Is it worth using film?

Check out the Nikon D40. It's a tiny DSLR and shouldn't be too intrusive if you slap on a small prime lens.

I would recommend this over a cheap DRF such as the RD1.

inhand02rr7.jpg
 
Last edited:
I still shoot film. So far, digital has only replaced color print film. I still shoot some B&W print and e6 slides. However, I'm sure I'll shoot more digital as toime goes on, but as long as I can get film, I'll shoot some from time to time.
 
I have to agree with many posts here. Digital DSLRs at 10+ MP deliver marveles color and plenty of detail for most of us. The Pro's will use 13-16mp camera's.

I use a Film RF for all my casual fun stuff, and a DSLR for any Studio Stuff. (Which I have not been doing recently). But I do want to get a newer 8 or 10 mp DSLR (XT or XTi)

I like the smaller AND lighter weight of the RF with my lens's. Hell, I think my Canon D60 with 28-105 EF lens weights more than my RF plus 3 lens combined !

That is why I shoot film. Lighter equipment and of course the mental state that Film RF's puts you in. Like an old timer photographer making a picture.
 
at 35mm format:

film is only worth it if you like the look and the process. You aren't going to get more resolution than from a sharp 10MP RAW file. Not unless you're on a tripod shooting something fine and scanning on a drum scanner. Then you're down to the grain anyway and have little gain to show for it.

at 645 medium format:

again, the look is alot of the deal, since the 22MP backs will produce similar results up to 11x14 on a primo printer. BUT, a very well scanned 645 negative or slide will go way beyond any current handheld digital camera. It should reach beyond 40MP. And the tonality you get...well, you're not going to get that from a CCD.

at 6x7 : digital has nothing on you.

at 4x5: talk to NASA.
 
ffttklackdedeng said:
Doesn't the D40 require the lens to have an AF motor? How many small Nikon primes have that?
Click to expand...

The above DPREVIEW photo of the D40 with the 50/1.4 attached has its mode dial set to M. In this case there would be no AF, as there is no drive screw in the lens mount for this lens.
 
I am the original poster. In terms of film vs. digital quality, it seems that only the very high-ended digitals can match the quality of film. To me the issue of dynamic range is much more important than the mega-pixels. Many vendors now are coming out with 10MPs DSLRs, but only the most expensive one provide dynamic range wide enough to be interesting. Worse yet, those expensives one are usually very large and not what I am looking for.

My point is though that if I have the $$$, M8 would have been the perfect choice for me. But to achieve the dynamic range, size, etc with reasonable pricing. I may have to settle for film.
 
jomyoot said:
I may have to settle for film.
Click to expand...

Actually, while I understand your argument, I'd say that as long as Digital can not meet, in any fashion, your needs, then you are "settling for" any time you use anything other than film.

Now, I have no doubt that within the next 10 years there will be no technical reason to use film. So? Andrew Wyeth still uses egg tempera which was given utterly no technical reason for use once oil paints were invented. If no roll film based on Mr. Eastman's breakthroughs is made sometime in the future, I will still be able to wet coat glass plates. In the end, it will always be possible to make silver into an image. I doubt that is true of a jpeg.

William
 
for the price of a top quality digital camera and lenses. You can buy a top end 35mm or mf rangefinder and have a ton of cash left over for film, processing and plane tix too.

I was in a store yesterday dropping off film for processing. The next cashier was ringing up a digital Nikon and lens.... over 6,000$ Cdn including taxes.

What does a Leica M8 cost.
 
jomyoot said:
I am the original poster. In terms of film vs. digital quality, it seems that only the very high-ended digitals can match the quality of film. To me the issue of dynamic range is much more important than the mega-pixels. Many vendors now are coming out with 10MPs DSLRs, but only the most expensive one provide dynamic range wide enough to be interesting. Worse yet, those expensives one are usually very large and not what I am looking for.

My point is though that if I have the $$$, M8 would have been the perfect choice for me. But to achieve the dynamic range, size, etc with reasonable pricing. I may have to settle for film.
Click to expand...


"settle for film"

man. What happened?

If I had all the money in the world, I wouldn't ever use a digital camera again - as long as film and chemicals exist. I would shoot film and scan it on an Imacon X5 into giant files and print gorgeous poster sizes prints on a huge Epson printer to plaster my walls from floor to ceiling. Film is richer tonally, higher dynamic range when done properly, more natural in appearance, etc.

"settle for film"?
 
jomyoot said:
...I am the original poster. In terms of film vs. digital quality, it seems that only the very high-ended digitals can match the quality of film. To me the issue of dynamic range is much more important than the mega-pixels. Many vendors now are coming out with 10MPs DSLRs, but only the most expensive one provide dynamic range wide enough to be interesting. Worse yet, those expensives one are usually very large and not what I am looking for.

My point is though that if I have the $$$, M8 would have been the perfect choice for me. But to achieve the dynamic range, size, etc with reasonable pricing. I may have to settle for film.
Click to expand...

I've shot mainly digital for the last two months, for various reasons. But today I took a Leica M for a walk at lunchtime, with B&W film. I don't know yet what the images will be like, but I certainly enjoyed the process and the thinking, which is very different from using digital.

That said, I certainly enjoy my digital SLR. If you want compact, and excellent dynamic range, at a reasonable cost, I recommend you look closely at a Pentax K10D with a pancake lens (21mm, 40mm and 70mm available), and learn to process RAW files.
 
Hi... tho' I've been hot on SLR & digicam [a good P & S] for half a year, like Ruben says, the RF bug or GAS [yikes!] did bite. A great M2 from my PJ days came off the shelf, I bought the CV 25/4 Skopar, and a Bessa T [CQ closeout] is enroute.

Why do I shoot film?... and I am NOT anti-digital.

- I have a lot of good SLR & RF gear.
- A dSLR body+2 good AF lenses, represents $2,000-that I cannot spend now.
- I like to believe that I'm participating in a forum with several thousand others, who are helping to KEEP FILM PHOTOGRAPHY ALIVE.
- Yes, we live in a digital age and I have to accept that. Further, I love the interface of photography with the computer.
- Having checked out a 350D I was considering buying... it did not resonate well in my 'kishkes.' Kishkes is Yiddish slang for gut ;-)
- With film & RF, I feel so much more in control of the elements [and what do we really control these days?].
- Finally, with my Leica, I occasionally enjoy a pleasant fantasy... that I am part of the continuing tradition of the PJ's of the 40's, 50's & 60's.

Thanks for lstening.
mike
 
I would like to wet my toes more trying to process RAW files, but they are so hard to come (as I do not have any digital camera with that capability). I found a very few RAW files for the M8, especially one not so impressing for contents, but I was stunned of the quality I could get from my inkjet/b&w system from it. At least in details and clearity, though something was lost compared to film. It was extremely good and very impressive, but also different.

Since the M8 is out of reach for me, I have started to eye the new Pentax K10 and K100 cameras with those small pancake lenses. But so far I have not been able to find any DNG files from it to play with. Is there any place where such can be downloaded?

/Håkan

ChrisN said:
That said, I certainly enjoy my digital SLR. If you want compact, and excellent dynamic range, at a reasonable cost, I recommend you look closely at a Pentax K10D with a pancake lens (21mm, 40mm and 70mm available), and learn to process RAW files.
Click to expand...
 
I'm with shutterflower above.
There's an academic type word in German, Weltanschauung... meaning one's world view. The world view these days, is heavily digital. For me, it is from that place, that, 'settle for film' comes from. With no put-down intended in any direction, not everyone has to subscribe to the prevailing world view.

People & groups like Stephen Gandy, Jorge, RFF, flickr and thousands more... create the space, and encourage the expression of photographers via film. To the extent that we are thriving, let's hope that Fuji, Kodak and Ilford are still making the stuff.

Ciao, mike
 
back alley said:
ricoh grd.
Click to expand...

Can't agree more.

Why did you go digital in the first place? Consider the reasons for that move. Are you willing to leave behind the benefits it gave to you? If so, go back to film. Otherwise stick with digital. But don't be blindsided by a digital rf (either the r-d1 or the m8). There are plenty of other digital cameras that come close to the rf experience. The GRD is one of them. There are other (by Leica and Panasonic, for example)
 
mike goldberg said:
- With film & RF, I feel so much more in control of the elements [and what do we really control these days?].
- Finally, with my Leica, I occasionally enjoy a pleasant fantasy... that I am part of the continuing tradition of the PJ's of the 40's, 50's & 60's.

Thanks for lstening.
mike
Click to expand...
I feel the same way .... coming from film (Nikon FM & F3HP which I still both have but don't use ...) going via digital P&S I ended up with a D1x and some big glass. People sometimes asked me if I'm pro shooter when they saw the huge Nikon with the 70 - 200 AF-S VR and at that point I started feeling unconfortable. I'm taking photos for fun, not for making a living out of it and when I accidently take some better photos, I am happy if somebody else likes my photos, too.

Two month ago, I bought the Epson R-1ds, followed by a Bessa-T and now the Leica M6, got infected by RFF and GAS 🙄 Now, I mostly shot film (B&W) with the M6 and mostly the CV 35 2.5 PII or the CV Nokton 50 F/1.5 (sometimes with the Biogon 2.8/25 mm T* but using an external vf is not what I really like ....) Photography with a RF camera is a different story compared to a DSLR, especially with BW film but I tend to prefer it ....

Just my 2cents

Gabor
 
Hi maddoc,
I'm just getting used to the CV 25/4 and have adjusted amazingly quickly, to its VF. I ordered the Bessa T, a CQ closeout, and expect to have it within 2 weeks. Very likely the T will be primarily for the 25/4 and a 50.
- So how do you like your T? I was looking for a 2nd M-mount body, and Gandy convinced me the T was a valid choice, especially with the long RF base.
Ciao, mike
 
mike goldberg said:
Hi maddoc,
I'm just getting used to the CV 25/4 and have adjusted amazingly quickly, to its VF. I ordered the Bessa T, a CQ closeout, and expect to have it within 2 weeks. Very likely the T will be primarily for the 25/4 and a 50.
- So how do you like your T? I was looking for a 2nd M-mount body, and Gandy convinced me the T was a valid choice, especially with the long RF base.
Ciao, mike
Click to expand...
Hi Mike,

I like my T a lot ! (Actually I bought a used Bessa-T 101 anniversary set with the Heliar 50/F3.5 here in Japan) Two big advantages a) Even with mounted VF and spirit level the camera is still very small and light b) when using the VF one can still "see" the LEDs of the exposure meter ! c) focussing works nice with the long RF base and the diopter !! Since I "have" to use a VF on the T, I mainly use the CV Heliar 15mm /F4 (a very nice and small lens !!) with it and it is a perfect combo. If only the Nikon Coolscan V which I ordered yesterday would arrive soon ....😉

Cheers,

Gabor

PS: I had a look at your flickr gallery. Very nice !
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom