Coming back from Digital?

[Tuolumne]

Having found the perfect digital camera, the Panasonic G1, I find myself returning to film. Perhaps it was just the quest that held me enthralled. Don't get me wrong: I shoot plenty of digital with my R-D1 and G1. But when time and cost are not an issue, I prefer the simplicity of film and the beauty of the old film cameras.

/T

 

[Migracer]

More of both

More of both

I shoot more film than ever and even more digital. The film I use for my "art" the digital for work.

 

[Migracer]

Well ?

Well ?

OK and your photofinishers.

But keep a film camera handy. We're not far away from the Big Blast and when the EMP pulse takes out all the satellites and computers.... It's film baby, and that's all she wrote!!

All the people who express the film is dead mantra don't take into consideration all those parts of the world where digital is not convenient. Comes from a perception that everybody lives in the big city and everyone has a computer.

Not at all.

Films here for the duration and will likely be a viable counterpart to digital forever.

The third world is jumping directly past the wired telephones to cells, from no cameras to digital and from oxen to solid state operated farm implements.

The EMP BLAST will also destroy anything that is effected by Xrays!

Since kuzano is hording film cameras, I will corner the market on; No.2 pencils, spiral notebooks, bottles and corks.🙂

 

[Tuolumne]

Having found the perfect digital camera, the Panasonic G1, I find myself returning to film. Perhaps it was just the quest that held me enthralled. Don't get me wrong: I shoot plenty of digital with my R-D1 and G1. But when time and cost are not an issue, I prefer the simplicity of film and the beauty of the old film cameras.

/T

Having spent a long day with the G1, I'm now back to digital. That G1 rocks! Around and around she goes, and where she stops, nobody knows.

/T

 

[peripatetic]

Spent 15 years shooting a little film on SLR never made much real progress. No darkroom access, hate photo clubs, living in small houses, moving a lot....

Yes I know many great photographers have survived worse, but it was just a barrier I never really got past.

Then got a DSLR and burned through around 20000 exposures in 2 years. Learned a LOT. I really did need to take 300+ shots of squirrels in the park, and I learned a great deal from the experience, not least of which is that squirrels are not the greatest photographic subjects. 😛

Then tried the M8 but didn't like it. So took a chance on a Zeiss Ikon and love it. So now I shoot 50-50. For colour my 5D totally blows away the colour films I've tried, but I very much like BW film.

The difference in price between a Zeiss Ikon and an M8 pays for a LOT of film processing.

But even with BW, it's not really so much that I prefer the output from film, I'd be happy enough if I could get the same output from a rangefinder as I get from my 5D from something that didn't cost me £4000 + lenses. But when I have my Ikon in my hands I have a smile on my face and joy in my heart; that has never happened with an SLR digital or otherwise. If they made a digital Ikon that felt the same I would get one for sure.

So to end my midnight ramblings (I haven't had much sleep this week) I shoot film because my favourite camera happens to need it in order to make images.

 

[l.mar]

Umm . . . whatever is available and whatever works? Having a single digital P & S and a bunch of film cameras (and at least an unexposed frame or two of film around), the outcome is fairly predictable! On the other hand, there's always the 1.2 mp cellphone camera, when there's nothing else handy. All of them are just boxes to collect light and images.

 

[Brian Levy]

I picked up a little pocket digital and keep it in the pocket to replace the Minox ML that I used for years but finally went to the happy camera heaven. The digital serves its purpose but not nearly as good as the ML.

I use a Leica 35mm and a Bronica ETRS but finally broke down and picked up an Olympus E-520 dslr with the 2 kit lenses. Digital has come a long way but is still missing that something that good film and lens combos have. Yes, good color, good detail, good contrast, etc. but seems stripped of something. Leaves me thnking of listening to a classical performance on a record and a CD. The digital seems to be stripped of some of the emption.

Hence, I take the digital out for times where I want more than just a quick shot and less than a shoot, maybe 10% of all my shooting. Also, that grab shot when some animal decided to occupy the back yard as the camera is sitting closer than the fim cameras.

 

[redpony]

Digital got me excited about photography again after a ten year hiatus. It wasn't only the convenience of digital, but also the excitement of online galleries and discussion forums, and the wealth of knowledge about photography available online.

It was this basic appreciation of photography that I rediscovered online that led me back to shooting film.

 

[Lilserenity]

It was this basic appreciation of photography that I rediscovered online that led me back to shooting film.

Actually that's a superb point. I've not switched to digital and I'm not likely to, I enjoy film too much and apart from somehow winning the lottery and being able to afford an M8 (which I still don't like much over my M2) -- it's not happening any time soon. And then I'd also have to start not liking the developing and printing process... Anyway I digress.

One thing that the web and the internet in general is brought together people with similar interests over a geographically diverse space. NOw that might sound like "that's a bit obvious, duh!" But that's a really special thing easily taken for granted, I still get out with local photography groups, help out here and there and so forth, but the web is a great way to be social about what can sometimes be a very private and slightly introvert passion for some.

The web for all its ills, is a massive massive boon to any photographer and its one digital technology that I have a great deal of admiration and use for.

