to analog printing.
Digital the costs are hidden & insidious (I 'need' a bigger better computer/harddrives/ printer...oh look there's a new model camera/ lens i need for better results....)
Film they're upfront...& all depend how you structure your desires....
 
Hi again! I finally got a Minolta Dynax 500si from a friend, as the Pentax was still having problems with the stuck mirror. I got 2 rolls of Agfa precisa CT 100 film from my girlfriend and shot 2 of them during my holiday trip. I still have to (let them) develop, but it was a nice refreshing experience to shoot analog: I abolutely didn't miss the digital screen, it was more a positive thing than a negative to me. After the shot the mind is quiet again as there is nothing to see. That was the biggest difference to me compared to shooting with a digital screen camera.

I think I would equally enjoy the Leica 11M-d and Pixii camera's, but they are way more expensive initially. And although I still have to send the film rolls to a photo lab (or learn to do it myself if possible) - as long as I can just hand the film rolls in, I skip the digital RAW development as well, a process I don't enjoy as it's also behind a computer screen.
So glad you found a camera you like. When, or maybe you have already, get them developed it's useful to get digital scans also. (Maybe you already have.) The Pixie is cute, but it has limitations. You can't beat an 'M' camera, but they are ruinously expensive, (I should know!) even second hand. I also love the Fuji digital range. Have fun.
🙂
 
So glad you found a camera you like. When, or maybe you have already, get them developed it's useful to get digital scans also. (Maybe you already have.) The Pixie is cute, but it has limitations. You can't beat an 'M' camera, but they are ruinously expensive, (I should know!) even second hand. I also love the Fuji digital range. Have fun.
🙂

Small point but a sensitive one for me. It is Pixii, named for a French scientist. ;o)
 
Digital the costs are hidden & insidious (I 'need' a bigger better computer/harddrives/ printer...oh look there's a new model camera/ lens i need for better results....)
Film they're upfront...& all depend how you structure your desires....
That is true. We may complain about film prices, but the money invested in fast progressing digital technology is so much more. Think before releasing the shutter, do the developing yourself, and film photography is still not expensive. Not to speak of the joy of a positive darkroom....
 
in fast progressing digital technology
I think there is a difference between film costs (needed for analog) and costs for fast digital technology what is more like a gimmick.
Tere is no need to use digital different from film. My digital photos are all single shots. Very often only one per session.

But the cost comparsion has often led to nothing in the past. So I just looked at the structural components 😉
 
Last edited:
As the owner of 2 Pentax K 3 bodies (not the monochrome version, but the earlier one) I can vouch for their quality and ruggedness. Pentax also makes many prime lenses in addition to zooms, and there are lots of older lenses out there in K mount that will work with their DSLRs, although metering is a bit of a compromise with older (pre A series) lenses. As someone who came to digital after many years of film shooting, I found the Pentax DSLRs fairly easy to adapt to in terms of controls. The K3 cameras have separate thumb wheels for aperture and shutter speed controls, and changing ISO is also pretty straightforward. I'm not familiar with your Olympus so I don't know how they would compare. It will be a larger camera and that may help with making controls more comfortable for your hands. Pentax auto focus isn't exactly best of breed, but it sounds like that isn't crucial for you. What Pentax DSLRs do have is decent, bright pentaprism finders, something that low end Canon and Nikon DSLRs lack. I hope this is helpful.
This would be my suggestion if the OP is still considering. I am in the process of selling my Leica M 240 because the Pentax K3 is just perfect for me.
 
Tere is no need to use digital different from film. My digital photos are all single shots. Very often only one per session.
😉
That´s an exceptional attitude, at least in my photographic environment. I am also known as a very economical digital shooter, but there´s always the temptation of newly improved camera models.
 
I think there is a difference between film costs (needed for analog) and costs for fast digital technology what is more like a gimmick.
Tere is no need to use digital different from film. My digital photos are all single shots. Very often only one per session.

But the cost comparsion has often led to nothing in the past. So I just looked at the structural components 😉
It also depends how you shoot and what your life is like. In film days I shot 100-200 rolls of 135-36 film per year and developed and printed or scanned it myself. For most of my film photography life, film was cheap and so was my time (I do include my time in the cost). But with the M10M I shoot about 10,000-20,000 frames a year. I need a home computer for work and business purposes anyway. To shoot even at my film days rate would now cost more in 2 years than my M10 Mono cost. High end digital is _way_ cheaper for my purposes.
 
Last edited:
Yes, saying the cost of the computer is part of the cost is a bit of a red herring. Let me see a show of hands of folks who did not already have a computer when they got a digital camera. Editors? There are some pretty good free open source editors out there. So spare batteries are about it other than the cost of prints. Prints without buying the supporting darkroom gear.

But who is chasing images on the basis of cost?
 
It also depends how you shoot and what your life is like. In film days I shot 100-200 rolls of 135-36 film per year and developed and printed or scanned it myself. For most of my film photography life, film was cheap and so was my time (I do include my time in those costs). But with the M10M I shoot about 10,000-20,000 frames a year. I need a home computer for work and business purposes anyway. To shoot even at my film days rate would now cost more in 2 years than my M10 Mono cost. High end digital is _way_ cheaper for my purposes.
Agreed- the more you shoot, the cheaper becomes digital. My range is circa 30 rolls per year, 35 and 120, and some sheets of 4x5. Digitally circa 2000 actuations per year- a completely different calculation than your´s.
 
the more you shoot, the cheaper becomes digital
I think at the lower end of shooting amount digital is also in front.
A smartphone and some free or cheap apps can be all you need to get and edit your photos.
The cost aspect gives no orientation. Film and digital can vary from (nearly) 0 to expansive just depending on your individual situation.
So my advice is to try all yourself for everybody until you find what fits your needs or what makes your photography comfortable.
And don't forget to shoot, shoot, shoot! 😀
 
Back
Top Bottom