Which is more important - film or lens?

[Kin Lau]

Film can be pushed or pulled or you can used different developers and print on a harder or softer grade.

But short of some very fancy darkroom/photoshop work, you can't makeup for a short DOF of a fast lense, or the tendency/resistence of a particular lense to flaring, or the weird/beautiful bokeh. I think we see those effects in any shot more easily and readily than the choice of film.

If you're a member of the "f8 and be there" club, then it probably doesn't matter.

 

[DougK]

One of the best quotes ever for this kind of question I found in a computer magazine (Pen Computing, I think) a couple of years back. It was in a column called "The Difference Engine" and was written by David MacNeill. He was discussing guitar strings and the endless arguments about which make of strings are the best. He had a chance to ask George Thorogood what strings he played with on his guitars, Ernie Ball or whatever. George shrugged and said, "I just gas it up and drive."

I choose a lens for a particular angle of view. I couldn't tell you the difference between Zeiss, Leica, Zuiko, Pentax, or whatever if my life depended on it, but I could tell you if it was wide or normal or tele. Once you get to a certain level of quality, to me the rest is nitpicking. I just make sure I choose a good quality manufacturer for the focal length I want and then stick it on the camera.

For film, I don't like grain so I choose lower speed film. In color, I don't like print film so I buy transparency. Fuji, Kodak, or Agfa depends on what the store has in stock in the speed and type I need, although I will get Agfa over the others if I have the option to do so and the price is right.

That's about as picky as I get.

 

[RML]

Digital. 😛

 

[Toby]

Lenses are important but as most of us only have one of each focal length and we all probably bought the best we could afford it's not really a variable in the day to day sense. Film and developer (or lab choice) are going to have far greater day to day impact on your images as stated earlier -Tri X (or HP5) and D76 (ID 11 is the same thing) is a good starting point for RF photography if you want to experiment with obscure eastern european film developed in cat's urine -fine, but I bet you go back to Tri X 😀

 

[jamiewakeham]

<Groovy thread sure to inspire>

Thank you, Chris 🙂

I agree entirely that there are many many variables here (I hadn't thought about the developer... I still pay a nice man to do that bit for me 🙁) and I think the footprint analogy makes a lot of sense.

I'm still currently working through my huge stockpile of Delta, panic bought when Ilford looked like they were on their way out. I certainly intend to go get some Tri-X and HP5 to experiment with, but until I finish rebuilding my house and get the enlarger out they'll just have to join the neg mountain...

At the risk of going on and on about what seems to be a less critical issue than I'd first thought*, let's try the following scenario: same camera, same lens, same shot, same light, same developer, same paper grade and same printing times (was that everything?). Repeated with Tri-X, Delta, HP5, whatever. I guess the Delta would come out a bit more contrasty than the other two?

Jamie

* I think this film-mania is just my trying to stave off buying any more actual gear. Still got the jitters waiting for my allegedly-mint £25 GIII to arrive...

 

[Bertram2]

Lens is more important than film,
Chris
canonetc

At least most of us have to put the priority on the lens. Not owning a set of 5 for each focal length our choice is limited on the lens side.

But ist is still unlimited on the film side and lets us turn setscrews depending on what the result shall be.
Bertram

 

[caspert79]

I would say the lens is more important because I think that lenses vary more in quality than films (they all meet a sort of 'acceptable' standard).

 

[Hektor]

Hmmm......... I think the Tri-X would be contrastier than D100.... D100 would have a more full range of tones and a smoother look..... it depends what YOU like... and what you are trying to create.

Stop talking about it and go and shoot some film........ and THEN talk about it...!!!!

 

[jamiewakeham]

I'd love to, Hektor, but I suspect that if I leave my class alone they'll sack me 🙁

Jamie

 

[Hektor]

sacrifices, sacrifices,.............

 

[jamiewakeham]

But if they sack me, how do I fund the next GAS attack? Surely I can't survive on just a QL-17, Zorki 1 and my EOS rig?

J

 

[Hektor]

Be like Vincent V-G, sell your pics......;-)

JC

 

[Hektor]

How about you get a cheap scanner and a dev tank for all that Delta.....?

use 75% recommended dev times to keep the neg a bit pale for the scanner....

or get your negs put on CD by Jessops or better Peter Gaffney Labs, - He's good and cheap !

 

[jamiewakeham]

I've experimented a bit with scanning (my friendly deputy headmaster has a nice scanner) and then printing B&W negs. While I find it a really useful process with my colour slide, it just feels all wrong with B&W! Cheating, somehow, in a way that it isn't for colour.

I'll finish the renovation eventually, and can then go hide in the bathroom for a few days with the enlarger.

You're right, I must go get a developing tank, though.

J

 

[Hektor]

Get a 3 reel tank, Jobo or Paterson, you don't have to fill it up - but it saves time.

DDX is good, Rodinal is good and cheap, any good make of fixer is OK, don't bother with stop - just one shot it.

Hang your negs in the shower overnight to dry and put 'em in sleeves asap in case of dust.

You can look at them on a pc and write to a cd.

Then when you've got your wet darkroom running you'll have a store of pics to work with !

 

[Hektor]

Oh I forgot, you need a changing bag to load the dev tank. - Jessops do one.