A digital fan would say digital is superior because you cannot remain without film. If you want to shoot analogue, you have to carry film and maybe batteries. If you want to shoot digital, you have to carry batteries and memory cards. You seem to be a little biased toward film
(I imagine you disposed of your batteries properly rather than throwing them into the trash)
Assuming regular AA alkalines, at least in many places in the US, simply throwing them in the trash IS disposing of them properly:
North America just north of that sharp right turn North America makes on the Atlantic coast.
Here is what this comes down to for me,I swear I do make a point in the end. I went to pick up a car and drive it up the East Coast of the US last weekend. I decided that I would travel quick and light and just bring a digital POS that I have an underwater case for rather than my Nikonos V that has a case that just makes carry on size. I figured I could take some snaps and if I dove I could get some snaps as well. If I had taken the Nikonos I could have gotten 36 shots per dive at ISO 100, or 24 at ISO 400. I ended up with 73 digital snaps over the two dives we did that day, I thought that was alright. Later that day we were out having lunch and I pulled out my camera to take a snapshot and the fresh batteries I had put in that morning died.
I replace the S76 batteries in my Nikonos cameras every other time I replace the batteries in the flash or before a dive trip because dives are expensive and I want my photos of them. I also bring two sets of spare batteries on vacation, but by my formula, one is enough. The replacement interval for the Nikonos cameras works out to be about 12 to 18+ dives at 24 exposures per dive depending on flash use. That's right, more than 5x the photos between battery swaps.
Now you know why I call it my POS (piece of $^!+) digital camera.
Dam battery vampires.
"Would you like it if someone that painted in oils told you that you were not making portraits because you were using a camera?"
"Shouldn't it be more about the joy of producing and viewing the photo than what you paid for the camera?"
I don't think that dependence on batteries is a strong argument for film and against digital. I have several film cameras which are completely dependent on battery power for shutter operation and for film advance, which makes them just as battery-dependent as digital. I always make a practice of carrying at least one spare set of batteries for every piece of equipment I have with me. The one camera I have which is prone to giving me grief is my D1x which is as good as an F5 (for digital, that is) but for its stupid NiMh batteries which only give less than 200 images between charging and even need charging when I am not using the camera. It is getting less and less use these days, so the regular charging routine is becoming more of a nuisance. I just wish that camera manufacturers would have a bit of standardisation of battery type, even within their own brand.
Sure film cameras need batteries too, but I understand the OP's point, digital sucks through batteries much quicker than film cameras. My MF rangefinders both have electronic controlled shutters as well as displays in the viewfinders, but when the batteries die I can't even remember the last time I changed the batteries, which in itself can be a bad thing if you're not prepared! More the reason to have a spare on hand. While when I go shoot with my mom who has a DLSR she is constantly having to charge her battery before shooting, or if spur of the moment, can't get the shot because her battery suddenly dies. I see the advantage!
While when I go shoot with my mom who has a DLSR she is constantly having to charge her battery before shooting, or if spur of the moment, can't get the shot because her battery suddenly dies. I see the advantage!
Maybe mom needs to replace the battery or buy a spare.