Film v Digital: what drives your choice

B

Bobonli

Established
Local time
2:57 PM
Joined
Sep 12, 2009
Messages
139
Location
Long Island, NY
View My Gallery
Many members here own digital cameras in addition to film-based RFs. I'm curious as to what drives the decision to shoot digital versus film. Are there situations that cry out "digital" or "film"? How do you decide which medium to shoot?

I'm currently all digital, non-RF. Last fall I rented an M6 and put a few rolls through it. I loved the form factor and the results on film. The price of processing and scanning was a bit of a shocker, however, and I missed the immediacy of seeing the images right away.

Yesterday I was heading out with the family, ostensibly to "photo hunt" and when I pulled my D200 17-55 rig out to go walking, my loving wife chided me that "that thing's enormous, you stick out like a sore thumb." Almost immediately I thought "I didn't have this issue with the tiny Leica."

So I'm trying to work out which are good applications for digital vs film, large vs small camera. Thanks for responding.
 
Cost drives my choice. I use cameras I purchased up to fifty years ago. They were expensive. They are still just fine. Film is cheaper for me.

A second driver is my desire to have battery-free equipment.

Finally, I use digital for the day-job and we break so much gear every year that when I do things for myself, I like the robust build of my old hardware. Forty-something years and still working.
 
aad said:
Sounds more like big vs little, not digital vs film.
Click to expand...

There's an element of that, for sure. If I just wanted small, I could use a point and shoot but there's something organically different between a p&S that makes the decisions for you and a tool that you have to understand to get the desired results. Logically, I know it boils down to different tools for different tasks.
 
I'm having more fun with film. I need to sell my 1DMKIII, or use it...haven't in eight months. Soccer season is coming up for the kids. I'll use the Canon with long lenses.

I'll partially get back to digital when I can buy a small form factor, large sensor, fast focusing, virtually no shutter lag digital camera that produces quality files.

If I had to produce lots of commercial stuff, would be mostly digital, but for me it is a hobby.
 
Two reasons. One is form factor. I love shooting my M6 more than any camera I've ever owned (my dad's M3 was comparable, of course), and you can't buy a digital M3/M6. The M8 and M9 do appeal, but they are bigger, fatter cameras. They are not the same.

The second reason is that I like the process of working with film, and the results. The process thing has two parts. I love being out for a day or a week, and not being even tempted to chimp. The upside and the downside are that you don't know what you're getting. If I were a pro I'd find it exceedingly hard to work this way, but as an amateur it is very often preferable: I focus on what's happening around me, not on what's written to my CF card.

There's also the post-exposure part of the process: I like developing film, and although scanning is tedious, I like that, too. Pulling a roll from the final wash and seeing the images on the negative is simply magical. You get a tangible recording of the light-pattern.

The results that you get from black and white film are not equivalent to digital. They may be better or (in some ways, at least) worse in the technical sense, but the results are unquestionably different.

Finally -- and this is something that I can go on and on about -- we are in the twilight of film. It may be a long twilight, but right now is the golden age for film. It's a truly mature technology. You can get better films than ever before, and the inflation-adjusted cost is about as low as it's ever been. And fantastic film cameras are still available, new and used, for reasonable cost.

All of this will change. Good film cameras will be harder to get, and harder to repair, over time. Film will become rarer and more expensive. Meanwhile, digital -- being the perpetual cycle of obsolescence and dissatisfaction that it is -- will continue to get better and cheaper. Digital is the future. Digital is going nowhere. If you don't shoot digital for a couple or a few years, and you come back to it, it will only be be better and cheaper. If you don't shoot film for a couple or a few years, you may come back to it and find that it's effectively gone.

I'm not saying that what to shoot is an either/or question (yes, of course I have a DSLR), and I am not saying that film is for everyone. But if you care for what film can do, or you like aspects of the process, or you just dig film cameras (or a specific film camera), the time to use film is now.

Just my $0.02.
 
Last edited:
..Finally -- and this is something that I can go on and on about -- we are in the twilight of film. It may be a long twilight, but right now is the golden age for film. It's a truly mature technology...

a poet's answer, a mature answer...bravo!
 
Especially in winter, I focus on closeup subjects, like mushrooms and flowers, which my DSLR does best. Subjects like shooting kite surfers brings it out again.

Landscapes impel me to bring out the RB67, and some of what's left works with my RF gear.

It just depends on the subject.
 
If I can really focus on shooting, such as during a vacation, I prefer film. If I'm just hoping to grab a few snaps, digital is fine.
 
At this stage in the hobby, I take out a film camera to "do photography". I use a digital to "take pictures". That could easily change, since I have the attention span of a gnat, but it's my current philosophy.

I love the feel of a mechanical camera. I love the fact that the fine mechanical film cameras are now affordable.

I love the speed of a digital camera.

My film cameras (and my main digital) are rangefinders, so if I got a wild hair to shoot some macro or sports (not very often), I'd use my 30D or DLUX4.
 
I'll rethink about digital when I can easily make transparencies and print in darkroom. I shoot B/W only, and until that happens, film is my only choice. I use digital camera when I need images for other purposes (classifieds, sending snaps via email, for work, etc) but that's not the photography I enjoy.
 
Cost, the lack of good processing, the fact that I can do the whole digital process in my small apartment, the fact that the M8.2 and X1 have great image quality, etc have allowed me to leave film to a once in awhile thing.
 
i shoot digital rangefinder...

i like the everyday cost once the camera is bought

i like using a computer to process the image

i've had over 30 years in a darkroom, time enough for me...i was a pretty good printer too.

i like not having to set up...chemicals, trays etc....just plop in the sd card, hit itunes for some music, and turn on the air conditioner (it's hot today)...oh yeah, click on pse8.

i love my rd1 cameras, love, love, love!
started out with a leica m4-p, went through canon and many of the rest...LOVE THE RD1!

image quality...looks good to me. and i pay the bills around here.

and as far as the internet experts go...
i've had folks ask me what film i'm using...and that i over sharpen when in fact i did not sharpen at all...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

F
What is the best non M digital body for M lenses?
2
Replies
23
Views
946
shawn
S
S
Suggestions / advice for new camera
2 3
Replies
45
Views
2K
silvershadelynx
S
lxforrest
A DIY retro digital camera project - Blog #3 Prototype V -1
Replies
3
Views
383
lxforrest
lxforrest
T
Film versus Digital, and vice versa
2 3
Replies
42
Views
4K
Tim Murphy
T
I
Canon FD Film Scans Softer than Digital Camera with Canon FD
2
Replies
21
Views
2K
ifaynshteyn
I
Back
Top Bottom