Coming back from Digital?

Coming back from Digital?

  • What is digital?

    Votes: 53 6.5%

  • I've tried digital, but found it's not for me

    Votes: 100 12.2%

  • I've never left film, but now shoot some (<20%) digital

    Votes: 144 17.6%

  • I've never left film, but now shoot mostly (>80%) digital

    Votes: 104 12.7%

  • I'm back from 100% digital to some (<20%) film

    Votes: 148 18.0%

  • I'm back from 100% digital to mostly (>80%) film

    Votes: 186 22.7%

  • I'm back from 100% digital to 100% film

    Votes: 58 7.1%

  • What do you mean, film?

    Votes: 27 3.3%
  • Total voters
    820
Why declining sales for films should bother us ?

Why declining sales for films should bother us ?

I mean 😛hography is in danger !!!😱 😱

In the near future:

- in less than 10 years, camera on mobile phone will be as good for current use as a canon 350 D, 80% of the population will be satisfied with this;
- film will stay as an Art for a minority , medium format 10 % and
- only the professional reporters will use the big cameras Nikon D3 etc ...less than 10%.

The point now, is to define why and how photography will be developing as an Art ...and attract young people to be involved ...🙂

I happen to go with a folding camera in touristic places and pepole are looking at me like being "very strange". Even at the airport I have more and more difficulties because the people inspecting do not know if it is dangerous or not !!!!:bang: :bang:
 
LOOP said:
I mean 😛hography is in danger !!!😱 😱

In the near future:

- in less than 10 years, camera on mobile phone will be as good for current use as a canon 350 D, 80% of the population will be satisfied with this;
- film will stay as an Art for a minority , medium format 10 % and
- only the professional reporters will use the big cameras Nikon D3 etc ...less than 10%.
Click to expand...


Things brings up an incredibly interesting idea...

That more and more individuals will be using cell phones over DSLR's, etc.

However I think this is not entirely true. Just as you have now, there is a stron gmarket for Point and Shoot cameras. I think that it is this market which will ultimately be taken over by the "cell phone camera" users.

The reason why most people buy SLR's is because of the flexibility and adaptability that the cameras give them. They can have better optics, better sensors, better image quality and handling over point and shoots. This is something that I think will remain constant no matter what happens with digital point and shoots.

What Im saying is that there has always been the point and shoot users and the more semi-amateaure users who prefer using a DSLR (even if they dont know what they are doing).

So i think what we'll see is a continuous update to teh DSLR in the area of size, usability, compactness, etc... but ultimately the real money maker is going to be the P&S cameras (whether it be in the form of camera phones or what we see now as point and shoot compacts)
 
About 8 years ago I had a film scanner and I was scanning all my transparencies and negatives and printing with ink. It didn't take long to become bored with the process. I bought new darkroom equipment, packed away the scanner and went back to chemicals. It's not as easy to do but there is no comparison in personal satisfaction.

Bought a Canon DSLR a few months ago along with a wide angle zoom. I had some time off so I decided to learn enough about digital to do all I need to do with it. It's pretty simple, really. Now I have the capacity to do digitally the same thing I can do with film.

So what?

About the same time I bought the DSLR, I came into possession of several Kiev rangefinders. So I had a lot of new toys to play with during the same time period. Guess what I've used the most? Yep--my $60 Kievs get more use than the $1600+ digital camera and lens I bought. Seems to me that anything important enough to take a picture of is important enough to do the best way I can do it.

So I'm now in possession of a nice digital camera and I'm looking for a reason to use it.
 
jbf said:
Things brings up an incredibly interesting idea...

The reason why most people buy SLR's is because of the flexibility and adaptability that the cameras give them. They can have better optics, better sensors, better image quality and handling over point and shoots. This is something that I think will remain constant no matter what happens with digital point and shoots.
Click to expand...


I think many people use DSLRs because they want to feel like a pro. Quality wise, the amount of mega pixels doesn't matter because most people never print their pictures and if they do it's probably on 5 x 7 or 4 x 6. At those sizes a point and shoot from 5 years ago is probably more than enough pixels.

It also explains why there doesn't seem to be any pressure to reduce the size of these things: pros use big honking cameras. Why else would people buy giant zooms so they could step way back to take a picture of 4 people that easily could have been shot closer with a fast fixed lens?

Sure there are lots of people who buy DSLRs for the improved image quality but I bet they are in the minority. It's more a perception of value and a status thing and like automobiles, the bigger the better. And I agree it will remain so as point and shoots go away in favor of camera phones.

The most interesting form of digital camera to me at least, were those so called pro-sumer models, the Canon G3s, the Oly 5050s etc from a few years back that had the swivel screens and lots of manual controls and decently fast lenses that have been sort of phased out (with the exception of the G9) so everyone can sell their DSLRs. The big things now seem to be outrageous zoom ranges and image stabilization (to make up for the slow lenses).

Really the live view flip out screen of these models was something really different and an interesting way that cameras could have evolved but since many people came to share their pictures by actually passing the camera around, the screens grew really large (look at the latest point and shoots) became fixed on the camera's back and the viewfinder itself because superfluous and basically vanished.

The DSLR is basically the same as the last generation of film SLRs with a sensor on the back. Most people probably never outgrow the crappy kit zoom but if they do, these companies have a ton of lenses to sell them with virtually no more investment.
 
I use DSLR for urban landscape, architecture, etc. And on the other hand I use film rangefinder camera for street photography. Each kind of camera fits extremely good in respective niches.
 
I'm 80/20 film to digital now having gone from film to digital and back to film.
I think that will swing around to 20/80 when the right digital RF comes along. I see a digital RF as my every day shooter with medium format film in use for landscapes and pinhole work.

I lust for a M8...just not $5000 worth. I imagine a M9 will induce enough lust to overcome its price.
 
I love to develop BW films and slides both 24x36 or 120, so I love analogic cameras and films. I' use digital point and shot only for take few pictures. I think that photography is, for me obviously, "drawing with light", and I hate to correct my pictures with photoshop.
 
LOOP said:
- in less than 10 years, camera on mobile phone will be as good for current use as a canon 350 D, 80% of the population will be satisfied with this
Click to expand...

They will not be that good (optics) nor would they have to be. Phone manufacturers do not have an interest in good cameras, but that may change.
 
I tried DSLR for 1/2 a year and suddenly fell in love with rangefinder. Then I sold my DSLR and return to film photography. Now I only keep a GR digital for travel and daily life photos, and shoot film most of the time when I am out on the street alone to do my photography.
 
I usually stay away from anything that even remotely resembles digital vs film but I have the urge to relate a recent experience so please, don't be too harsh on me... 😱

After a few years of waiting on the sidelines, I bought a Digital SLR last Saturday (Nov, 24th). And I returned it on Nov 27th. I went to digital for 3 days and I am happy to be back!

I always felt unqualified to comment on digital vs film but after trying out a DSLR, I know exactly what I was "missing".

We had the annual Santa parade last weekend and I took the DSLR along. The first shock was the weight and bulk of the Pentax K100D (which claims to be one of the smallest and lightest DSLRs available). Worrying about battery drain in the cold, squinting through that pitiful viewfinder, waiting for camera to come to life after it automatically turns off and the flat looking pictures that have to be massaged in the image editor to look halfway decent. It was all too much for me. Granted I got an entry level DSLR but most of these issues will apply to even the high-end models.

I am a software professional and I know I can learn the process but it just felt like such a waste of time. My Bessa and Kievs and heck even my Pentax Spotmatics are light, compact, always ready to take the shot, and produce excellent results.

When the sky finally falls on my head and C41 will no longer be processed in Canada, I will revisit the final frontier...

Please, this is only my personal and probably ignorant opinion! I am not against digital, I have a nice little point and shoot digicam, it fits in my shirt pocket, and helps me document my camera repairs and take casual snaps.

Thank you for letting me vent and I hope I haven't upset anyone.
 
To wgerard

To wgerard

I started out with digital and D50 a year ago. Nice camera and great for sport and action. I felt I wasn't learning much though.

I got an om-10 and then a om -4ti and fell in love with film photography.

Two weeks ago I got the bessa R and am delighted with it.

With regards to film slrs I was comparing the size of my om-4ti with the bessa r and I could swear is only 5% larger. So if you like you cameras portable get an olympus om camera.
 
The thing that brought me back to film was the quality of scans I get out of my CoolScan.

A darkroom was out of the question for me, but I demand the freedom to crop and adjust tonality of prints. I tend to shoot only B&W film, lab develop (for now), do the HDR scanning thing and unleash PS as the digital enlarger. One more generation of B&W inkjet printers should complete the picture. Right now I ship out the digital files for printing.
 
Last edited:
Well, I'm just making a return visit to Film after several years as a point-and-shoot digital photographer.

I hung-up my film SLR probably 20ish years ago when lack of funds and the demands of fatherhood prevented me from devoting the time to photography that I used to.

I initially went point & click on 35mm, for family snapshots, then moved on to the same thing in digital format, with firstly a Fuji Finepix 2800, then more recently a Sony P200. Both of these can turn out half decent pictures, but are cr*p in low light and two out of three shots are out of focus. I never seemed to have this problem with the older film point and shoots although the last film camera I bought (a Leica C1) similarly struggled indoors. Maybe it's the fact they are all "zooms".

Now I've made the bold decision to return to film. Enough of this Automatic Tomfoolery I will now tell the camera what to do rather than the other way round! I still have my old Olympus OM knocking around somewhere, but I'm set on buying a RF, probably the Bessa R4M which looks good at the price.

For me the digi-cams will still be an option for family and holiday snaps, but my film cameras will be for photography.

Sorry, I know that sounds a bit "pseudy", but I can't express it any other way.
 
Digital? I heard the rumour that they make cameras that don't use film, but I've been unable to confirm them. I started out with 35mm colour slide back in 1977, and I've never had any desire to switch formats or go over to the Dark Side.
I'm underwhelmed by digital for any number of reasons, and so, for the forseeable future, I'll stick with what I know and love.
 
I came back to film with the arrival of my baby girl. Nearly all of the images of my first 2 are on film (ciroflex tlr, Etrsi, ikonta) and I couldn't see going all digital with the new little one. Picked up a couple ciroflexs, not totally happy with their condition, picked up a C220 (very happy, and as luck woul dhave it got a good deal on a M6. Baby girl and wife are very happy with the camera choices (baby likes digital too though).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom