JPEG, OVF and a manual lens. Recreating the film experience

[olakiril]

When digital sensors arrived, shooting RAW was a revelation to me. So much I could do to the picture after the fact. Then mirrorless came with the EVFs. Finally you could use a viewfinder to see the final result before you take the picture! Autofocus became fast and more importantly predictable few years ago for me and I was very happy that I could finally not worrying about focusing any more.

But in the meantime something was lost. Is it the tactile feel of the manual lens plus the feeling of uncertainty of what was captured? Is the pressure to make sure the camera takes the picture you have in mind forcing you to have a clearer picture of what is in your mind?

Every now and then I do enjoy setting my camera to JPEG only, use OVF without any image review, and a manual lens to get as close to that experience as I can with a digital camera.

You?

 

[Nitroplait]

I use film when I want the film experience.
With that said, my X-100F is permanently set to Acros Yellow filter B&W film simulation and although I do RAW+JPEG, I never touch the RAW files. That is as close I get to the "film experience" with a digital camera.
However, the digital camera lacks the "economising/contemplation due to film cost" element and I don't think I can completely ignore that, thus, to me, only a film camera can give me a film experience.

 

[nickthetasmaniac]

You?

I usually try to recreate the film experience with... film 🙂

I'm yet to come across a digital camera that even vaguely approximates the tactile experience of a good mechanical body.

 

[David Hughes]

I use my film cameras because the last thing I want is to forget how to take a photograph...

Reading about these wonderful digital cameras years ago I was told they had modes for scenery and portraits etc but the things would take landscapes wide open and I'd use a small aperture for the DoF and they'd take scenery with the thing zoomed out to 200mm and I'd use the wide angle end of the zoom and so on.

No matter what they tell you we still have to override the electronics from time to time. And if they thought differently then why do they all offer program shift and EV compensation?

Regards, David

 

[olakiril]

I usually try to recreate the film experience with... film 🙂

I'm yet to come across a digital camera that even vaguely approximates the tactile experience of a good mechanical body.

I am interested in this as I do enjoy the tactile experience as well. Other than the manual lens and a speed dial what else is there? For me the only digital camera that was exactly the same was the R-D1 due to the cocking lever (and of course the analogue indicators!).

Aren't Leica's fairly close? Especially the D versions that miss the LCD monitor?

I use film when I want the film experience.
However, the digital camera lacks the "economising/contemplation due to film cost" element and I don't think I can completely ignore that, thus, to me, only a film camera can give me a film experience.

True. The fact that you are paying up-front the cost for the digital camera it does take out some part of the experience.

The point of this thread was to see what is possible without going back to film...

 

[Yokosuka Mike]

The point of this thread was to see what is possible without going back to film...

Lately the point of a thread seems to be of little concern to some members.

All the best,
Mike

 

[peterm1]

Though I love shooting in RAW as I enjoy the process of using post processing to reveal an image that is only generally based on the original that came from the camera I have recently been experimenting with using an older M4/3 camera (the Panasonic GF1) and an optical viewfinder in the accessory shoe to mimic somewhat the process I remember when shooting film (well, one of them). To further this illusion I will often shoot in black and white (JPG) though I make a concession to modernity by also saving the image in RAW (just in case I need to make some changes such as when there are blown highlights). The OVF I use is a very nice 75mm one that came with my Voigtlander 75mm f1.8 Heliar classic when I bought it new a decade or so back. But being an M4./3 camera the lens I use with this finder is a 30mm f2.8 Sigma in M4/3 mount which on that camera gives a field of view that is close enough to that of the OVF to be workable. The nice thing with this arrangement is that it is very liberating. I feel free to just look through the OVF, quickly compose the shot, ignore the rear LCD screen and shoot whatever subject takes my fancy without even thinking about focus, exposure or anything else very much other than general framing. The lens focuses quickly and is pretty accurate so the overall feeling is somewhat that of shooting an old school point and shoot.