 

[hovis]

I started out with film in the 80's and switched to digital around 1999 due to clients wanting digital files. I'll shoot digital for work, (advertising, editorial, corporate), but I recently picked up a few Leica M's because I missed the process of analog photography and the mechanics of the older cameras. I always liked Hasselblad, Leicas and Nikons and will use them for personal work and possibly for a few commercial assignments. To me digital kinda lacks soul but I do like the fact that I know right away that I have the shot my client needs. That is the one thing I like best about digital.

 

[merciless49]

I actually wanted to do all digital, all the time, starting around 2004. That was the year I bought my first digital camera, the Canon PowerShot S50. It is a point and shoot, not too much in terms of manual control, but the results were decent for me at the time.

However, I always had a Nikon F3 which was given to me by my dad. Never had much of a chance to play with it, so I shot maybe one roll through it for the 4-5 years I owned it. But then, not having enough money (still a starving student), I didn't want to invest about $1000 in a DSLR, so I started to try and learn how to use the F3. Since it only cost me less than $100 to get lots of film and develop from Costco (back around 2006) that was my route. Never looked back since, even though the F3 is now a backup to the M3, and the M3 is used in conjunction with the Fuji GL690.

All in all, I'm still looking into venturing back into digital for the convenience and certain advantages that format offers, but I just can't seem to let go of film yet.

 

[edodo]

Digital is good for fashion and portraiture where you can snap as much as you want and select the most natural/coolest shots!

Film is good for emotion and where you want to picture what reality really is!

 

[chrishayton]

I started with Canon DSLR which ive had a few of. playing with film but not really doing muich. Then bought a M4-P and a scanner and shot all film for a year. Just bought an M8 after selling all my Canon stuff and can see me shooting 70/30 digital/film as its alot cheaper to shoot colour. (b+w only in film camera from now on) though this may even out after the novelty of a digital m calms down

 

[sjw617]

Interesting that about 75% of the people responding use digital. A higher percentage than I would have thought from some of the 'discussions' in threads here.

Steve

 

[Doug]

In regards to digital, I started in March 1996 with a Kodak DC-50, $990, which I expected to use in documenting maintenance issues at work. Didn't work out that way, as its first exposure was by my wife in Nov 99 documenting ideas in fabric patterns. Ah, well, she was happy for a while with its 0.4 Mp resolution, 768x512, as I was clearly not into digital at the time! I am now, though... 😀

 

[andydg]

Mostly film these days

Mostly film these days

Started photography over 20 years ago with film and now I'm back again. In between having used several different digital cameras and way too many lenses, found it was too easy to loose focus and just press the trigger. On shooting random images and buying more gear than I really needed.

I felt out of touch and careless to the point of not caring if the capture did not turn out. Letting the camera think for me, became too lazy.

With my current RF I am forced to take my time, frame, focus, set aperture, shutter speed, and capture. Not having instant feedback took a bit to get used to. Now I eagerly review the negatives when they come back in a day or two from development.

My wife today commented, "So you're shooting with that old thing again?" I had to smile and say, "Yes dear, absolutely I would not want it any other way."🙂

 

[hipsterdufus]

One thing that killed digital for me is the crop factor. I love OOF areas in my pictures and even though I have a digital SLR, I just can't seem to get the OOF areas as easily. That, and I got sick of monkeying around with all of the extra controls on digital SLRs (white balance, AF vs. MF, reviewing pictures after they're shot). Basically, I love the simplicity of film, so I went back to it. It is what I shoot when I want the picture to "mean something". Digital is what I shoot when I want something to be "good enough".

 

[kehng]

i love both but my M8 is a helluva lot more fun with colour on LR and PS for me. I did shoot some photos at my sister's wedding in B&W on my M7 (when my M8 somehow managed to find dust all over it's sensor) recently and was amazed all over again with how fantastic those shots turned out. If I had my own darkroom or could afford to have all my files scanned at high res at processing I would probably use film more. It looks better for some things but is less convenient.

 

[johannielscom]

Digital, I did Fuji S1 pro, Fuji S3 pro, Nikon D300, Leica M8.

Regret selling that D300 kit to finance the M8, I got crazy using those IR-cut filters and kept loving the M3 more, shutter and winding transport beat an M8 hands down.

Sold the M8.

A roll of B&W film I can develop in 20 minutes, scanning takes about 40 more.

I import my scans into Lightroom and series-finish them when I can, or use Photoshop to tweak individual files.

Easy as pie.

Selling the M8 got me a classic M6 0.85, a 1943 Zeiss Sonnar 50/1.5, a Voigtlander Bessa RF with Color-Heliar and a busload of 135 and 120 film. Oh, and a 1938 Leica IIIa with SCNOO winder and Canon 28/3.5.

A week from now, I will be shooting a 1964 Nikon F with Nikkor 50/1.4.

Who needs digital when you can have all that fun? 😎

 

[Bill58]

It will be interesting to see if the mfgrs. of digital cameras can EVER restore the utter simplicity and control, without hassle, you have w/ film.