Anybody using a film camera around here?

[effisk]

looks like film is dead...
www.french.tk

Well, I never thought there would be any replies to that post.
There was no thread in the Film Cameras subject at the time, I thought that film camera users were the kind of people that didn't use computers (not to mention the internet)
Looks like I was wrong.

I personnally had a film camera when I was younger, but I rarely took photos because it was such a hassle (you have to get it developped, wait, pay, etc.). I probably shot 200 in total...

Since I bought my first digital camera two and a half years ago, I've shot more than 6000 photos (not taking into account the one I've erased).
What a change!
____________
http://www.french.tk

[ray645]

Im new here and I know Im late so Ill keep it short, Film is far from dead and I still love shooting with it...

Bronica ETRsi 645 on 120 film (I wonder what MP count it would take to match Ilford Pan F Plus 50 25? 45? )

Nikon F100

[thejazzman]

I new here and I know Im late so Ill keep it short, Film is far from dead and I still love shooting with it...

Bronica ETRsi 645 on 120 film (I wonder what MP count it would take to match Ilford Pan F Plus 50 25? 45? )

Nikon F100

A 645 neg equals about 100MP which goes to say the the current DSLR's (even the Kodak 14MP or Canon's 10MP's Ds) are a far cry from the quality that you get from a normal 6x4,5 neg or even a 35mm neg.
It takes about 25megapixels to simulate 35mm film's practical resolution and even 500megapixels to simulate a 4x5inch neg.
That's normal I would say.there's about 100 years of development and refinement behind film whereas digital is just starting out. So..advantages for digital...?

Digital is fast, handy for family shots...show to your friends the results instantly and great for newspaper photos where speed is paramount. When it comes to quality film is the way to go! Yep.
Cheers.
Jos

[falcon8826]

I have a Nikon N80 and love the quality of the pictures it produces- does anyone have a reccomendation for really good developers who do a nice job scanning to disk? I can't seem to find anyone local who does it well hre in NH.

Thoughts appreciated : )

(PS I do have an Epson 1640 SU but I always seem to end up with dust or specks : )

Dan

[sheila]

Film .... I vaguely remember film! The digital age sparked my dormant interest in photography three years ago and this is one person who would never go back to film. In the seventies I used to develop my own black and white images - trays of smelly chemicals, working in the dark, and still not really getting the results I wanted. Now, no smelly chemicals - I sit at my PC (with the only chemical being the 220 in a nice glass of Aussie chardonnay) in the comfort of my study and process the images to my satisfaction. No need to worry if the chemicals are "off" or too old. No need to worry about a film lab completing ruining shots of Africa with two large scratches down the negs. And I can find my photographs quickly and simply without scrabbling around in a shoebox of slides/prints in the back bedroom gathering dust.

Would you go back to a manual typewriter and white out?

Cheers
Sheila

[paul_teixeira]

Very rarely, but I still use Canon F1, Canon F1n and a Canon A1. But to be brutally honest, it's digital all the way for me nowadays. That's what my clients want, so that what they get.

[ghecko]

I am a newbie in the photography world
I am currently studying it and I am using a Minolta Dynax 404si,
Af 35-80mm & Af 75-300mm lenses.

Unfortunately things over in South Africa are a tad bit expensive compared to the prices overseas So I will have to wait awhile before going digital

My dad did photography as a hobby and had his own dark room, so I learnt alot about developing and film at a young age.

[libragrrrl67]

I love film and am still using an old maxxum 7000. I work in a photo lab though, which takes the cost of shooting film way down. I process and scan everything myself. Once I quit the lab, I think I'll be going digital for convenience, cost effectiveness, not trusting anyone else to handle and scan my originals, and of course instant gratification.
And it's also pretty impossible to participate in those photo-a-day projects with a film camera.
But I still love film!

[gwilburn]

Shooting mostly digital these days for the convenience, but shoot film when I have a bit of extra time to develop it (B&W) then scan. Don't have a darkroom anymore. I enjoy digital a lot but Tri-X and HP5+ are in a class of their own.

[jengle]

I've been 'digital' for about 5 years now - using film and an HP S20 photo scanner. I also have access to a high end Nikon film scanner. The reason I bought my 5.3 Megapixal digital camera was that I have had issues getting clean negatives - even with Kodak processing I've had chemical spots and lots of micro-dust. I know it's not my environment because I can take a roll of film stored for 30 years and scan it in without any dust or marks. I heard the line about the millions of pixels I would need to get the same resolution as film, however my new HP 945 5.3 Megapixal actually outperforms most of the shots I took and scanned in as tiff at 2400! I thought my digital camera was going to be a handy backup to my Canon EOS 50e, but now I just may make the switch -> even though I've now gotten two film shops in town that do a decent job with my processing (only $2.50 a roll for processing only and clean negatives). One is Snap Photo - a professional photography development shop, and the other is.... yes Walgreens! I take all my digital pictures to get processed on the Fuji machine at Walgreens because they only charge .20 each compared with .40 to .49 each at the "professinal" shop that uses the same machine!

I have pictures from the hp 945 and scanned in shots at http://www.pbase.com/jengle

[jsb]

I'm still using film but I'll go digital as soon as Holga comes out with theirs.

[bobtrips]

No reason to wait on Holga. Get a Barbi-Cam! ;o)

[gerrydavid]

looks like film is dead...


www.french.tk

I dont think film camera's are really dead. I just got a new slr 35mm camera. :0) Besides alot of pro's use film cuz they take pictures faster and they can print them larger than digital cameras, assuming you dont have a $20,000 digitial camera. :0) but hopefully digital will get faster and more mp3's.

I personally prefer my digital slr like camera, czu I can take a ton of pictures and dont have to worry about the expense of it.

I use a Fujifilm Finepix 3800 digital camera.

[bobtrips]

Actually, your number is off a bit. By about a factor of 5. The $4k Kodak 14n will out-resolve any 35 mm color film.

Any a 6 meg dSLR will print much larger than 35 mm color film. Film enlargements hit a 'noise' wall when the grain gets so obvious that it destroys the quality of the print. Good digital captures are essentially noise free and can be printed much larger.

And - you might check the specs on some of the latest dSLRs that are designed for sports/photojournalist work.

[ray645]

How do you come up with this stuff????? a 6meg DSLR will print larger than 35mm color film???

honestly now, why and how do you come to this conclusion?