Oddly this is something like the reverse of my normal shooting routine. In my case when shooting with my Sony A7s I almost always shoot with vintage manual focus lenses so must focus using focus peaking etc. and take some pains to get the focus right. But with the combo I described above the overall feeling I get from the kit is ironically (given I am using a auto focus lens with that arrangement) much more old school. As I said it is liberating and fun. This also adds back in the feeling described by the OP - that of uncertainty about how the image will turn out.

 

[Arnold Layne]

Hope i can afford shooting film again some day. In the meantime, i bought a x-pro1 about a year ago because i thought it was the cheapest an closest thing to my M6 i could get.

I try to use it as a film camera as much as i can:

-The camera came with the xf18, but the lenses i use the most are the ones from my Leica era (focusing is veeery slow compared to a real rangefinder, but i'm getting better)
-Manual exposure always
-Back display always off. I dont know what have i done until i get home, as exciting and demanding as in the old days.
-OVF (except for focusing when i need it)
-I press the shutter as wisely as i know. I don't want to waste film, i mean mb...
-I shoot raw+jpg as i'm learning. Trying to quit raw. Rarely use them.

So yes i enjoy a lot. Because i am making photos again and because, although not the same, it looks like (a bit)!

 

[Godfrey]

The digital camera that came the closest to the film camera workflow, in my experience, was my Leica M-D 262. No menus, minimal configuration settings (really, nothing at all but setting the date/time and allowing for firmware updates); the rest was *exactly* the same as using my Leica M4-2 with the added bonus of an infinitely long roll of film and the ability to set a specific sensitivity for each exposure (200-3200 ISO). Only raw files were captured, and you had to format the SD card for use outside of the camera since there were no settings to do that, or delete any photos, in the camera.

Just like with the M4-2, you make your photos, copy them into your processing system, and render them to final images either in print or on screen.

I should never have sold the M-D 262. It was a perfect Leica M camera. 🙁

G

 

[Axel]

JPEG, OVF and manual lens have nothing to do with film experience. In my opinion.
I can do that every day without film. And I do 🙂

Nostalgic feelings when I grab my R-Leica or some other old film stuff are nice.
But using a full metal typewriter, a needle printer or a dial plate phone are/were similar things in our generation.
I can not imagine to disclaim all the modern advantages of technical evolution.
That all belongs to another life that has gone long years ago.
For me.

On the other side the whole procedure with and around film, from choosing over fiddling in and out, developing and work in the darkroom
is a process that can sure be done even today and in the future. So is my interpretation of this part of the forum.
Also with modern, motor-driven AF-Cameras or big plates...

 

[Dogman]

Yesterday I took out a couple of my old Nikon D700's (Nikon's second full frame digital camera, 2008, mirror and prism, OVF) and a bag full of Carl Zeiss ZF.2 manual focus lenses. I almost always shoot JPEGs anyway so that was a given. Mostly I shoot AF lenses but some times I just cruise back to 1975 and like messing around with manual lenses. It's not for a film-like experience. No offense meant to film users but I cringe at the thought of returning to using film. I guess I just like what I like and do what I do.

Here's a sample of what I shot yesterday, all were done with the D700 and the Carl Zeiss 35/2 Distagon.

 

[zuiko85]

A ‘well behind the curve’ camera user here. I have a modern, not modern mirrorless EM10 and don’t own even one autofocus lens for it. Bought it with the intention of having a digital to use my 1960’s era half frame Zuikos on. Never go full manual unless necessary, usually just stick to apertured preferred auto and use the front dial for exposure bias as needed. Focusing is a problem, so I use 5x magnified view to check focus, a slow go any way you look at it. Just cannot see spending another $300 for the kit zoom just to get autofocus. So, sorta like a film camera with the manual focus lenses.

edit: Did have to spend a long afternoon shimming the Chinese made lens adapters so that the infinity mark lines up at infinity.

 

[KoNickon]

Another EM10 user here -- first version. I have several adaptors -- Nikon F, Leica M, a couple of others -- but generally I stick to the M4/3 Zuiko lenses. The kit 14-42 is really excellent for my (JPEG) use. I have the 45-150, 30 macro and, most recently, the 30/8 "lens cap," which I used just this morning. Now that is just a fun, freeing, lens, and the image quality is fine. Since it's zone focus, it provides the closest thing to the manual focus experience.

There's the wonderful tactile experience you get with a film camera, no question about it. But adjusting exposure using the EVF is hugely beneficial, as is deleting the "meh" pictures. The downside of film is seeing how few pictures worth keeping come out of a roll of film.

 

[ptpdprinter]

The downside of film is seeing how few pictures worth keeping come out of a roll of film.

And that's after repeating the "film slows me down" mantra until you are in a trance. Apparently film doesn't slow people down enough though. For that you need large format, where every time you trip the shutter you hear a giant sucking sound coming from your wallet.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Not sure what film has to do with it. If I want to do film, I still have bunch of cameras. JPEG1 is not film at all, it is Polaroid/Instax which is very specific experience. Way to primitive gear, media and results, IMO.

I'm not sure if I want to keep my two EVF cameras, either. Here is zero difference in AF speed or accuracy. In fact EVF brings nothing but slug. It takes time to wake up, it fails apart on panning. And it just doesn't feel natural.
Live preview... I'm taking pictures since earlier eighties. If picture doesn't come right, it is my fault. I have learned how not to fail.

I'm holding to digital M. Great experience and sharp pictures (some times : ). OVF is big part of it.

I don't need it in JPEG1 as long as camera raw files are compatible with my LR 6 and they are not uselessly, annoyingly huge.
It limits me to older cameras and cameras from manufactures who respect users for real and provide DNG. Leica is one of them.

I don't use review and screen is turned off, EVF and OVF cameras.

I'm OK with tourist approach of using the screen only camera. Like awesome by all means GRD cameras. Touch AF would be even better in addition to snap.

Constantly checking were I want to move to optimize my gear. And as much as I want it to be small and light, but still FF, I'd rather keep my one kilo 5D MKII.
It just feels a lot more natural and trustworthy comparing to mirrorless/EVF.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Yesterday I took out a couple of my old Nikon D700's (Nikon's second full frame digital camera, 2008, mirror and prism, OVF) and a bag full of Carl Zeiss ZF.2 manual focus lenses. I almost always shoot JPEGs anyway so that was a given. Mostly I shoot AF lenses but some times I just cruise back to 1975 and like messing around with manual lenses. It's not for a film-like experience. No offense meant to film users but I cringe at the thought of returning to using film. I guess I just like what I like and do what I do.

Very good bw.

I'm not into film for a while now. No free time for chemicals and running water to be honest.


Kai W did a video ten days about 5D MKII with his typical careless handling. But he just followed outgoing trend on old FF DSLRs, nothing new.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHM6Wk2OLYc
I have this camera for second time and for awhile now and it is very hard to departure with. It renders not worse than new cameras, if not better, IMO...

 

[oldwino]

I’ve been using an old, but very capable, Nikon P7800 from 2012. Tiny sensor, adequate autofocus, great zoom lens (28-200 eq). Built in flash. Compact. For a certain kind of photography, it’s perfect. And the jpegs are just fine, and fit the vibe well.

 

[Retro-Grouch]

After a number of years using full-frame Sony cameras, I overwhelmingly missed the "film experience", and understood that it was not available from digital. Sold the Sonys and dusted off my neglected Leicas. Done with digital.

 

[Timmyjoe]

I won't go with JPEG because I don't want to lose any info from the original image capture, for later editing or whatever. But now that mirrorless camera are getting so good I'm enjoying using manual focus lenses from 60, 70 even 80 years ago, with the new digital sensors. Manually focusing with the EVF, which works on pretty much ANY LENS, is really something I click with. (pun intended).

Best,
-Tim

 

[ptpdprinter]

After a number of years using full-frame Sony cameras, I overwhelmingly missed the "film experience", and understood that it was not available from digital. Sold the Sonys and dusted off my neglected Leicas. Done with digital.

As far as I can tell, the "film experience" consists of loading and unloading film from your camera. Everything else is the same as digital. Of course, if you process your own film and make your own prints, then it is an entirely different matter.